Folders in Bitcasa won't be shown in TC

[HAL 9000]

Hello everybody,

I'm just playing around with that cloud service Bitcasa Infinity Drive, which installed a drive I: on my PC. Nothing new, nothing exciting. SugarSync does so, Wuala does so ...

But on Bitcasa, I don't see any folders. I can create folders ... and they're "gone". When I switch to Windows Explorer, I can see all folders, including the one I just created in TC. Than I turned invisible folders on in TC ... and there they are! They have this red ! like the system folders on C:. OK, Windows Explorer has no problems with it. Any other app? Photoshop with it's custom dialogs has no problem, Winamp sees them all, Firefox ... Not problem. Only TC doesn't show them by default.

And it just affect folders. I can see any files on root and in any folder (when I opened the hidden folder and switch visibility off). And it also affects all sub-folders. They're also hidden.

I don't know who to blame. Is it TC or Bitcasa? First, I'll like to know what's going on here and if I get a decent work-around. And I start with you guys, because I think you're fitter

Thanks for your support.

[MVV]

What about folder attributes? Hidden, system?
How Windows Explorer does show these folders? Opaque or semitransparent (like hidden/system items)?

[HAL 9000]

Windows Explorer shows them regularly. Folder attributes like hidden or system are not set. Nothing special about those.

Any other help? If anyone feels like helping, there's a free version of the service. And beside that bug, it's actually very nice.

Maybe somebody can confirm or deny that behavior on his account. But I already checked it on two completely different systems. I wonder why I don't find anything about it on Google. It seams there's no TC user using Bitcasa or vice versa.

[ghisler(Author)]

It probably has the "system" attribute set - this is used to show a special icon in Explorer. Check the "Attr" column in Total Commander.

[HAL 9000]

Yes, attribute column is showing s. Why would they do this? How can I get rid of it (should I actually)? Why are these "system folders" shown in Windows Explorer but not the system folders on c: ? It seams, only Total Commander doesn't show those folders. Any idea?

[ghisler(Author)]

In TC, both hidden and system files/folders are hidden together. In the next version, you will be able to choose separately whether you want to hide hidden files, system files, or both.

[MVV]

ghisler(Author),
I think you may add an INI option to always show folders with 'system' attribute if they contain desktop.ini file. If such folder has 'hidden' attribute too, it should be shown only if ShowHiddenSystem is enabled.

What about ShowHiddenSystem parameter, I think there may be some values: 1 - show all (as is), 2 - show hidden w/o system, 3 - show system w/o hidden (it seems to be default Windows behaviour - it always shows my files/folders with 'system' attribute regardless of folder options but hides its own system files if corresponding option is set)... But an additional parameter may be needed to keep previous show flags.

[HAL 9000]

Ah, that would work around. I was wondering why system folders on C: are hidden in Windows Explorer and those folders on Bitcasa drive aren't. But now I see the system folders have both system and hidden attribute, while the Bitcasa folders only have system attribute. So, your solution will work greatly. Thanks.

Is there any time frame we can expect the next TC version? (roughly without guarantee of course)

[HAL 9000]

I just got reply from Bitcasa support:

This is an "unintended feature" with the network file system we use on the Windows client. In other words, it's a bug we're aware of. Thanks for inquiring about it, though; we're already working on a fix for it.

So, they will also fix it.

[ghisler(Author)]

2MVV
Unfortunately this would make it necessary to get the file list of all subfolders with the system attribute, which would slow down the reading of a directory quite considerably. There is a good reason why TC gets the per file/folder icons in a background thread...