Not critical - Back Directories (../../)
|Nic||09/06/2003 11:04 am|
This is NOT CRITICAL - just a point of interest for a future release / tidying up!
If a source file uses the back directory command as part of it`s path, for example:
../../directory/new.htm and is referred from page http://my.site.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/original.htm
then OEP will store the new file on my disk in folder:
however, OEP may well have already (in fact most likely) downloaded this page from a different referrer and it would be stored relative to where you would find it on the server:
c:\project_folder\my.site.com\dir1\new.htm (also a much cleaner name).
Now this is directly a problem, because when navigating in a browser it works just fine - but it can lead to duplicating of downloads - a big problem if there are large graphic or video files, and just a minor pain if they are text files or you are trying to replicate the server side.
Please take this in the spirit it was intended. OEP is the best site downloader I`ve come across, and certianly the best $50 I`ve spent on internet related stuff! I just thought it was an area that could be tidied up at some point!
|Oleg Chernavin||09/08/2003 02:31 am|
Thank you for your kind words. Offline Explorer removes all /../ and it makes the corret path. If you have noticed some site where this is not so, please tell me the URL of that page and I will do the fix shortly.
|Nic||09/08/2003 06:41 am|
You are most welcome! However, the example I have used above is not theory, but exactly what 2.9.1298 has done.
OEP CORRECTLY downloads the page, but when it stores it on the local hard drive it stores exactly as I have shown above.
I hope this hasn`t got anything to do with my first request a few weeks ago regarding the plus sign, becuase I know the handling of certain non-alphabetic characters can be particular (witness my other request)!
I don`t know how else to describe this - i`ve re-read my first message, and the example given seems quite clear.
The particular site with this problem is an adult site - not sure whether you guys are prepared to check it out (or the ramifications if I gave you my password), but you should be able to see the problem from the first message above. But I`m happy to give you details if you are.
|Oleg Chernavin||09/08/2003 07:11 am|
I just tested such situation again and didn`t find an error. I created two files in different folders - made them to link to each other using ../ back dirs and downloaded links do not contain anything like _252E_252E_252F_252E.
This is strange. It looks like that site might be using some other kind of a link. It is also possible that if /../ follows after ? sign in the URL, then anything after ? is considered a part of filename, and /../ should not be eliminated, but kept as-is.
|Nic||09/08/2003 09:26 am|
I may have got confused... I am sure I had this problem on Saturday, but I have to be honest and say that I can`t replicate it! I may have been confused by what I suspect now is the website logic and not OEP`s!
Many many apologies for wasting your time. I also very much appreciate the work you`re doing on the other issue!
Thanks (and sorry) again!
|Oleg Chernavin||09/09/2003 12:54 am|
No problem with that. If you will ever face it, please write us directly to firstname.lastname@example.org with the details on how to reproduce it.