Volumes folder bug report for 2.2.4

[pdX]

Here's the config: OS X 10.1.3, LimeWire 2.2.4, with a download location on a seperate partition. I began to sort through my files in the OS while LimeWire was open. I was throwing away items, and moving others to different folders. I didn't realize that someone was downloading one of the files I was moving to the trash. When I tried to empty the trash, the OS prompted me that I couldn't because that item was in use. So I checked LimeWire's Monitor tab to find that someone indeed was continuing to download that item, even as it had moved to my trash. This of course raises a concern that within LimeWire I didn't specify my trash to be shared. If I moved that item to a non shared ordinary folder on the same partition, would that folder become shared? So I quit LimeWire, ending this individual's download. The next time I opened LimeWire I noticed I was sharing 0 files, which wasn't accurate, so I tried to download a few small files, and I couldn't locate any new downloads on my hard drives. On check, I found the download location within LimeWire was said to be the same as before. I assumed, then that LimeWire was downloading to the trash (invisibly).

Next I opened preferences and tried to select my original download folder. Unfortunately, I couldn't back out enough to find the whole hard drive, so I retyped the directory route (something like /Volumes/ScratchPart/Documents/Downloads/LimeWire). But this didn't work. In the OS's finder, I saw no Incomplete folder generated, and a check of the LimeWire library represented the folder to be an ordinary document, not a folder. So then I tried to retype the address, and nothing seemed to do it. Again I downloaded a few test files, which I couldn't locate with Sherlock, but could see and launch them from LimeWire's Library. So I uninstalled and reinstalled LimeWire, and the same location showed up in the preferences. Finally, I purged LimeWire content from my system manually, rebooted in OS 9, ran DiskWarrior and Norton's Utilities. Then ran Ghost Hunter 2.1 to locate any missing or invisible files.

Here's where it gets weird. I call one of my partitions, the one to which I download: ScratchPart. Via my manually entering a location into LimeWire, LimeWire created a series of folders on my primary hard drive in the invisible folder called Volumes. In the Volumes folder, you normally see alias' to your other drives & partitions. Well, LimeWire created a new folder called ScratchPart, forcing my original alias (which points at that partition) to rename itself ScratchPart 1. This of course mislead all my other apps that incorporated links and download locations along the Volumes/ScratchPart/ path to send content into and generate new cache folders, etc, within a new bunch of folders hidden within the invisible Volumes folder. Thus missing my partition all together, and making the content invisible (only because they're inside an invisible folder - not because their visibility is turned off or on). Using Ghost Hunter, I deleted the ScratchPart folder (and all it's contents) and renamed my ScratchPart 1 alias ScratchPart. Then ran my Utilities, rebooted into OS X, and reinstalled LimeWire. Running fine now, able to locate my original download location without hitch.

Hope this helps. pdX

[VTOLfreak]

And that's why most people do not use Mac's ! haha !

[pdX]

VTOLfreak,

I looked over your posts to other threads and you seem pretty smart. Sorry, but this suprised me, given your post to this bug report. Mostly you contributed in a helpful and knowledgable way to other posts...

But in this one, the premise of your argument -- that a product is better if most people choose it over others -- has two structural flaws, as far as I can see. One, it assumes people make choices without history and inertia playing a part (ie, Microsoft or McDonalds or Starbucks might dominate a certain market partly because of aggressive marketing and anti-competitive business practices, not necessarily because of the quality of their product). Likewise, I think that many people make choices based on what they see available or based on what they know from their past experiences; so when for example a longtime mac user begins to search for a new computer, she's not as likely to purchase a LINUX or Windows machine. And two, your argument applies as poorly to Operating Systems as it does to religion, orange juice, art, music, burgers or coffee. If most people choose Budhism, MinuteMaid OJ, Monet, Backstreet Boys, McDonalds or Nestle's Cafe, then those are probably the best choices overall, given the field. That doesn't seem all that accurate.

If you could be more specific in your argument, I'll try to consider it. Do note, though, I was one of MOST PEOPLE under a year ago. I replaced my Sony VAIO (Windows 2000 - my system for the two years prior) with a PowerBook (OS 9 & X). And I have to say, Mac OS 9 caused me as many headaches as Windows had. But OS X is worth a look. So far, I've run it for several months - I think four, and it's not crashed on me. Not once. Occasionally an older application will quit when running OS 9 from within OS X, but no more or less than my experiences with Windows or OS 9 alone. OS X native applications, on the other hand, are tremendous and very stable, even as I test the processor and memory management with many tasks simultaneously. It's not without it's glitches and minor things that I'd like to see changed, but I'm impressed overall.

pdX

[VTOLfreak]

Yes , I know that Mac's are more stable then PC's in general if the user knows how to use it properly .
But in terms of compatiblity and such , leave them on the shelf .
They even use their own half-baked variant of TCP/IP ...

And why do I get a seminar because of a joke ?

I know that Mac's their filing system is more complicated then a NTFS or FAT32 filing system , and I mean in general daily use not setting them up .
It's a disease Mac's have had for years .

But so do PC's in parts .
For example : if you compile certain programs in a NTFS file system they won't run on FAT32 systems .
Even popular programs like Installshield can't run decently on FAT32 if compiled on NTFS .
Luckely it does work the other way around .

Running your Mac for over 4 months ?
PC's can do that trick too if you have decent drivers installed .
I have a Win 2000 machine running as proxy (mail&web) , FTP and Gnutella client .
It's a dual P4 Xeon 1.8GHZ with 2048MB DDR SDRAM .
I let it run 3 months , then I shut it down for like 10 minutes to udate the virusscanner and such .
I don't know if I can let it run even longer , haven't tried .

[pdX]

Good critique, VTOLfreak. Again, I see you've done homework. I'm impressed with your breadth of knowledge - again, I think you're really informed.
I did not make it clear that I read your comment not only as a joke, but as flippant and sarcastic - almost mocking. I tried to take it seriously, and so I answered by analyzing what I saw as the comment's premise. If it were a simple joke, I don't think I'd find a reason to respond with a seminar. But good critique- it was a seminar, you're right.

I've gotten a lot of heat from colleagues for my switch from PCs. I find it's not only a personal choice, but also a political one that seems to illicit curt, flippant responses from them. I responded as I do to colleagues. I imagine you understand. Thanks for your clarification. pdX

[VTOLfreak]

Did you look up every archived word I wrote or what ?
He has 4 posts and he thanks me (300 posts) that I make good critique ...

Weird world ...

Sigh , I'l live with it ...