Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 24/04/2005 Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> More annoyingly, I virtually spent 3 days trying to make a backup
>> from one Windows machine to another. It turned out that transfer
>> protocols do not cater for paths exceeding a certain size (what the
>> heck??). This never ever happened on old distributions of Linux that
>> I use.
>> Can anybody advise? Am I being harsh? Windows has cost me a lot of
>> time, so how can I not rant about it? The new Microsoft mantra is "It
>> just works", but quite frankly, it often doesn't.
> MAX_PATH is defined in the Windows API as 256 and is the maximum length
> of a full path to a file (including its name and extension).
Why isn't that common knowledge? And where is standardisation?
> It seems though that it is possible to create a file that exceeds this
> limit, goodness knows how. A solution is to rename some of the
> directories on the path to a single letter until you get back under the
> limit - not something you want to do every day.
Yes, but here is my problem... like you suggest, it's not something I want
to do every day.
Once every 2 weeks I back up 3+ GB of data by transferring from one
hard-drive to another. This requires several hours to complete and takes
place while I'm away. I can never know which new locations are 'too long'
and it might take hours until an error is flagged. If this occurs, I need
to retry the following day, which means another day without my laptop.
> As you use Linux perhaps you could mount the offending drive under
> Linux and sort it out?
I am actually waiting for my 5.5 year-old laptop to die so that I can buy a
different machine which is Windows-free. Honestly, no offence towards
Windows; it is just being a constant pain and yet so many people use it.
Roy S. Schestowitz