I guess we can both agree that TeraCopy and FastCopy are the best 2 free file copy tools out of the many that are available. They each have features that the other doesnt. FreeFileSync 11.29 Fixed crash after 1-byte file copy from MTP device. This appears to be done with closed source code rendering FFS 8.0 and later binaries not open source and possibly in violation of the GPL if the project has accepted outside code under the GPL and combined it with their closed source code.ħ.9 Dev Test 4 (): Added 1 second pause before helper launches FFSħ.9 Dev Test 3 (): Downgraded to 7.9 to resolve install.dat lockdown (locked to specific relative path), disabled update checkĨ.2 Dev Test 2 (): Added second process breakĨ. But that article tells me, for my use case, that TeraCopy is better. The app locks itself to a specific relative path in an attempt to force end users to use the bundleware installer to install and upgrade the app. With FreeFileSynce, I setup up my sync once, the way I like, with all the inclusions, exclusions, versioning, and other settings, then just run it whenever I want. Usually I either use RoboCopy for scheduled jobs, or for ad-hoc copy situations at work. The official builds of FFS 8.0 and higher can not be made portable. I prefer the nice GUI and features of FreeFileSync for home. Particularly if you've tried FreeFileSync 6.3 or later (the standard version without PAF) and had encountered this error on your system. Please give it a try and report back whether it works for you. This setup uses a second helper process to handle some of the file moves and break processes. Error Code 32: The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process. This bug results in an error: "Cannot open file "GlobalSettings.xml". Since I keep noticing this issue version after version I am to second Midas' comment too (".A basic error two versions in a row with no regard for user feedback.") and can only hope that the dev will visit this venue and read our comments before releasing another version with the same inconvenient features.īTW, regretfully due to the somewhat "original/unusual" GUI I accidentally clicked a couple of times the "Synchronize" button (instead of the "Synchronization settings" one) and I would really love if the dev could offer us the option to enable/disable a (sort of safety) "Synchronize now?" (final confirmation) dialog.Ĭoncluding, (if others reading this comment are in agreement) we should probably try to mass-convey to the dev at least (but not limited to) the request to add BOTH the "Compare now?" and "Synchronize now?" confirmation dialogs and also to make sure that the user's settings are observed no matter how the folder pairs are loaded into the GUI.I've put together a development test that attempts to work around the long-standing bug in FreeFileSync 6.3 and later that renders it unable to be launched from other processes (menus, schedules, third party file managers, etc). So at every run I have to abort + change the settings (to the ones I actually saved originally) + restart the comparison (with the right settings)! This (which IMHO is a plain and simple) bug is quite frustrating and what fuels the frustration even further is not having the option to manually start the comparison process, which starts automatically as soon as the folder pairs are loaded into the GUI. While I second the comments of shodan816 I would like to add that if I open 2 folders (via secondary channels such as SendTo, Open++, etc.) FreeFileSync always opens them with the "File time and size" settings despite I saved the "File content" comparison settings.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |