Messages

1

Support and Feedback / Re: Sort by Ext field - bug?

« on: March 16, 2017, 19:27:49 »

Ahhh that are a network shares and not a normal folder?

Correct.

It is shown "virtualized" inside MC so that it can be shown as everything else.. browse network is a file system plugin in MC that shown the network shares are normal files and folders. so that can be shown.

I looked through all the extensions and plug-ins native to a default install of Multi Commander, but don't see one called "Browse Network".  As well, I searched the web-site for this plug-in, but came up empty.  Am I misunderstanding or do you, perhaps, have the name wrong?

Yes the sorting can be wacky since it is not real files

Is there a fix/workaround for this?

Thanks,

Greg

2

Support and Feedback / Re: Sort by Ext field - bug?

« on: March 15, 2017, 19:39:05 »

I don't really understand what you mean,
Files on windows do not have a standard user comment metadata field.  the comment field you have is the comment field from the metadata on exe./bin files.

These are folders, not files.  Not sure if it's relevant, but the folders reside on a server using Windows Server 2012 R2.  On my local machine, I'm using Windows 7.

In the attached jpg you will see that I've sorted by the Ext/Comments field, but it's still basing the sort on the Name field.  Hope that helps clarify what's happening.

3

Support and Feedback / Sort by Ext field - bug?

« on: March 14, 2017, 22:56:47 »

In the native Windows File Explorer, I have a folder containing many sub-folders.  These sub-folders are assigned numerical names corresponding to clients.  The names of those clients are displayed in the Comments field.  In Multi Commander, the values displayed in File Explorer's comments field show up under the heading "Ext".  (Strangely, the Comments field in MC doesn't display anything here.)  The sort behavior of this Ext field appears to be buggy.  When you sort in either direction (asc/desc) it doesn't use the values in that field, but the values in the Name field - the numerical designations.  I doubt this is intentional.  Is there a way to change this behavior or is this indeed a bug?

I'm using the 64-bit version of Multi Commander, v6.9.1 (build 2306).

Thanks,

Greg