digitie / transmission-remote-dotnet

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/transmission-remote-dotnet
GNU General Public License v3.0
1 stars 0 forks source link

TransmissionID column "#" dose not sort properly #260

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Sort of "#" column

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
The column should sort numerically, but it is instead sorting by 
alphabetically.  So 1, 11, 111, 2, 22, 222 are incorrectly displayed in 
sort order.

What version of the products are you using?
Transmission: 1.93
Remote: 3.20 (rev 587)

Please provide any additional information below. Feel free to
attach screenshots or sample code which demonstrates the issue being
described.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by reardo...@gmail.com on 5 May 2010 at 6:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Oh, i forgot about it :/
Now, fixed by r588.

Original comment by elso.and...@gmail.com on 5 May 2010 at 9:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
# column doesn't count torrents from start i.e. have at least 2 torrents (# 1 
and #
2) delete one of them and add a new one his number won't be 1 or 2 (according 
to real
number of torrents iTR) but 3 and so on.

Original comment by ml.ci...@gmail.com on 12 May 2010 at 8:47

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Yes, because this is the internal ID used by Transmission daemon. same ID if 
you use 
transmission-remote -l

Original comment by elso.and...@gmail.com on 12 May 2010 at 9:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Hmm can it be redesigned in TR so it could count it properly in other word TR 
shows
column number according to real number of torrents seen in TR windows not taken 
from
transmission-daemon?

Original comment by ml.ci...@gmail.com on 12 May 2010 at 10:14

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
The torrent count is in statusbar. For sorting, all the same 1-2-3-..12 or 
1-5-7-
455. The internal ID is need for me too. I dont want to add unnecessary columns

Original comment by elso.and...@gmail.com on 12 May 2010 at 10:57