Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Seems like that regardless how the files are retrieved from the Impmented File
system, Dokan wil always attempt to perform it's version of the matching code
See DbgPrintW(L"FileMatch? : %s (%s,%d,%d)\n", find->FindData.cFileName,
(pattern ? pattern : L"null"),EventContext->Directory.FileIndex, index);
// pattern is not specified or pattern match is ignore cases
if (!pattern || DokanIsNameInExpression(pattern, find->FindData.cFileName, TRUE)) {
PureSync uses a DirName<"* systeax to get all the files from a directory called
DirName, but Dokan then removes all those file to the return caller via it's
aways implemented MatchFiles call in Directory.c
Original comment by smurf...@gmail.com
on 12 Nov 2010 at 6:01
The MatchFiles has a parameter called PatternCheck, this is set to FALSE if the
FindFilesWithPatternCode hae been implemented, this does not disable the
DokanIsNameInExpression from being called with MatchFiles !
Original comment by smurf...@gmail.com
on 12 Nov 2010 at 6:15
Dokan supports DOS_STAR, DOS_QM and DOS_DOT. So there should be a bug in
DokanIsNameInExpression.
DokanIsNameInExpression emulates FsRtlIsNameInExpression.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff546850(v=VS.85).aspx
And when PatternCheck == FALSE, DokanIsNameInExpression is not called. pattern
is NULL in that case in MatchFiles function.
Original comment by asa...@gmail.com
on 8 Jan 2011 at 3:27
Hi,
I tested DokanIsNameInExpression with several patterns and I couldn't find any
issue.
Could you give me an example of wrong result?
For example:
Expression: DirName<"*
Name: DirNameTest
Original comment by asa...@gmail.com
on 8 Jan 2011 at 7:28
I think the easiest thing to do is to install PureSync 2.7 (It's free) and see
what patterns it is using. (The newest version is 2.8.1)
- The Pattersn they use work with norml NTFS directories (i.e. they find
subdirs and files), but in a Dokan mounted drive (Via Mirror and my
implementation(s)) - it only get the directory and nothing else.
Also please see the pictures attached to
http://liquesce.codeplex.com/workitem/7556
Original comment by smurf...@gmail.com
on 8 Jan 2011 at 10:20
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
smurf...@gmail.com
on 12 Nov 2010 at 5:16