Possible folder name length bug?

Bugs found in XnView Classic. Please report only one bug per topic!

Moderators: XnTriq, xnview

Post Reply
linkish
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:25 pm

Possible folder name length bug?

Post by linkish » Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:45 pm

Firstly, I apologise if this subject has been discussed already; I'm short on time at the moment and haven't had a chance to do much searching.

Anyhow, I noticed this two days ago, and again just now. I was using the file tree to navigate folders in which I wanted to batch-rename the contents. The result was a program crash notification by Vista. After a small investigation to make sure there was nothing wrong with the files themselves, I decided to rename the folder to something shorter (and with fewer underscores). Interestingly, that completely stopped the crashing.

The very same thing happened only moments ago (after updating to 1.97.4), and again I changed the folder name, and again the crashing was resolved. The folder in question's name was 59 characters, including spaces; the renamed folder has 32.

Obviously this is something I'll have to be mindful of for now, but is there a way you devs can fix this? I'd hate to have to guess which folders names are too long all the time, especially if I'm in the middle of file operations.

Thanks for your time.

marsh
XnThusiast
Posts: 2443
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 6:31 am

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by marsh » Sat May 01, 2010 12:35 am

Running under linux;wine;ext3, I can use up to about 255 characters in complete path (including parent folders).
The article below describes a limit when using windows:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library ... px#maxpath

linkish
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:25 pm

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by linkish » Sat May 01, 2010 1:10 am

marsh wrote:Running under linux;wine;ext3, I can use up to about 255 characters in complete path (including parent folders).
Best I can do is shrug my shoulders at that. As I detailed above, the pattern was the same both times, with nothing changing except the renaming of the folders. Is XnView choking on the length of the path, then? It's odd to think it would if I have no problem with the files in other contexts.

User avatar
Clo
XnThusiast
Posts: 4441
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:57 am
Location: Bordeaux, France
Contact:

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by Clo » Sat May 01, 2010 1:27 am

:arrow: linkish

:) Hello !

• I created a 61-character named folder here in Total commander as :
E:\aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\
in which I copied an image file : No problem when opening it with XnView, View and Browser ! :?:

:mrgreen: KR
Claude
Clo
XP-Pro SP2 (Fr)
Old user ON SELECTIVE STRIKE till further notice

linkish
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:25 pm

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by linkish » Sat May 01, 2010 2:09 am

Clo wrote::arrow: linkish

:) Hello !

• I created a 61-character named folder here in Total commander as :
E:\aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa\
in which I copied an image file : No problem when opening it with XnView, View and Browser ! :?:

:mrgreen: KR
Claude
Clo
XP-Pro SP2 (Fr)

Fascinating. That sounds like a very loud folder. (Eaaaaaaaaaa!)

Obviously, you're not using the same system set-up as I am, so perhaps it's Vista-specific?

marsh
XnThusiast
Posts: 2443
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 6:31 am

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by marsh » Sun May 02, 2010 12:26 am

linkish wrote:
marsh wrote:Running under linux;wine;ext3, I can use up to about 255 characters in complete path (including parent folders).
Best I can do is shrug my shoulders at that. As I detailed above, the pattern was the same both times, with nothing changing except the renaming of the folders. Is XnView choking on the length of the path, then? It's odd to think it would if I have no problem with the files in other contexts.
Yes, the path length mattered for me. This other note mentions MSDOS limit of 260 bytes.

linkish
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:25 pm

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by linkish » Sun May 02, 2010 7:47 pm

marsh wrote:
linkish wrote: Best I can do is shrug my shoulders at that. As I detailed above, the pattern was the same both times, with nothing changing except the renaming of the folders. Is XnView choking on the length of the path, then? It's odd to think it would if I have no problem with the files in other contexts.
Yes, the path length mattered for me. This other note mentions MSDOS limit of 260 bytes.
I'm confused. My HDD is NTFS; is there a reason a 260-byte limit would be a factor?

I suppose ultimately none of this matters much, really. It's not a massive inconvenience, and the conjecture doesn't seem to be accomplishing anything.

Though I do thank you all kindly for the assistance! Cheers.

marsh
XnThusiast
Posts: 2443
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 6:31 am

Re: Possible folder name length bug?

Post by marsh » Mon May 03, 2010 10:35 am

I have recreated same failure with many applications. This suggests to me that MS is defficient.
The linux version views images buried about 4000 deep without problem.

Post Reply