Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OrionHall" data-source="post: 239296" data-attributes="member: 56502">AMCUpdater v0.6 now available!Hi All,Following a few reported bugs and feature requests, version 0.6 is now available for download.As mentioned in an earlier post, here's the main changes:Bug - incorrect use of an Int instead of a Long data type caused a crash scanning very large files. Fixed. Actually, I never managed to replicate the crash - only the fact that it didn't import the invalid (too large) values. So hopefully this is really fixed! I've tested with a 6GB .ts file (HD1080) and no problems so far.Bug - minor tab index glitches. Fixed.Bug - 'Apply defaults to main window' option did not copy the override path value. Fixed.Bug - minor window glitches - the forms should not have been sizable etc.Enhancement - added the option to launch a file or program after scanning, so you can run Ant automatically if you like. Also includes the option to only run the file if orphaned files were found when scanning.Enhancement - files added to the Ant catalog now include the 'Date Added' field.Enhancement - the 'Purge Database Entries for Missing Files' option now works from the command line. Use with caution!Source code and binaries for Win32 and x64 are now on SourceForge for download <a href="http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=205435" target="_blank">here</a>.As usual, please have a play and report any problems in this thread.Possible New Feature Alert!!I've been thinking about adding a new feature to enable re-scanning of files if needed.  This would be the case where I have a poor quality film and replace it with a better one (particularly since buying a 5.1 speaker setup and finding how many of my films don't have AC3 surround sound!)  Normally it's not a problem just replacing the file as it'll play just fine; but the Ant catalog will have incorrect data in it.  I've tested the creation of a file checksum and have been storing it in the 'borrower' field in Ant for the time being.  Due to the size of the files in question I can't checksum the whole thing so have just grabbed the first 1MB of data and used that for the calculation.  Hardly accurate really, but should be good enough!  In terms of speed it's not a problem - I tested using nearly 400 files, each 700-1400MB, and the time for a complete scan went up from 26 minutes to 28 minutes!Does this sound like a feature worth including?  Does anyone else see a need for updating the media information with a 'scan for changes' and/or a 'rescan all files' feature?Answers on a postcard please!Cheers,OrionHall.</blockquote>

Verification