Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[wpmac] Re: _xx files

Expand Messages
  • Randall C. Wilson
    I just received my licensed copy of Tiger in the mail, but have not installed it. Under Panther I hae not been having problems saving files in WP. I have
    Message 1 of 13 , Jul 13, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I just received my licensed copy of Tiger in the mail, but have not
      installed it.

      Under Panther I hae not been having problems saving files in WP. I
      have auto backup set to 2 minutes and use a Dual G-5

      Since the problem under discussion seems to exist with both Tiger and
      Panther I am guessing that the file saving problem is not a Tiger
      specific issue.

      I would rather not install an OS upgrade that is going to interfere
      with one of my most frequently used programs.

      >--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Gilbert, Geoffrey S"
      ><Geoff@e...> wrote:
      >
      >> It was worse in Panther, pre-Spotlight. I don't keep my files
      >> in the User Directory. John keeps his on the Desktop. maybe
      >> that has something to do with it.
      >
      >It's worse for me in Tiger than in Panther (I installed the 10.4.2
      >update about an hour ago, and have noticed no change in this
      >issue). But here, the xx files are never more recent than the
      >named files. More of them just crop up in Tiger.
      >
      >So should we sell this to Hollywood as an update to "The X Files"?
      >
      >Sorry . . .
      >
      >John R.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      > Visit your group
      >"<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wordperfectmac>wordperfectmac" on
      >the web.
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >
      ><mailto:wordperfectmac-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>wordperfectmac-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
      ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.


      --
      /S/ Randall

      mailto:rwilson@...

      Alternate: mailto:gryndal@...

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • John Rethorst
      I get a number of xx files as I work, usually well into a session after the named documents have been open for a while. After excluding Spotlight s indexing
      Message 2 of 13 , Jul 15, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        I get a number of xx files as I work, usually well into a
        session after the named documents have been open for
        a while.

        After excluding Spotlight's indexing for the work area
        (tried this with the desktop and also with the user
        directory), no more xx files appeared.

        Geoff's report that this was worse under Panther makes
        me wonder whether Panther's contents indexing had a
        similar auto-updating function that would produce the
        same result. But his finding that xx files can be more
        recent than the named file doesn't happen here. There
        may be two problems with similar symptoms.

        IAC I've emailed Gero to ask whether, in a future update
        to the WP Importer, files with the "WP_xx…" naming
        protocol can be excluded from indexing.
      • John Rethorst
        ... The problem I m getting is cosmetic and trivial - just sweep up xx files at the end of a session. The problem Geoff s getting is non-trivial, since an xx
        Message 3 of 13 , Jul 15, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Randall C. Wilson"
          <rwilson@i...> wrote:

          > I would rather not install an OS upgrade that is going
          > to interfere with one of my most frequently used programs.

          The problem I'm getting is cosmetic and trivial - just sweep
          up xx files at the end of a session. The problem Geoff's
          getting is non-trivial, since an xx file can contain more
          recent data than the named file. Burton found that changes
          were not being written to the named file, just to the xx file.

          An extension or third-party app conflict is not out of the
          question. I'll test for that. Any further observations would
          be welcome.
        • Geoff Gilbert
          John Any of your files have footnotes? It s more likely that the xx files will be newer if there are footnotes and that was the last thing i was working on -
          Message 4 of 13 , Jul 15, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            John

            Any of your files have footnotes? It's more likely that the xx files
            will be newer if there are footnotes and that was the last thing i
            was working on - as if closing the footnote window somehow updates
            the xx file, but not the proper file.

            Geoff


            >--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Randall C. Wilson"
            ><rwilson@i...> wrote:
            >
            >> I would rather not install an OS upgrade that is going
            >> to interfere with one of my most frequently used programs.
            >
            >The problem I'm getting is cosmetic and trivial - just sweep
            >up xx files at the end of a session. The problem Geoff's
            >getting is non-trivial, since an xx file can contain more
            >recent data than the named file. Burton found that changes
            >were not being written to the named file, just to the xx file.
            >
            >An extension or third-party app conflict is not out of the
            >question. I'll test for that. Any further observations would
            >be welcome.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • ICLUF Legal Director Randall C. Wilson
            I do not have the problem, but neither are my work folders indexed, so indexing could somehow be involved. ... -- /s/ Randall C. Wilson, Esq. Legal Director
            Message 5 of 13 , Jul 15, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              I do not have the problem, but neither are my work folders indexed,
              so indexing could somehow be involved.

              >John
              >
              >Any of your files have footnotes? It's more likely that the xx files
              >will be newer if there are footnotes and that was the last thing i
              >was working on - as if closing the footnote window somehow updates
              >the xx file, but not the proper file.
              >
              >Geoff
              >
              >
              >>--- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Randall C. Wilson"
              >><rwilson@i...> wrote:
              >>
              >>> I would rather not install an OS upgrade that is going
              >>> to interfere with one of my most frequently used programs.
              >>
              >>The problem I'm getting is cosmetic and trivial - just sweep
              >>up xx files at the end of a session. The problem Geoff's
              >>getting is non-trivial, since an xx file can contain more
              >>recent data than the named file. Burton found that changes
              >>were not being written to the named file, just to the xx file.
              >>
              >>An extension or third-party app conflict is not out of the
              >>question. I'll test for that. Any further observations would
              >>be welcome.
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
              >
              > Visit your group
              >"<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wordperfectmac>wordperfectmac" on
              >the web.
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              >
              ><mailto:wordperfectmac-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>wordperfectmac-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
              ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.


              --
              /s/ Randall C. Wilson, Esq.
              Legal Director
              Iowa Civil Liberties Union Foundation

              mailto:rwilson@...



              Ph: (515) 243 4032
              Fax: (515) 243 8506 (call first)

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • John Rethorst
              ... I tried a file with footnotes, with no change. But another thing I did was reindex, and it improved the problem significantly, although it didn t fix it.
              Message 6 of 13 , Jul 16, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gilbert <Geoff@e...>
                wrote:

                > Any of your files have footnotes? It's more likely that the xx
                > files will be newer if there are footnotes and that was the last
                > thing i was working on - as if closing the footnote window
                > somehow updates the xx file, but not the proper file.

                I tried a file with footnotes, with no change. But another thing I did
                was reindex, and it improved the problem significantly, although it
                didn't fix it.

                My entire startup disk is indexed, and nothing else. I went to
                System Prefs > Spotlight > Privacy and dragged the icon of my
                startup disk into the exclusion pane. I waited five seconds, then
                deleted the icon from the pane with the minus button at the
                bottom. This deletes the index for that disk, and causes a
                reindex from scratch. I think that, especially with a new
                technology, this beats revising an existing index. Sorta like
                the OS 9 desktop database.

                I've also asked Gero whether an update to the plugin could possibly
                just exclude WP files with names including "WP_xx" from indexing.
                If, when WP updates its temp file, Spotlight sees that and grabs the
                file to index, this could be at least part of the problem.

                John R.
              • John Rethorst
                I moved the WP Importer file out of /Library/Spotlight, reindexed, and the _xx files disappeared. I moved the importer back where it was, let the index update,
                Message 7 of 13 , Jul 19, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I moved the WP Importer file out of /Library/Spotlight,
                  reindexed, and the _xx files disappeared. I moved the
                  importer back where it was, let the index update, and
                  the problem resurfaced - although it took several
                  saves among a few open documents before the _xx
                  files returned.

                  If Panther used a similar structure to notice saved
                  changes and update its contents index, then indexing
                  could be the reason. IAC I sent Gero an email with
                  these findings. I don't know if the importer API
                  supports exclusion based on file names though.

                  John R.
                • Geoff Gilbert
                  I am using 10.4.11 on a G5. When saving WP files under Classic, the temp file (XX) is being preserved and is more up-to-date than the proper file. I have run
                  Message 8 of 13 , Nov 16, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I am using 10.4.11 on a G5. When saving WP files under Classic, the
                    temp file (XX) is being preserved and is more up-to-date than the
                    proper file. I have run mdimport -r
                    /Library/Spotlight/WordPerfect.mdimporter in Terminal, but to no
                    effect.

                    Any thoughts?

                    Geoff
                  • Daryl Chinn
                    Geoff, In my original versions of WP 3.0 and 3.5 (perhaps before also), when I typed
                    Message 9 of 13 , Nov 16, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Geoff, In my original versions of
                      WP 3.0 and 3.5 (perhaps before also), when I typed
                      <Apple-S), it saved both the old file (under the file
                      name) and the new file(under a numbered name). The WP
                      3.5e (Rethorst) doesn't do that on my late PB G4 PPC
                      Classic/10.4.11 as well as Titanium
                      PB/10.4.11/Classic) and hasn't ever done that. I've
                      never figured out why (I never found a Preference, for
                      instance, or a way to re-set or change this) either
                      version does what it does. I still have both on my
                      computer and they both act as they always have (see
                      above). I can't suggest a change, just offer
                      commiseration and hope someone can explain or help
                      change
                      this. Daryl ---
                      Geoff Gilbert <Geoff@...>
                      wrote: > I am using 10.4.11 on a
                      G5. When saving WP files > under Classic, the
                      > temp file (XX) is being preserved and is
                      more > up-to-date than the > proper
                      file. I have run mdimport -r >
                      /Library/Spotlight/WordPerfect.mdimporter
                      in > Terminal, but to no >
                      effect. > > Any
                      thoughts? > > Geoff >
                    • John Rethorst
                      ... I ve just updated to 10.4.11 on a G4. No change noticed. John R.
                      Message 10 of 13 , Nov 16, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gilbert <Geoff@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > I am using 10.4.11 on a G5. When saving WP files under Classic, the
                        > temp file (XX) is being preserved and is more up-to-date than the
                        > proper file.

                        I've just updated to 10.4.11 on a G4. No change noticed.

                        John R.
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.