mrkvs
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by mrkvs
-
GreatMarko, so yes, I was able to disconnect my current device. But this doesn't let me change any path per folder. I can change the 'default folder location' for this particular device, which changes paths for all the folders associated with my account. I thought that was the whole point and 'uber-dropbox' feature to be able to sync any folder on one device with any folder (in any location) on another device. And BT Sync did that until now. Or am I getting/doing something wrong? This is really frustrating, I can't use BT Sync with a such feature-cut release, because in my case, for example, some folders are located even on different drives and so it must remain. -
GreatMarko, on Windows (v2.0.120) there is no way to change mode to 'Disconnected'! Right-click folder menu gives just an option to 'Remove' the folder, which does exactly that. Moreover, folders (which originally located on another mac) show up as disconnected (dotted icons) only when I remove all the folders from the list and buttons 'Connect' appear. But then it doesn't work the way I expected it to work. Please see my post (unanswered): http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/38981-cant-disconnect-a-folder-anymore-option-disappeared/
-
The latest windows version 2.0.120 doesn't have the 'disconnect' option anymore, so the corresponding FAQ article is irrelevant (http://help.getsync.com/customer/portal/articles/1901281-how-to-disconnect-a-folder-?b_id=3895). Now the similar option is called 'Remove'. The functionality is different though. I was trying to disconnect some folders to change its destinations on windows. 'Disconnect' is still present on mac and works the way it is described in the article. 'Remove', on the other hand, does remove the folder completely, so it disappears from the folder list. The only way to get that folder back (which is present on my other computer) is to remove all the folders from the list! Then suddenly all the folders from my account appear with dotted icons. Then theoretically I was able to 'connect' each folder. As soon as I connect the first (and any) one (finally picking the desired destination), all other folders are connected as well, having the same destination as the first one, which is absolutely unexpected. What can I do about that? How can I change destinations one by one manually? Thanks!
-
Can't Link To A Device Already Running Sync 2.0
mrkvs replied to ms2oo8's topic in Sync Troubleshooting
I have exactly the same problem. Except both desktops are running the latest Mac OS X. Moreover, I can't link two desktops indirectly via a mobile device, which sucks a lot. Is it a known issue? -
What is actual status of this issue? I'm testing synapp on my DS112j right now and is seems to behave the same way as described in the original post.
-
Yes, please, identifiers for folders!
-
Windows share a folder inside shared folder?
mrkvs replied to maartenvc's topic in Sync General Discussion
Please refer to this thread: -
Got you! Should I edit .SyncIngone on both, 1 and 2, machines? Also, I just tried to exclude a subfolder from synced one (by editing .SyncIngnore") and then create a separate sync-job with no success — the same error returned "This folder cannot be added to SyncApp as it is part of a folder that is already syncing." Anyway, this approach, I think, is too laborious and is not that intuitive as it could be, isn't it?
-
SyncApp version 1.0.99
-
I think you didn't miss the point! But. By ignoring c:\folder1\sub1 (on Machine1) and d:\share1\sub1 how would they sync on those machines (1 and 2)?
-
When I'm trying to create a new sync-job for a folder within another folder, which is already synced, I get this: "This folder cannot be added to SyncApp as it is part of a folder that is already syncing."
-
As I understand, syncing machine 1 and 3 is not initial intention! So at the moment changes within "c:\folder1\sub1" won't be synced to 3rd machine's "c:\subfolder" directly. Which is not great, but totally fine, I think.
-
I'm not trying to delve into every detail, but why that might be an issue? In my perspective, those sync-jobs (for main folder and sub-folder) can live without even knowing about each other. Parent folders would sync as they used to. As soon as changes within 3rd machine's "c:\subfolder" are synced to 2nd machine's "d:\share1\sub1", on that 2nd machine those can be rendered as regular changes within local folder. This by-turn will trigger syncing between "c:\folder1" and "d:\share1" in regular fashion. That should work the opposite way as well. The solution with .SyncIgnore is good until you are not really willing to sync those subfolders on machines 1 and 2. Which is kind of limited solution.
-
You won't be able to try it out, since SyncApp doesn't allow to make Secrets for folders within already synced ones. So I'm trying to understand what kind of confusion this thing might cause. File version? I believe it's the same case as syncing any folder on 3 machines. Is that actually possible? (to share secrets with more than 1)
-
That image doesn't show, something is broken.
-
Well yes, from technical point of view. What I tried to show was that the sub1 folder will be synced on all 3 machines, which is what we are asking for I still can't get what kind of problems this approach will cause.
-
I thought SyncApp was aimed at fitting my folder structure. I can move folders around anytime, but that breaks my workflow.
-
Yes! Except "c:\folder1\sub1" won't be created, since it's already there! See pic below:
-
Why would it? I don't mind to sync that particular "folder1/sub1" on 3 machines.
-
Well, this is exactly what I'm missing. You see, I own 2 computers. I'd like to sync, for example, the whole directory called "PROJECTS" on them. And then, I'd really like to be able to share just one project within that directory with my colleagues. At the moment syncapp thinks it's gonna cause problems.
-
How is that actually possible? Could you please give us a short guide for "file sharing"? I can definitely "share" folders via "secret" code, but files...
-
Kos13, unfortunately, you can't receive any more PMs, system says. Is there any other way to receive a link?
