Re: Size Zero Movie Download Links
Aminta Brauer
Not suitable for this site This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
The stat command here allows us just to get the file size, that's the -c %s (see the man pages for other formats). I am running the stat program and capturing its output, that's the $( ). This output is seen numerically, that's the outer (( )). If zero is given for the size, that is FALSE, so the second part of the OR is executed. Non-zero (non-empty file) will be TRUE, so the rm will not be executed.
I am currently on MacOS Monteray 12.4 and using SmartSync (online-only) by default. The Dropbox App version is v151.4.4304 . I noticed that all the cloud files are now shown as Zero bytes. I could still download them (make them available offline) but I remember in previous versions, I could see the size of the files before choosing to download them. Is there some fix for that? I just followed some discussion groups and clicked on "Fix Permissions" under the account tab, which is syncing many files. Not sure if that will fix the issue. Any other tricks to fix this?
Did this post help you? If so, give it a Like below to let us know.
Need help with something else? Ask me a question!
Find Tips & Tricks Discover more ways to use Dropbox here!
Interested in Community Groups? Click here to join!
We received an email stating there was a Dropbox update over the weekend. Now ALL of my files (that were synced to my Mac) are showing Zero bytes. I work in InDesign and ALL of the links are broken. Dropbox says all my files are up to date. I went into the account, held down Option and Fixed Permissions and Hardlinks; it did nothing. If I double click on a file, the size and is restored. But, I have 10,000+ files that are showing Zero bytes... which means I would have to relink EVERY single image/file in ALL of my InDesign documents. Please advise ASAP.
Have you tried selecting the files or folders you'd like to have available for local use (like when working in inDesign etc.) by right clicking on them and setting them to be local instead of online only?
Did this post help you? If so, give it a Like below to let us know.
Need help with something else? Ask me a question!
Find Tips & Tricks Discover more ways to use Dropbox here!
Interested in Community Groups? Click here to join
I all of a sudden am now having this exact issue. The whole point of using Dropbox and storing files online is to link to them without having to download copies locally and filling up your hard drive. Until this past weekend, linked files in InDesign always worked with Dropbox (without storing them locally) and now all of a sudden they do not. I am only experiencing this on my Mac running Monterey. On Macs running Catalina, everything works okay.
Yes, I can access files working with them offline, but that's not what I want to do. That would require downloading every single file that is linked in any InDesign file, which would fill up my laptop and defeat the purpose of using Dropbox.
I thought Dropbox was supposed to have a fix to what apple did by now. I read it was to be rolling out by January. Is there a link that I should be going to or a method to force an update for Dropbox?
For the past few months, whenever I add a link to a webpage in constant contact, even if the font for the text within the link appears to be the same size as the rest of the text in Constant Contact (and even if I specifically resize the font of the link to be the correct size), it shows up as a smaller size when I send the email. Sometimes changing all the text to plain text formatting and re-adding the links works to fix that, but sometimes it doesn't. There doesn't seem to be a consistent solution, and sometimes it has happened (the links have shrunk) in the final version of a message we send out even if they were the correct size in a test email.
Hi @CDPHE-EJ. Thank you for that information. I did a quicksend to my own address (you might have seen a notification for it since it had to be a live send, not a test) and I was able to replicate it as well on my end.
Taking a look at the Design tab, the body text is set to 14pt which is the size of the link text in the live send. Even if the text is changed under the block, some of the text properties can be carried over from Design. I would recommend changing the font size to 18 under Design and see if this fixes the issue, testing with a live send to your own address.
The issue with seeing the links in a different font is in the Gmail web client, on the google chrome web browser. The issue is consistent across devices (desktop (windows) computers for multiple team members, as well as mobile devices (iPhone).
I have generally been copy/pasting the text with the link into the email campaign from Google Docs. Typically, I will copy-paste over the text, then turn all of the text into "plain text" after pasting it in, then reformat it to the appropriate font and size, and add each link back in manually in Constant Contact. This did fix the problem the first few times I tried, but lately the issue has been re-occurring even after I do that. One time, I did try creating a new text box, typing in the text by hand rather than copy-pasting, and adding the link, but that did not resolve the issue and the link still appeared smaller than the rest of the text in the final product.
Thank you so much for the quick reply and looking into the issue for us! I had no idea that the design tab would impact that. I really appreciate your assistance, and have adjusted the design tab to use the correct font size in the body of the email.
Some file systems have a small area inside the directory entry that is used for the beginning of the file, which significantly speeds up processing of symlinks and small reads (think file) at the expense of larger directory entries.
If the entire symlink contents fit into the directory entry, then no data blocks are allocated, and the du size shows as zero. If the symlink doesn't fit, space is allocated normally (so you end up with a single block allocation), which may be optimized by the filesystem using tail merging (but there is no API for du to know about this).
But for whatever reason it still shows 2 numbers on either end of my current page. If I change mid_size to 3, it shows 3 numbers on either side of the current page so I know it is picking up the parameter.
I had a quick look at the source, and it does seem that the problem comes in at line 2267 (current version 4.1). I will however need to do some testing at some stage to make sure that this is a bug, but on face value, this is the only place I can see that this problem might occur.
I have recently written my own pagination function to overcome a few short falls with paginate_links(), but it can be improved. I just don't have enough time to completely test some core functions and even my own functions and improve them.
You can then call it as paginated_numbers() in your templates. Remember, you can set the parameters as arguments to suite your needs, and it works for custom queries and main query and also static front pages
When calculating the size of dir1 I would go for the command du -sh dir1 since du will only count hard-links only once. Ok so far so good, but by counting only once this means that I am actually counting not from the first hard link which lives in dir2. So let's say du -sh dir2 is 2G in size. dir1 will also be 2G in size since the hard link will be counted once in that directory structure. As far as my knowledge in hard-links concern I believe hard-links do not actually have the same file size as the first inode created right ? I would really enjoy getting some clarification on getting the directory size of hard-link files that live in different directories, thus getting an estimation of the real disk space the hard-links are occupying.
Then there are file-names. Each file-name points to exactly one inode. Each inode can have between zero and many file-names point at it. (Each inode can have between zero and many open file-descriptors (owned by processes) point to it). If there are zero file-names, and zero file-descriptors pointing to an inode, then it is garbage collected.
7fc3f7cf58