Search Results

Search found 20566 results on 823 pages for 'folder structure'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 61/823 | < Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >

  • Windows Server - share files without access for administrator

    - by Pawel
    We have a MS Windows Server 2008 R8 based server that is administrated by our IT department. We would like to achieve two things simultaneously: A folder on the server, containing several thousand files (new files added frequently) that is accessible to some ActiveDirectory users (e.g. board of directors) but is not accessible by IT department employees IT department employees still maintain rights to administrate the server, including installing new software and services We already checked some solutions: Using NTFS access rights. Unfortunately IT (members of "Administrators" group) can set themselves as new owners of the files and change the permissions so that they gain access to the files. Enabling EFS. Unfortunately even if you do not allow IT to access files, they still can disable EFS completely because they have administrative rights. Moreover as far as I know you have to manually add permissions for all users but the owner for each new file - very inconvenient. Creating a new role for the IT department that has all the privileges apart from taking ownership of files. Unfortunately if you're not a member of the Administrators group, you cannot install new software, no matter what privileges you add to the role. TrueCrypt - nice free encryption software, but with poor sharing capabilities. You can either mount an encryption container on the server (and then IT has access to its contents) or you mount them locally but only one user can mount it for writing. AxCrypt - free encryption software that enables file-by-file encryption on the server. There are some disadvantages though - you have to manually encrypt each new file added. The files have their extensions changes. You can only set one password for all files (so all users have to know this one password). Any other ideas? Our budget is limited so enterprise-class software from Symantec or PGP would probably be not an option.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 shows a drive as full in summary but files shown on drive are very small

    - by Rob
    I have a drive partitioned so it is seen by Windows as 2 drives: C:\ and D:\ Windows 7 shows D:\ as full up in the graphical summary in 'My Computer' summary of all the drives, e.g. the bar graph indicates full and nearly all of the drive's capacity, 108Gb, is full. So I go into the D:\ drive to look at the files, I see several folders. I select them all and the right-click menu Properties to count their size, expecting the value to be about the same as what Windows reports in the summary, i.e. nearly 108Gb. But the properties window shows the files are very small, Kbs and Mbs, nowhere near 108Gbs. One of the folders is a backup, but its size is very small. I've checked the folder options to show all system files and hidden files too - and counted these in the properties. Something invisible is holding the space. What is happening here? I'm afraid to delete anything if it removes valuable backups. Have I got huge backups here? Why can't I see them? How do I see them?

    Read the article

  • .htaccess: Allow only one Folder Structure - 301 Redirect

    - by elmaso
    Hello, how can I allow only one Folder-Structure with .htaccess like that: http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+FIXEDWORD2/ the dynamicword is not fix, anything else is 301: http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+mistype/mistype/ --> 301 http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+mistype/mistype --> 301 http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+FIXEDWORD2/mistype --> 301 Is that possible?

    Read the article

  • Creating a structure from bytes with ctypes and IronPython

    - by Adal
    I have the following CPython code which I now try to run in IronPython: import ctypes class BarHeader(ctypes.Structure): _fields_ = [ ("id", ctypes.c_char * 4), ("version", ctypes.c_uint32)] bar_file = open("data.bar", "rb") header_raw = bar_file.read(ctypes.sizeof(BarHeader)) header = BarHeader.from_buffer_copy(header_raw) The last line raises this exception: TypeError: expected array, got str I tried BarHeader.from_buffer_copy(bytes(header_raw)) instead of the above, but then the exception message changes to TypeError: expected array, got bytes. Any idea what I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Roaming Profiles & Redirected Folders - storage consumption? offline files and caching?

    - by Ben Swinburne
    I understand the concepts of both roaming profiles and folder redirection and have used both separately before. I am about to set up a network from scratch and would ideally like to use both for the following reasons primarily Roaming profiles allow users to log on to any machine and have their profile Redirected profiles allow users to have their My Documents and Desktop etc backed up without the need to log off at the end of the day. The servers can run their backups overnight and there are no missing files due to the user not logging off. Redirected profiles largely alleviate the slow log in times caused by large profiles. My question is if some of the folders are redirected and therefore not part of the roaming profile what happens on machines which truly roam (i.e. laptops)? If there's offline files or a cache does this mean that the problem whereby a user has to log off comes back? By having them both enabled, is there any duplication i.e. if I have a users$ share and a profiles$ share would I have Desktop twice for example?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server - share files without access for administrator

    - by Pawel
    We have a MS Windows Server 2008 R8 based server that is administrated by our IT department. We would like to achieve two things simultaneously: A folder on the server, containing several thousand files (new files added frequently) that is accessible to some ActiveDirectory users (e.g. board of directors) but is not accessible by IT department employees IT department employees still maintain rights to administrate the server, including installing new software and services We already checked some solutions: Using NTFS access rights. Unfortunately IT (members of "Administrators" group) can set themselves as new owners of the files and change the permissions so that they gain access to the files. Enabling EFS. Unfortunately even if you do not allow IT to access files, they still can disable EFS completely because they have administrative rights. Moreover as far as I know you have to manually add permissions for all users but the owner for each new file - very inconvenient. Creating a new role for the IT department that has all the privileges apart from taking ownership of files. Unfortunately if you're not a member of the Administrators group, you cannot install new software, no matter what privileges you add to the role. TrueCrypt - nice free encryption software, but with poor sharing capabilities. You can either mount an encryption container on the server (and then IT has access to its contents) or you mount them locally but only one user can mount it for writing. AxCrypt - free encryption software that enables file-by-file encryption on the server. There are some disadvantages though - you have to manually encrypt each new file added. The files have their extensions changes. You can only set one password for all files (so all users have to know this one password). Any other ideas? Our budget is limited so enterprise-class software from Symantec or PGP would probably be not an option.

    Read the article

  • svn (with git frontend) branch merging with different directory structure

    - by Fu86
    I have a subversion repository with a directory structure: frontend backend + a + b In a other branch, someone had put the sub-folders a and b in the root directory and delete the other stuff (frontend, backend). a b Now i have to merge this branch back into the trunk (backend-folder). How can I do that to dont lose the history from the branches? I use git to access and work with the subversion repository.

    Read the article

  • if-else structure

    - by Halo
    I have these long statements that I will refer to as x,y etc. here. My conditional statements' structure goes like this: if(x || y || z || q){ if(x) do someth else if (y) do something if(z) do something else if(q) do something } else do smthing Is there a better, shorter way to write this thing? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Samba PDC plus universal folder

    - by skids89
    I know how to configure samba on my ubuntu box to become a PDC however I need some select files to be accessible to multiple users. These files are beyond their personal files. I.E. users A-C need to be able to access a schedule saved as a spreadsheet. But user D does not and users B-D need to be able to access confidential employee info but user A does not. How do I set this up on top of the PDC structure? Any video tutorials would be a plus. Im new to linux so documentation is a confusing slow slog to learn. Thanks so much in advance!

    Read the article

  • Django: Serializing models in a nested data structure?

    - by Rosarch
    It's easy to serialize models in an iterable: def _toJSON(models): return serializers.serialize("json", models, ensure_ascii=False) What about when I have something more complicated: [ (Model_A_1, [Model_B_1, Model_B_2, Model_B_3]), (Model_A_2, [Model_B_3, Model_B_4, Model_B_5, Model_B_59]), (Model_A_3, [Model_B_6, Model_B_7]), ] I tried serializing each model as it was added to the structure, then serializing the whole thing with simplejson.dumps, but that causes the JSON defining each model to be escaped. Is there a better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • PHP JQuery: Where to specify uploadify destination folder

    - by Eamonn
    I have an uploadify script running, basic setup. Works fine when I hard code the destination folder for the images into uploadify.php - now I want to make that folder dynamic. How do I do this? I have a PHP variable $uploadify_path which contains the path to the folder I want. I have switched out my hard coded $targetPath = path/to/directory for $targetPath = $uploadify_path in both uploadify.php and check_exists.php, but it does not work. The file upload animation runs, says it is complete, yet the directory remains empty. The file is not hiding out somewhere else either. I see there is an option in the Javascript to specify a folder. I tried this also, but to no avail. If anyone could educate me on how to pass this variable destination to uploadify, I'd be very grateful. I include my current code for checking (basically default): The Javascript <script type="text/javascript"> $(function() { $('#file_upload').uploadify({ 'swf' : 'uploadify/uploadify.swf', 'uploader' : 'uploadify/uploadify.php', // Put your options here }); }); </script> uploadify.php $targetPath = $_SERVER['DOCUMENT_ROOT'] . $uploadify_path; // Relative to the root if (!empty($_FILES)) { $tempFile = $_FILES['Filedata']['tmp_name']; $targetFile = $targetPath . $_FILES['Filedata']['name']; // Validate the file type $fileTypes = array('jpg','jpeg','gif','png'); // File extensions $fileParts = pathinfo($_FILES['Filedata']['name']); if (in_array($fileParts['extension'],$fileTypes)) { move_uploaded_file($tempFile,$targetFile); echo '1'; } else { echo 'Invalid file type.'; } }

    Read the article

  • Java Data Structure

    - by Joe
    Hi there, I'm looking for a data structure that will act like a Queue so that I can hava First In First Out behaviour, but ideally I would also be able to see if an element exists in that Queue in constant time as you can do with a HashMap, rather than the linear time that you get with a LinkedList. I thought a LinkedHashMap might do the job, but although I could make an iterator and just take and then remove the first element of the iteration to produce a sort of poll() method, I'm wondering if there is a better way. Many thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • passing an array structure as an array

    - by Matias
    I'm having trouble passing a structure array as a parameter of a function struct Estructure{ int a; int b; }; and a funtion Begining(Estructure &s1[]) { //modifi the estructure s1 }; and the main would be something like this int main() { Estructure m[200]; Begining(m); }; is this valid?

    Read the article

  • Where should an application's default folder live?

    - by HotOil
    Hi: I'm creating a little app that configures a connected device and then saves the config information in a file. The filename cannot be chosen by the user, but its location can be chosen. Where is the best place for the app's default save-to folder? I have seen examples out there where it is the "MyDocuments" location (eg Visual Studio does this). I have seen a folder created right at the top of the C:\ drive. I find that to be a little obnoxious, personally. It could be in the Program Files[Manufacturer] or Program Files[Product Name], or wherever the app was installed. I have used this location in the past; I dislike it because Windows Explorer does not allow a user to browse to there very easily ('browsability'). Going with this last notion that 'browsability' is a factor, I suppose MyDocuments is the best choice. Is this the most common, most widely accepted practice? I think historically we have chosen the install folder because that co-locates the data with the device management utilities. But I would really like to get away from that. I don't want the user to have to go pawing through system files to find his/her data, esp if that person is not too Windows-savvy. Also, I am using the .NET WinForms FolderBrowserDialog, and the "Environment.SpecialFolders" enum isn't helpful in setting up the dialog to point into the Program Files folder. Thanks for your input! Suz.

    Read the article

  • Can the "Documents" standard folder be rescued and how?

    - by romkyns
    Anyone who likes their Documents folder to contain only things they place there knows that the standard Documents folder is completely unsuitable for this task. Every program seems to want to put its settings, data, or something equally irrelevant into the Documents folder, despite the fact that there are folders specifically for this job. So that this doesn't sound empty, take my personal "Documents" folder as an example. I don't ever use it, in that I never, under any circumstances, save anything into this folder myself. And yet, it contains 46 folders and 3 files at the top level, for a total of 800 files in 500 folders. That's 190 MB of "documents" I didn't create. Obviously any actual documents would immediately get lost in this mess. My question is: can anything be done to improve the situation sufficiently to make "Documents" useful again, say over the next 5 years? Can programmers be somehow educated en-masse not to use it as a dumping ground? Could the OS start reporting some "fake" location hidden under AppData through the existing APIs, while only allowing Explorer and the various Open/Save dialogs to know where the "real" Documents folder resides? Or are any attempts completely futile or even unnecessary?

    Read the article

  • C++ priority queue structure used ?

    - by John Retallack
    While searching for some functions in C++ STL documentation I read that push and pop for priority queues needs constant time. "Constant (in the priority_queue). Although notice that push_heap operates in logarithmic time." My question is what kind of data structure is used to mantain a priority queue with O(1) for push and pop ?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >