Win XP search bug. Q about search program

Discussion in 'PC Technical Talk' started by Michael Salem, Nov 16, 2003.

  1. Windows XP has what I would describe as a very nasty bug in its Search
    function (it is probably advertised as a "feature"). When searching
    files for content, only certain file types are searched. Exactly what
    files are searched depends upon the patch level of XP and registry
    modifications that have been made. I have wasted a large amount of time
    in a system which was inserting a spurious string somewhere; searching
    all files on the machine for the string brought no matches, though in
    fact I later discovered that the string was present in several files. To
    test for this problem, simply create a text file called, say, TEST.101
    containing the string, say, qwerty; then do a search for files
    containing "qwerty" on the drive containing the file, searching files
    *.* or *.101 or even TEST.101.

    Solution: GREP, 32-bit Windows command-line version

    Best wishes,
    Michael Salem, Nov 16, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. JRS: In article <>, seen
    Or MiniTrue, via sig below, in 16- & 32-bit command-line versions.

    I don't know whether one or both of GREP and MiniTrue has, within their
    joint ambit, functions that the other lacks; but I do believe MiniTrue
    to have a wider ambit, and it has plenty of functions. I've not tested
    it in XP, though.

    It does not itself search multiple drives; but no doubt a FOR loop would
    do that.
    Dr John Stockton, Nov 17, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dr John Stockton wrote, in response to a posting of mine regarding
    finding files with specified content in Windows:
    Thanks, I hadn't thought of MiniTrue for this application. I use it
    specifically for doing global search-and-replace in general ("binary")
    files. So long as it supports long file and directory names without
    restriction (I expect it does, but haven't checked) it's a good
    candidate for doing what Windows XP's Search should do.

    Best wishes,
    Michael Salem, Nov 18, 2003
  4. JRS: In article <>, seen
    It seems not to support LFNs; but I don't find that a problem. It can
    search the whole of my C: drive (apart from what is in use and
    unopenable), and that has the usual long names.
    Dr John Stockton, Nov 18, 2003
  5. It seems not to support LFNs; but I don't find that a problem. It can
    It's not just LFN support in itself; command-line programs which can
    deal with some long file and directory names can easily have problems
    with long directory names, pathnames which are very long, etc. For
    example, the virus-checker F-PROT for DOS works fine on all Win98
    systems I've come across, but silently ignores many directories in NT-
    strand Windows (NT,2k,XP) (in the particular case of F-PROT there's an
    NT-compatible version, fpcmd.exe). Problems with skipped directories are
    not necessarily obvious. I'm not _certain_ that the grep I'm using is
    100% thorough.

    I've actually written (but not released) command-line software which
    worked fine with all the long file and directory names I threw at it on
    Win98 machines, but went awry with the extreme nesting of extremely long
    pathnames used by WinXP.

    Nothing can be worse then WinXP's search facility -- at least one is
    careful with command-line software. Microsoft programs not only know
    what you ought to do, rather than what you think you want, but they
    helpfully do things the "proper" way without ever telling you how extra-
    helpful they're being. Very good for the under-fives.

    Best wishes,
    Michael Salem, Nov 19, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.