|
|
This change in the recent versions is a disaster for me. I don't
understand and never had any problems about "Windows double-clicking" or
"the default text editor" so that is no plus for me at all.
But the inability to continue to have my cache archived and indexed by
Copernic or Google is a real problem.
Your suggestion that I "might want to try a cache visualiser tool"
misses the point, there is no human way to look through tens of
thousands of cache files by hand individually hoping to find what I am
looking for.
I hope that Opera reconsiders this disaster and returns to leaving the
file suffixs on.
Meanwhile, what is the latest version that does not have this disaster
built in, and wwhere can I download it?
Thank you.
Pat
In article <op.uezpgwn12llx79@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
> self <me@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > My latest version of Opera, v. 9.50 beta saves the cache files without
> > any file suffix, like opr2HUAZ, instead of opr2HUAZ.htm.
>
> 9.50 and later (the current release is 9.51, btw), does store the cache
> files without any file suffixes. This as a measure to avoid problems with
> Windows letting you double-click and execute files directly from the
> cache, and with the default text editor on Mac OS that would try to render
> HTML pages instead of viewing the source code. The files themselves are in
> the same format as they have ever been.
>
> You might want to try a cache visualiser tools, such as the good old
> â??O4FEâ?? <URL:http://users.westelcom.com/jsegur/#ofe> which can help you
> tell which files in the cache correspond to which URLs.
>
>
--
Pat
|
|