problems with directory sizes

Hi,

when I upload files on a server, the size displayed on my local browser and the size displayed on the server browser are different.
I don't mean that it was an ASCII transfer and that there has been modification of the file, hence of the file size.
I mean the size is displayed differently on these windows.

For instance if I look at a file which is known to be the same locally and remotely, the local window says :
IMG0001.jpg 74,2KB
and the remote window says :
IMG0001.jpg 75KB

this is embarassing when I want to compare the versions of the file...

I add that I've been answered to use the sftp dev version, but the dev version 1.0.977.5 suffers from the same problem...

Go to Settings, display, and change size format to the most liked by you, for example bytes.

>Go to Settings, display, and change size format to the most liked by you, for example bytes.

this doesn't fix the problems by two ways :

-first, the local browser is not affected by changing the display setting ;
-second this does not fix the bug

I'd like to use the automatic sizing anyway. sftp should use the same algorithm for displaying sizes on remote and local views.

There is no bug with file size because is windows the one that gives that size to the file. If you see windows explorer you don't see files with for example 10,3 KB (At last no on my windows)

I don't understand what you meant.
Why do you say that there is no bug when I see two different sizes.
I call it a bug.

BTW, I'm not talking about windows explorer, but the local browser included in sftp.

Please go ahead and make a screen shot of this, this way we can see the problem first hand.

And please stop creating multiple threads on the same subject, one is enough. Thank you.

>Please go ahead and make a screen shot of this, this way we can see the problem first hand.
sure, look by yourself :
different KB sizes between remote and local
the name of the remote site is modified the rest is "as is".

>And please stop creating multiple threads on the same subject, one is enough. Thank you.
I agree that I posted the same bug report about 7 weeks ago, and I apologize if starting a new thread is not the rule in the sftp forum.
In the other hand, 2 bug reports (the recent ones) for 2 bugs doesnt seem insane to me : the other bug report for a different bug (that is : wrong size displayed after upload and overwrite) has been deleted.

Now open a file on "Windows Explorer" and compare the file sizes to the remote server.

You will see that Microsoft Windows-Explorer is identical on showing file sizes as with the SmartFTP Local-Browser. (It's rounding it off)

If you want the same size shown on both ends, you will have to change the "Size Display Format" to kilobytes, under the display settings.

TIP
If you wish to see the exact file size of a file on the local system. Right-click on the file and select the Properties option.

>Now open a file on "Windows Explorer" and compare the file sizes to the remote server.
ok, I did it.

>You will see that Microsoft Windows-Explorer is identical on showing file sizes as with the SmartFTP Local-Browser. (It's rounding it off)
yes, that's right.

>If you want the same size shown on both ends, you will have to change the "Size Display Format" to kilobytes, under the display settings.
Hey, wait a minute.
I'm not reporting a bug for windows explorer.
Windows explorer works the way it works, and I don't think that the smartftp forum is the best place to talk about that.

I'm telling you that I'm a smartftp user, and in the smartftp application, there is an inconsistency. This is a bug. It annoys me, maybe someone else, I don't know.

I guess that you're using an object from some library to handle the local browser. You have not coded it and that you don't want to work to fix the inconsistency.
If so, tell it, and I won't annoy you with my reports if you think that's a correct behaviour to you.

To answer to the fact I should force the display to "KB" to get the same information on local and remote views, : I've already answered to this suggestion which is not the way, in my opinion, things should be done.
I want all windows to follow the settings the same way, that's as simple as that.
settings is bytes ?
every window displays sizes in bytes.
settings is auto (which I use) ?
every window displays sizes according to the same algorithm.
and so on.

To be clear : I like smartftp and find it great, I'm not here to advocate, but to have a bug fixed if possible

SmartFTP reuses a part of the Windows Explorer and the displayed size
comes from the shell interface of windows.