Replace Windows XP copy?

wrote in message
ps.com...
On 20 Okt, 21:49, Country Pumpkin wrote:
"Noozer" wrote
:

I often copy large amounts of files. Nothing is more frustrating than
having the computer copy files for an hour and then pop up an error.
This means I have to start over.

Now that Tucows has officially gone to crap I can't find any software
there, and Googling for "XPcopy replacment" or "xpfile copy"
generatea bazillion unrelated hits.

Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to
replace theXPfile copy?

Go to Snapfiles.com and look in the freeware area, and see if
theres any file coping software

XP has a bundled utility for this purpose : XCOPY.EXE
Open a Command prompt and write : XCOPY /? for a complete set of
switches.
Used with the /D switch, XCOPY will not copy files allready existing
on target directory.

"Power to the people!"
PKM

An excellent tool for this purpose is FileSync, from Fileware.
www.fileware.com

HTH
-pk

xcopy "C:\Your Source Directory\Your Source Directory\" "F:\Your Destination Directory\Your Source Directory" /c /s /h /-Y

Run the above command including the quotes.


No one has mentioned the syntax (a common Windows support problem.



The output of the command "xcopy /?" is listed below. Read up on the different parameters. Note, this is only for Win2k and XP systems.



XCOPY source [destination] [/A | /M] [/D[:date]] [/P] [/S [/E]] [/V] [/W] [/C] [/i] [/Q] [/F] [/L] [/H] [/R] [/T] [/u]
[/K] [/N] [/O] [/X] [/Y] [/-Y] [/Z] [/EXCLUDE:file1[+file2][+file3]...]
source Specifies the file(s) to copy.
destination Specifies the location and/or name of new files.
/A Copies only files with the archive attribute set, doesn't change the attribute.
/M Copies only files with the archive attribute set, turns off the archive attribute.
/D:m-d-y Copies files changed on or after the specified date. If no date is given, copies only those files whose source time is newer than the destination time.
/EXCLUDE:file1 [+file2][+file3]... Specifies a list of files containing strings. When any of the strings match any part of the absolute path of the file to be copied, that file will be excluded from being copied. For example, specifying a string like \obj\ or .obj will exclude all files underneath the directory obj or all files with the .obj extension respectively.
/P Prompts you before creating each destination file.
/S Copies directories and subdirectories except empty ones.
/E Copies directories and subdirectories, including empty ones. Same as /S /E. May be used to modify /T.
/V Verifies each new file.
/W Prompts you to press a key before copying.
/C Continues copying even if errors occur.
/I If destination does not exist and copying more than one file, assumes that destination must be a directory.
/Q Does not display file names while copying.
/F Displays full source and destination file names while copying.
/L Displays files that would be copied.
/H Copies hidden and system files also.
/R Overwrites read-only files.
/T Creates directory structure, but does not copy files. Does not include empty directories or subdirectories. /T /E includes empty directories and subdirectories.
/U Copies only files that already exist in destination.
/K Copies attributes. Normal Xcopy will reset read-only attributes.
/N Copies using the generated short names.
/O Copies file ownership and ACL information.
/X Copies file audit settings (implies /O).
/Y Suppresses prompting to confirm you want to overwrite an existing destination file.
/-Y Causes prompting to confirm you want to overwrite an existing destination file.
/Z Copies networked files in restartable mode.

The switch /Y may be preset in the COPYCMD environment variable.
This may be overridden with /-Y on the command line.




Noozer wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
22-Jul-07

I often copy large amounts of files. Nothing is more frustrating than having
the computer copy files for an hour and then pop up an error. This means I
have to start over.

Now that Tucows has officially gone to crap I can't find any software there,
and Googling for "XP copy replacment" or "xp file copy" generate a bazillion
unrelated hits.

Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to replace
the XP file copy?

Previous Posts In This Thread:

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 5:37 AM
Noozer wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
I often copy large amounts of files. Nothing is more frustrating than having
the computer copy files for an hour and then pop up an error. This means I
have to start over.

Now that Tucows has officially gone to crap I can't find any software there,
and Googling for "XP copy replacment" or "xp file copy" generate a bazillion
unrelated hits.

Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to replace
the XP file copy?

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 6:46 AM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Yep, there are, and already included with Windows. Run "xcopy /?" for
help on using it, like the /C switch to ignore errors.

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 7:42 AM
Stan Brown wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Sun, 22 Jul 2007 05:46:37 -0500 from Vanguard
:

In my opinion, ignoring errors is a really good way to give yourself
a false sense of security.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 5:42 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

And ignoring errors lets you continue the copying despite them. Why
lose all files just because one is bad? Yeah, the hard drive might be
going bad but why should that enforce losing ALL files? Could be the
one file is "bad" not because of a hardware defect but instead because
the file is locked. There are some utilities, like handle.exe from
SysInternals, oh.exe from Win Resource Kit, and Unlocker but most users
don't know about them because they don't realize the copy error is due
to a locked file (and don't understand what is a locked file). If you
were copying 38,000 multimedia (data) files and had to sacrifice a few
to get all the rest, would you simply decide that none of them were
salvageable because a few were not?

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 8:43 PM
Noozer wrote:

Which is still the wrong way to do it.It shouldn't IGNORE errors.
Which is still the wrong way to do it.

It should not IGNORE errors. It should work around them and make you VERY
aware of what did not work.

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 8:53 PM
Ayush wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
[Noozer] wrote-:



It will show all the errors i command prompt.

On Monday, July 23, 2007 1:58 AM
Stan Brown wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Sun, 22 Jul 2007 16:42:29 -0500 from Vanguard
:

Are you serious?

It's a pretty bad thing if you have a "copy" that isn't the same as
the original, but you don't know it's not the same.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

On Monday, July 23, 2007 11:59 AM
Bill Sharpe wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Stan Brown wrote:
The error is that the file cannot be copied. Assuming that the OP is
copying files to another directory the ignored file just won't be copied
there. The significance, of course, occurs when you assume that all
files have been copied and delete the folder with the original files.

So, yes, use "ignore errors" but be aware of the potential consequences.

Bill

On Monday, July 23, 2007 6:46 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

You don't run DOS commands, do you? You haven't run the XCOPY command
and had files it couldn't copy, have you? Otherwise, you would realize
that it reports the files it cannot copy. You could edit the DOS shell
properties to up the number of buffered screen lines, like to 8000, or
you could simply redirect the stdout of XCOPY to a file, as in "xcopy
filespec {target} {logfile}".

So what is your *right* way of copying dozens, hundreds, or thousands of
files when a few will fail? Sacrifice all of them, I suppose. Yeah,
good solution, uh huh. And what is "work around them"? Could it be to
ignore and report them? Well, then you are agreeing that XCOPY is a
solution.

In fact, you don't even need to actually copy the files if all you want
to do is check if they can be read. You can run XCOPY to NULL; see
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/319137/en-us.

On Monday, July 23, 2007 6:54 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

The fact that the file can NOT be copied is the error, and obviously
there was no copy made to be different than the original (unless you
include non-existence as a difference). If you want to spend the extra
cycles checking the integrity of the copies, add the /v switch. Geez,
how hard can it be for you folks to just run "xcopy /?" to actually SEE
what options are available. Duh!

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:13 AM
Noozer wrote:

Not if I don't have to.
Not if I don't have to.


But then it's not replacing the Windows GUI Copy or Move context menu items
is it. That's what I asked for... Something that will replace the built in
version of the commands.


It may help copy files when some may not work, but it doesn't answer my
question at all.


What I want to do is copy ? of files from one USB drive to another USB
drive. I want to keep the directory structure intact. I want to know what
files could not be copied and WHY (Path too long, CRC errors, file in use).
This will literally take HOURS to finish, so I want it to go as fast as
possible and don't want it to pause for any reason until it's done.

So... Can I go to My Computer, open the drive, CTRL-A, right-click, "XCOPY",
back to My Computer, right-click on drive #2 and "XPASTE"? When it's done
will it tell me WHY the files wouldn't copy?

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:18 AM
Noozer wrote:

Duh!
Duh! A copy of a file structure (multiple files, SINGLE copy operation) that
is missing a single byte of information is "not the same."

And "the fact that the file can NOT be copied" is NOT the error. It's the
result. The error could be a CRC error on the disk, file in use, path name
too long, target full, etc...


Real smart... the "/v" switch does NOT verify that the source and target are
the same. It ONLY verifies that the target is complete and readable. The
target could contain gibberish, but will pass a check using "/v" if there
are no CRC/sector errors.


How do you run "xcopy /?" from the desktop context menu? I'm looking for a
COPY/MOVE replacement. I'm not looking for a lesson in using DOS.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:37 AM
Noozer wrote:

This should have read "...
This should have read "...is copy 258gig of files, comprised of 600000 files
and 47000 directories, from one USB..."

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:51 AM
Mark L. Ferguson wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Total Commander" will run from a USB stick. http://www.ghisler.com/

--
Mark L. Ferguson
e-mail subject line must include "QZ" or it is deleted
..

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:08 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

Reread your original post. You weren't asking how to make Windows
Explorer perform the copy. You stated that you had Googled around
looking for 3rd party alternatives. You never declared that they had to
be GUI utilities so dummies could use them (many seem to require a GUI
interface to specify options that can just as easily be specified in a
command line - just because that's the only user interface those users
know).


"Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to
replace
the XP file copy? "

My answer was that you don't have to REPLACE "the XP file copy" (which
was never defined as Windows Explorer, the 'copy' DOS command, or what).
Just use Xcopy that's already available.


As mentioned, run:

xcopy sourcespec [targetspec] [path]logfile.txt

Walk away and when it completes you can look at the logfile.txt file
(add a path if you want it saved somewhere other than the default
directory from where you run the xcopy command in the DOS shell).
Pretty simple. Doesn't require Googling around for 3rd party
alternatives or installing anything new.


Xcopy is a DOS command. That is, it issues its standard output to the
current shell's display (i.e., it is a console program). Xcopy is not a
GUI program with pretty windows and menu bars. Rather than having to
wade through menus to select a slew of options in a checkoff screen, you
simply run the program and specify the options using parameters. "xcopy
/?" tells you how to use the program (i.e., it even has its own help,
ta-da). If the buffer size for the DOS shell is huge then it might show
all of the output. Otherwise, and as shown, redirect stdout to a file
and then go use Notepad on the file when xcopy finishes.

I'm sure there are some GUI programs out there to do the same thing. I
don't bother looking for any since xcopy is already included with
Windows. xxcopy is a 3rd party program that has even more features but
it is also a console-mode program (a DOS program). Then there's
robocopy.exe which is included in the Windows NT Resource Kit but,
again, it is a console-mode program. I don't need GUI programs if DOS
programs do what I want, and you can redirect stdout if you want to
record the output of the program.

If you demand a 3rd party GUI application to do the copying that can
skip errors and report them then that is a different question that what
you asked. Someone else might make a suggestion for that additional
software.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:13 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Mark L. Ferguson" wrote in message
...

Hmm, come to think of it, Microsoft's SyncToy (free) might also work.
Have it installed but haven't needed to use it yet. Although not so
stated, guess the OP wants a 3rd party GUI solution. I don't know how
it handles copy errors.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:20 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message
...

Not possible. If the copy fails then there is no copied file so there
is no mismatch on bytes. Yes, a non-existent file is not the same as an
existent file.


Which again means there is no copied file to have a byte mismatch. Or
was it that you actually want the files copied that cannot be read? Not
sure how you copy anything that you can't read, kind of like writing a
book report on a book that you couldn't open.


Oh, so now the criteria has changed. Didn't see in your original post
that you demanded a GUI application so you could wade through menus and
select from a slew of options in one or multiple screens rather than
specify parameters on the command line. Okay, then go try Microsoft's
SyncToy. Might be better for you with its comfy, fuzzy, Fisher-Price
interface.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 6:33 PM
Stan Brown wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:37:46 -0600 from Noozer :

Nope. "Composed of", maybe, but "comprising" not "comprised of".

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 7:43 PM
Ken Blake, MVP wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:33:25 -0400, Stan Brown
wrote:



Congratulations! You're one of the very few people who knows what
"comprise" means.

But why are you correcting his English?

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 11:03 AM
Noozer wrote:

Uhm...
Uhm... Were are talking about a single COPY execution, which could include
multiple files. If you do A copy to duplicate 10 files, and only end up
with 9 at the target location then the resulting copy is different from the
original.

Say I hand you a file folder with 10 pages in it and tell you, "please copy
these". You begin copying each page, but run out of copy paper at page 8. Do
you return the result and tell me that it's done? Do you toss the first 8
into the trash and tell me that you couldn't do it? No, you give me a whole
folder containing only SOME of the pages.


You're telling me that the cover of a book will never be interesting enough
to take notes about it?


But HOW is ignoring the failure in any way useful if you don't know why it's
happening?


I used that for a long while to do a backup at each shutdown. It had it's
place. Still not any good for what I said.

I *NEVER* changed the criteria. I asked originally for a REPLACEMENT.
Something that works like COPY/MOVE but with some extra functionality.

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 12:03 PM
Noozer wrote:

Actually, I *am* going to change the criteria.
Actually, I *am* going to change the criteria. I am moving more files around
now and realized that one thing I'd like to do is be able to do a pause on a
long copy process to speed some smaller ones.

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 9:04 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

So you want the copy to first test if all files are readable before
doing the copy? Okay, then use the already suggested method in my other
post of copying to NUL to see if the files can be read before doing the
copying to destination files. Until the program attempts to actually
read a file, it won't know whether or not it can be read.

You can run multiple commands at the DOS command prompt. See
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
for help on using DOS commands. By using the "&&" command delimiter,
you can have the following command run only if the prior command exited
with zero status, so you could run:

xcopy srcSpec /s && xcopy srcSpec destPath [path]xcopy.log

Since no destination path was specified in the first command, output
goes to NUL. This checks if xcopy can read all the files included by
the source filespec. If that command is successful then the following
xcopy does have a destination path specified so the files that were
already tested as readable will be copied by this second command.

Maybe this gives you want you want. No files will get copied if any of
them cannot be read. I had figured you wanted to get whatever files
were readable.

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 9:37 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

Can't help you there. It's possible to do with a batch script but a lot
of logic would be involved in walking through all the subdirectories
starting at the parent source path to record the files with their paths
along with their sizes, record into a table, sort that table by
filesize, and then use a for-loop to copy each file in the order listed
in the sorted table.

Of course, to meet your first criteria that no files get copied if one
of them is not readable, the for-loop would first have to perform a copy
to NUL to guarantee the file could be read. If the exit code of the
copy to NUL were zero then execute a 2nd copy within that for-loop
following the 1st copy to NUL. The 2nd copy specifies a destination
path so the file actually gets copied. However, that means that the
for-loop would either abort on the first file that couldn't be read (so
you end up with only a partial copy in filesize order) or it would
simply skip the following copy and you end up with the for-loop
completing but only get in the destination path the files that could be
read okay. Alternatively, an if-statement on a non-zero exit code for
the 1st copy to NUL could delete all files and subdirectories at the
destination path and then exit the for-loop. The for-loop would contain
2 copy commands: the first copy goes to NUL to check the file is
readable; an if-statement checks if the exit code from the 1st copy was
non-zero and, if not , deletes all files and subdirectories thus far
created at the destination path and exits the for-loop; and the 2nd copy
would copy the file that has passed the test by the 1st copy to ensure
it was readable.

The single for-loop would result in testing each file in the order they
are specified in the input list. It would also copy each passed file
until a read test failed (and then do cleanup and exit). That means
each successful pass through the for-loop would do 2 copies: one to test
the file was readable and another to do the copy. The abort only occurs
after some time has been expended on testing and copying each file that
has so far passed. To get around the time for the copying, and because
you want all or none as your first criteria, two for-loops would be
needed. The first for-loop does only the testing that the sorted listed
of files are readable. The exit value from the copy command (to NUL) is
added to a variable (that started with a value of zero). An exit value
of zero means the command was successful. After doing the copy to NUL
and adding that command's exit value to the variable, an if-statement
checks if the variable is non-zero and, if so, exits the for-loop. This
would abort the testing for-loop when the first non-readable file was
discovered. No point in wasting time to check the rest that the rest of
the files are readable because, again, the first criteria is all or no
files. The second for-loop to do the actual copying using the same
sorted file list would be contained within an if-statement that tests
the value of the variable was zero; if the variable is zero from the
first for-loop then run the second for-loop. No point in doing any
copying if any file was unreadable to meet the first criteria.

So it's possible but I'm not going to spend the time to figure out the
batch script. Good luck finding another GUI utility that first reads
all files to ensure they are readable (rather than skipping on error or
aborting on the first error) and then does the copying only if all files
were tested as readable, and which does all copying in filesize order
across all subdirectories starting from the parent source path.

On Thursday, July 26, 2007 1:33 PM
Chris L. wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Take a look at http://www.nonags.com/nonags/diskbk.html

They have lots of programs for file management and synchronizing.


HTH

On Monday, July 30, 2007 4:24 PM
jmbrun wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
ROBOCOPY is cumbersome but so so versatile and customizable.

"Noozer" wrote:

On Wednesday, August 15, 2007 7:47 PM
Poprivet wrote:

PowerDesk. Has both a freebie and a pay for version.
PowerDesk. Has both a freebie and a pay for version. Will replace Explorer
if you want it to. Bad files don't stop the process of copying. Can copy
filepaths, names, etc., as text; e.g.
"C:\Program Files\Windows NT\Accessories\wordpad.exe" was done with a
copy/paste operation. Many other bells & whistles. Also beats Explorer for
search times.

Go to www.v-com.com/product/pd_ind.html

Looks like the freebie's he
http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/fil...scription.html


HTH,

Pop`




Noozer wrote:

On Saturday, October 20, 2007 4:49 PM
Country Pumpkin wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in


Go to Snapfiles.com and look in the freeware area, and see if
theres any file coping software

On Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:40 PM
SoCalCommie wrote:

Try XCOPY {source} {Destination} -h -i -c -k -e -r -y-- SoCalCommie"Country
Try XCOPY {source} {Destination} -h -i -c -k -e -r -y

--
SoCalCommie

On Monday, November 12, 2007 5:22 AM
perkri wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
On 20 Okt, 21:49, Country Pumpkin wrote:

XP has a bundled utility for this purpose : XCOPY.EXE
Open a Command prompt and write : XCOPY /? for a complete set of
switches.
Used with the /D switch, XCOPY will not copy files allready existing
on target directory.

"Power to the people!"
PKM

On Monday, November 12, 2007 4:08 PM
Patrick Keenan wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
An excellent tool for this purpose is FileSync, from Fileware.
www.fileware.com

HTH
-pk


Submitted via EggHeadCafe - Software Developer Portal of Choice
Cookieless Session Hacking - Prevention?
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/tutorials...on-hackin.aspx

xcopy "C:\Your Source Directory\Your Source Directory\" "F:\Your Destination Directory\Your Source Directory" /c /s /h /-Y

Run the above command including the quotes.


No one has mentioned the syntax (a common Windows support problem.



The output of the command "xcopy /?" is listed below. Read up on the different parameters. Note, this is only for Win2k and XP systems.



XCOPY source [destination] [/A | /M] [/D[:date]] [/P] [/S [/E]] [/V] [/W] [/C] [/i] [/Q] [/F] [/L] [/H] [/R] [/T] [/u]
[/K] [/N] [/O] [/X] [/Y] [/-Y] [/Z] [/EXCLUDE:file1[+file2][+file3]...]
source Specifies the file(s) to copy.
destination Specifies the location and/or name of new files.
/A Copies only files with the archive attribute set, doesn't change the attribute.
/M Copies only files with the archive attribute set, turns off the archive attribute.
/D:m-d-y Copies files changed on or after the specified date. If no date is given, copies only those files whose source time is newer than the destination time.
/EXCLUDE:file1 [+file2][+file3]... Specifies a list of files containing strings. When any of the strings match any part of the absolute path of the file to be copied, that file will be excluded from being copied. For example, specifying a string like \obj\ or .obj will exclude all files underneath the directory obj or all files with the .obj extension respectively.
/P Prompts you before creating each destination file.
/S Copies directories and subdirectories except empty ones.
/E Copies directories and subdirectories, including empty ones. Same as /S /E. May be used to modify /T.
/V Verifies each new file.
/W Prompts you to press a key before copying.
/C Continues copying even if errors occur.
/I If destination does not exist and copying more than one file, assumes that destination must be a directory.
/Q Does not display file names while copying.
/F Displays full source and destination file names while copying.
/L Displays files that would be copied.
/H Copies hidden and system files also.
/R Overwrites read-only files.
/T Creates directory structure, but does not copy files. Does not include empty directories or subdirectories. /T /E includes empty directories and subdirectories.
/U Copies only files that already exist in destination.
/K Copies attributes. Normal Xcopy will reset read-only attributes.
/N Copies using the generated short names.
/O Copies file ownership and ACL information.
/X Copies file audit settings (implies /O).
/Y Suppresses prompting to confirm you want to overwrite an existing destination file.
/-Y Causes prompting to confirm you want to overwrite an existing destination file.
/Z Copies networked files in restartable mode.

The switch /Y may be preset in the COPYCMD environment variable.
This may be overridden with /-Y on the command line.




Noozer wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
22-Jul-07

I often copy large amounts of files. Nothing is more frustrating than having
the computer copy files for an hour and then pop up an error. This means I
have to start over.

Now that Tucows has officially gone to crap I can't find any software there,
and Googling for "XP copy replacment" or "xp file copy" generate a bazillion
unrelated hits.

Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to replace
the XP file copy?

Previous Posts In This Thread:

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 5:37 AM
Noozer wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
I often copy large amounts of files. Nothing is more frustrating than having
the computer copy files for an hour and then pop up an error. This means I
have to start over.

Now that Tucows has officially gone to crap I can't find any software there,
and Googling for "XP copy replacment" or "xp file copy" generate a bazillion
unrelated hits.

Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to replace
the XP file copy?

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 6:46 AM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Yep, there are, and already included with Windows. Run "xcopy /?" for
help on using it, like the /C switch to ignore errors.

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 7:42 AM
Stan Brown wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Sun, 22 Jul 2007 05:46:37 -0500 from Vanguard
:

In my opinion, ignoring errors is a really good way to give yourself
a false sense of security.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 5:42 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

And ignoring errors lets you continue the copying despite them. Why
lose all files just because one is bad? Yeah, the hard drive might be
going bad but why should that enforce losing ALL files? Could be the
one file is "bad" not because of a hardware defect but instead because
the file is locked. There are some utilities, like handle.exe from
SysInternals, oh.exe from Win Resource Kit, and Unlocker but most users
don't know about them because they don't realize the copy error is due
to a locked file (and don't understand what is a locked file). If you
were copying 38,000 multimedia (data) files and had to sacrifice a few
to get all the rest, would you simply decide that none of them were
salvageable because a few were not?

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 8:43 PM
Noozer wrote:

Which is still the wrong way to do it.It shouldn't IGNORE errors.
Which is still the wrong way to do it.

It should not IGNORE errors. It should work around them and make you VERY
aware of what did not work.

On Sunday, July 22, 2007 8:53 PM
Ayush wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
[Noozer] wrote-:



It will show all the errors i command prompt.

On Monday, July 23, 2007 1:58 AM
Stan Brown wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Sun, 22 Jul 2007 16:42:29 -0500 from Vanguard
:

Are you serious?

It's a pretty bad thing if you have a "copy" that isn't the same as
the original, but you don't know it's not the same.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

On Monday, July 23, 2007 11:59 AM
Bill Sharpe wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Stan Brown wrote:
The error is that the file cannot be copied. Assuming that the OP is
copying files to another directory the ignored file just won't be copied
there. The significance, of course, occurs when you assume that all
files have been copied and delete the folder with the original files.

So, yes, use "ignore errors" but be aware of the potential consequences.

Bill

On Monday, July 23, 2007 6:46 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

You don't run DOS commands, do you? You haven't run the XCOPY command
and had files it couldn't copy, have you? Otherwise, you would realize
that it reports the files it cannot copy. You could edit the DOS shell
properties to up the number of buffered screen lines, like to 8000, or
you could simply redirect the stdout of XCOPY to a file, as in "xcopy
filespec {target} {logfile}".

So what is your *right* way of copying dozens, hundreds, or thousands of
files when a few will fail? Sacrifice all of them, I suppose. Yeah,
good solution, uh huh. And what is "work around them"? Could it be to
ignore and report them? Well, then you are agreeing that XCOPY is a
solution.

In fact, you don't even need to actually copy the files if all you want
to do is check if they can be read. You can run XCOPY to NULL; see
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/319137/en-us.

On Monday, July 23, 2007 6:54 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

The fact that the file can NOT be copied is the error, and obviously
there was no copy made to be different than the original (unless you
include non-existence as a difference). If you want to spend the extra
cycles checking the integrity of the copies, add the /v switch. Geez,
how hard can it be for you folks to just run "xcopy /?" to actually SEE
what options are available. Duh!

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:13 AM
Noozer wrote:

Not if I don't have to.
Not if I don't have to.


But then it's not replacing the Windows GUI Copy or Move context menu items
is it. That's what I asked for... Something that will replace the built in
version of the commands.


It may help copy files when some may not work, but it doesn't answer my
question at all.


What I want to do is copy ? of files from one USB drive to another USB
drive. I want to keep the directory structure intact. I want to know what
files could not be copied and WHY (Path too long, CRC errors, file in use).
This will literally take HOURS to finish, so I want it to go as fast as
possible and don't want it to pause for any reason until it's done.

So... Can I go to My Computer, open the drive, CTRL-A, right-click, "XCOPY",
back to My Computer, right-click on drive #2 and "XPASTE"? When it's done
will it tell me WHY the files wouldn't copy?

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:18 AM
Noozer wrote:

Duh!
Duh! A copy of a file structure (multiple files, SINGLE copy operation) that
is missing a single byte of information is "not the same."

And "the fact that the file can NOT be copied" is NOT the error. It's the
result. The error could be a CRC error on the disk, file in use, path name
too long, target full, etc...


Real smart... the "/v" switch does NOT verify that the source and target are
the same. It ONLY verifies that the target is complete and readable. The
target could contain gibberish, but will pass a check using "/v" if there
are no CRC/sector errors.


How do you run "xcopy /?" from the desktop context menu? I'm looking for a
COPY/MOVE replacement. I'm not looking for a lesson in using DOS.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:37 AM
Noozer wrote:

This should have read "...
This should have read "...is copy 258gig of files, comprised of 600000 files
and 47000 directories, from one USB..."

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 11:51 AM
Mark L. Ferguson wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Total Commander" will run from a USB stick. http://www.ghisler.com/

--
Mark L. Ferguson
e-mail subject line must include "QZ" or it is deleted
..

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:08 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

Reread your original post. You weren't asking how to make Windows
Explorer perform the copy. You stated that you had Googled around
looking for 3rd party alternatives. You never declared that they had to
be GUI utilities so dummies could use them (many seem to require a GUI
interface to specify options that can just as easily be specified in a
command line - just because that's the only user interface those users
know).


"Are there any GOOD file copy utilities out there that I can use to
replace
the XP file copy? "

My answer was that you don't have to REPLACE "the XP file copy" (which
was never defined as Windows Explorer, the 'copy' DOS command, or what).
Just use Xcopy that's already available.


As mentioned, run:

xcopy sourcespec [targetspec] [path]logfile.txt

Walk away and when it completes you can look at the logfile.txt file
(add a path if you want it saved somewhere other than the default
directory from where you run the xcopy command in the DOS shell).
Pretty simple. Doesn't require Googling around for 3rd party
alternatives or installing anything new.


Xcopy is a DOS command. That is, it issues its standard output to the
current shell's display (i.e., it is a console program). Xcopy is not a
GUI program with pretty windows and menu bars. Rather than having to
wade through menus to select a slew of options in a checkoff screen, you
simply run the program and specify the options using parameters. "xcopy
/?" tells you how to use the program (i.e., it even has its own help,
ta-da). If the buffer size for the DOS shell is huge then it might show
all of the output. Otherwise, and as shown, redirect stdout to a file
and then go use Notepad on the file when xcopy finishes.

I'm sure there are some GUI programs out there to do the same thing. I
don't bother looking for any since xcopy is already included with
Windows. xxcopy is a 3rd party program that has even more features but
it is also a console-mode program (a DOS program). Then there's
robocopy.exe which is included in the Windows NT Resource Kit but,
again, it is a console-mode program. I don't need GUI programs if DOS
programs do what I want, and you can redirect stdout if you want to
record the output of the program.

If you demand a 3rd party GUI application to do the copying that can
skip errors and report them then that is a different question that what
you asked. Someone else might make a suggestion for that additional
software.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:13 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Mark L. Ferguson" wrote in message
...

Hmm, come to think of it, Microsoft's SyncToy (free) might also work.
Have it installed but haven't needed to use it yet. Although not so
stated, guess the OP wants a 3rd party GUI solution. I don't know how
it handles copy errors.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:20 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message
...

Not possible. If the copy fails then there is no copied file so there
is no mismatch on bytes. Yes, a non-existent file is not the same as an
existent file.


Which again means there is no copied file to have a byte mismatch. Or
was it that you actually want the files copied that cannot be read? Not
sure how you copy anything that you can't read, kind of like writing a
book report on a book that you couldn't open.


Oh, so now the criteria has changed. Didn't see in your original post
that you demanded a GUI application so you could wade through menus and
select from a slew of options in one or multiple screens rather than
specify parameters on the command line. Okay, then go try Microsoft's
SyncToy. Might be better for you with its comfy, fuzzy, Fisher-Price
interface.

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 6:33 PM
Stan Brown wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:37:46 -0600 from Noozer :

Nope. "Composed of", maybe, but "comprising" not "comprised of".

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/

On Tuesday, July 24, 2007 7:43 PM
Ken Blake, MVP wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:33:25 -0400, Stan Brown
wrote:



Congratulations! You're one of the very few people who knows what
"comprise" means.

But why are you correcting his English?

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 11:03 AM
Noozer wrote:

Uhm...
Uhm... Were are talking about a single COPY execution, which could include
multiple files. If you do A copy to duplicate 10 files, and only end up
with 9 at the target location then the resulting copy is different from the
original.

Say I hand you a file folder with 10 pages in it and tell you, "please copy
these". You begin copying each page, but run out of copy paper at page 8. Do
you return the result and tell me that it's done? Do you toss the first 8
into the trash and tell me that you couldn't do it? No, you give me a whole
folder containing only SOME of the pages.


You're telling me that the cover of a book will never be interesting enough
to take notes about it?


But HOW is ignoring the failure in any way useful if you don't know why it's
happening?


I used that for a long while to do a backup at each shutdown. It had it's
place. Still not any good for what I said.

I *NEVER* changed the criteria. I asked originally for a REPLACEMENT.
Something that works like COPY/MOVE but with some extra functionality.

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 12:03 PM
Noozer wrote:

Actually, I *am* going to change the criteria.
Actually, I *am* going to change the criteria. I am moving more files around
now and realized that one thing I'd like to do is be able to do a pause on a
long copy process to speed some smaller ones.

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 9:04 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

So you want the copy to first test if all files are readable before
doing the copy? Okay, then use the already suggested method in my other
post of copying to NUL to see if the files can be read before doing the
copying to destination files. Until the program attempts to actually
read a file, it won't know whether or not it can be read.

You can run multiple commands at the DOS command prompt. See
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/d....mspx?mfr=true
for help on using DOS commands. By using the "&&" command delimiter,
you can have the following command run only if the prior command exited
with zero status, so you could run:

xcopy srcSpec /s && xcopy srcSpec destPath [path]xcopy.log

Since no destination path was specified in the first command, output
goes to NUL. This checks if xcopy can read all the files included by
the source filespec. If that command is successful then the following
xcopy does have a destination path specified so the files that were
already tested as readable will be copied by this second command.

Maybe this gives you want you want. No files will get copied if any of
them cannot be read. I had figured you wanted to get whatever files
were readable.

On Wednesday, July 25, 2007 9:37 PM
Vanguard wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in message ...

Can't help you there. It's possible to do with a batch script but a lot
of logic would be involved in walking through all the subdirectories
starting at the parent source path to record the files with their paths
along with their sizes, record into a table, sort that table by
filesize, and then use a for-loop to copy each file in the order listed
in the sorted table.

Of course, to meet your first criteria that no files get copied if one
of them is not readable, the for-loop would first have to perform a copy
to NUL to guarantee the file could be read. If the exit code of the
copy to NUL were zero then execute a 2nd copy within that for-loop
following the 1st copy to NUL. The 2nd copy specifies a destination
path so the file actually gets copied. However, that means that the
for-loop would either abort on the first file that couldn't be read (so
you end up with only a partial copy in filesize order) or it would
simply skip the following copy and you end up with the for-loop
completing but only get in the destination path the files that could be
read okay. Alternatively, an if-statement on a non-zero exit code for
the 1st copy to NUL could delete all files and subdirectories at the
destination path and then exit the for-loop. The for-loop would contain
2 copy commands: the first copy goes to NUL to check the file is
readable; an if-statement checks if the exit code from the 1st copy was
non-zero and, if not , deletes all files and subdirectories thus far
created at the destination path and exits the for-loop; and the 2nd copy
would copy the file that has passed the test by the 1st copy to ensure
it was readable.

The single for-loop would result in testing each file in the order they
are specified in the input list. It would also copy each passed file
until a read test failed (and then do cleanup and exit). That means
each successful pass through the for-loop would do 2 copies: one to test
the file was readable and another to do the copy. The abort only occurs
after some time has been expended on testing and copying each file that
has so far passed. To get around the time for the copying, and because
you want all or none as your first criteria, two for-loops would be
needed. The first for-loop does only the testing that the sorted listed
of files are readable. The exit value from the copy command (to NUL) is
added to a variable (that started with a value of zero). An exit value
of zero means the command was successful. After doing the copy to NUL
and adding that command's exit value to the variable, an if-statement
checks if the variable is non-zero and, if so, exits the for-loop. This
would abort the testing for-loop when the first non-readable file was
discovered. No point in wasting time to check the rest that the rest of
the files are readable because, again, the first criteria is all or no
files. The second for-loop to do the actual copying using the same
sorted file list would be contained within an if-statement that tests
the value of the variable was zero; if the variable is zero from the
first for-loop then run the second for-loop. No point in doing any
copying if any file was unreadable to meet the first criteria.

So it's possible but I'm not going to spend the time to figure out the
batch script. Good luck finding another GUI utility that first reads
all files to ensure they are readable (rather than skipping on error or
aborting on the first error) and then does the copying only if all files
were tested as readable, and which does all copying in filesize order
across all subdirectories starting from the parent source path.

On Thursday, July 26, 2007 1:33 PM
Chris L. wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
Take a look at http://www.nonags.com/nonags/diskbk.html

They have lots of programs for file management and synchronizing.


HTH

On Monday, July 30, 2007 4:24 PM
jmbrun wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
ROBOCOPY is cumbersome but so so versatile and customizable.

"Noozer" wrote:

On Wednesday, August 15, 2007 7:47 PM
Poprivet wrote:

PowerDesk. Has both a freebie and a pay for version.
PowerDesk. Has both a freebie and a pay for version. Will replace Explorer
if you want it to. Bad files don't stop the process of copying. Can copy
filepaths, names, etc., as text; e.g.
"C:\Program Files\Windows NT\Accessories\wordpad.exe" was done with a
copy/paste operation. Many other bells & whistles. Also beats Explorer for
search times.

Go to www.v-com.com/product/pd_ind.html

Looks like the freebie's he
http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/fil...scription.html


HTH,

Pop`




Noozer wrote:

On Saturday, October 20, 2007 4:49 PM
Country Pumpkin wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
"Noozer" wrote in


Go to Snapfiles.com and look in the freeware area, and see if
theres any file coping software

On Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:40 PM
SoCalCommie wrote:

Try XCOPY {source} {Destination} -h -i -c -k -e -r -y-- SoCalCommie"Country
Try XCOPY {source} {Destination} -h -i -c -k -e -r -y

--
SoCalCommie

On Monday, November 12, 2007 5:22 AM
perkri wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
On 20 Okt, 21:49, Country Pumpkin wrote:

XP has a bundled utility for this purpose : XCOPY.EXE
Open a Command prompt and write : XCOPY /? for a complete set of
switches.
Used with the /D switch, XCOPY will not copy files allready existing
on target directory.

"Power to the people!"
PKM

On Monday, November 12, 2007 4:08 PM
Patrick Keenan wrote:

Replace Windows XP copy?
An excellent tool for this purpose is FileSync, from Fileware.
www.fileware.com

HTH
-pk


Submitted via EggHeadCafe - Software Developer Portal of Choice
Cookieless Session Hacking - Prevention?
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/tutorials...on-hackin.aspx

XCOPY Replacement for the command-line.

ROBOCOPY - Robust File Copy for Windows NT : by

Download it from:
http://www.dynawell.com/download/Res...T/robocopy.zip

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)




rip torn wrote in message ...
xcopy "C:\Your Source Directory\Your Source Directory\" "F:\Your Destination
Directory\Your Source Directory" /c /s /h /-Y

Run the above command including the quotes.


No one has mentioned the syntax...

clipped

XCOPY Replacement for the command-line.

ROBOCOPY - Robust File Copy for Windows NT : by

Download it from:
http://www.dynawell.com/download/Res...T/robocopy.zip

==

Cheers, Tim Meddick, Peckham, London. :-)




rip torn wrote in message ...
xcopy "C:\Your Source Directory\Your Source Directory\" "F:\Your Destination
Directory\Your Source Directory" /c /s /h /-Y

Run the above command including the quotes.


No one has mentioned the syntax...

clipped