Shareaza

I can't seem to find where to enable this, if its already in the daily builds please point me to it.
I'd love to be able to filter out files that i have already downloaded and deleted, I sometimes search for large series of files and its a pain to have to scroll through 300+ listings to find the few that are new to me.

Filtering out already deleted files is not yet possible (Ryo-oh-ki?). However, you can filter out files you have already in your library using the normal advanced filter options.

There is Ghost Files in Library settings area. If you erase a file, a tag is saved stating why you deleted it. These tags then show up on Search results reminding you of the hazards or reason for deletion. Turn Ghost Files on and that should do the trick in reminding you of a previous download.

Now in Theory you should be able to Filter it in the Search Window by selecting "File you have already" in the Filter Results setting found in the Search Window when you right click for a context menu only after enabling Ghost Files. The reason is that a tag that acts as the file remains, and this tag is displayed as file even when it isn't in the library. Shareaza's library should therefore assume it is a file in the library and block based on that filter rule. Now currently it doesn't, but a new Filter Rule for files tagged as "You have downloaded and deleted this before." Should exist nonetheless.

I have ghost files turned on, and it doesnt work as it should. I do get the "red" listings for files I've already downloaded, but they show up regardless of if i have tried to hide "files i have". This would be a great addition for future versions.

'Files you have already' excludes ghost files as they area files that are not physically present on your HDD.

I don't know how it works exactly, but Shareazza has reported that I "already have" the file I wanted to download from search results. So I assume this works, at last in some extent.

I am not sure but I suppose when set in settings "remember history" in days that this says Shareaza how long Shareaza should remember recently downloaded files. If I am rght solution would be to set it bigger value, so perhaps this is question of settings.

My "library.historydays" setting is set to 365 days, and "library.historytotal" is set to remember 500 files. This does not work as expected. I think that these settings are to drop files out of your library after being shared for so many days??

You are correct ... as I stated before this is not in Shareaza right now, and again it would make a very fine feature request. Until Ryo can get around to seeing the necessity of your feature request you would have to make do and avoid the red files ... I'm sure that is not too hard?

I'm guessing the only reason why he wouldn't add it is because it would ruin the symmetry of the Filter Dialog Radio Boxes. What ocexyz suggested is related to your library remembering the latest downloads from the day it was downloaded totally irrelevant to your needs. You want to see results make a feature request and make it as clear as possible. You probably have to pester Ryo until he caves in .

yea, without clear futere request there is no future effect...

I think he also doesn't want to do this, because the entire filter needs rewriting. This makes adding something new without a complete rewrite simply useless - and a rewrite needs much time and effort.

Whatever, good rewritting also needs good (clear) future request.

I don't think it needs an entire rewrite ... whatever flag is sent to the filter triggering the "Hide files already in Library" can be duplicated for Ghostfiles, and a radiobox added to add effect. This is my layman view of it. This needs a Feature Request to see the What and the Why that necessitates the adoption of this feature. Is it so hard to avoid red files, explain why that is not good enough? How would you prioritize the desire of seeing this implemented ... we kind of have one active developer so it would make it easier if he knew the rationale behind it.

For me I feel quite indifferent about it as I do a content ban which the user here could do as an interim to solving his situation, but it could be quite laborious for day to day use. I see the feasibility of it from a security point of view ... we have to assume a user who sees a red file in his search result even if it carries a warning might still click on it. By filtering out as a default based on filter Rules we can avoid this. Also this is the last feature I think that has been missing from the whole essence of Ghost Files. If they act as virtual files in my Library, my Filter should be able to block them from my search results ... it's only logical. But I don't even use Ghost Files ... I'm more into archiving and I've not had a virus issue in the past 8-9 years (mind a bit fuzzy) of using Shareaza ... hmmm I think Shareaza is approaching a decade, we should do something? Since I didn't have a virus issue I wasn't motivated to use Ghost Files.

It's not hard to add it, I agree, but it is not logical. I think this feature should go along with a complete filter rewrite. AFAIK, the current filters are use an algorithm that needs linear more time the bigger the size of entries. A split filter for the different filter types with logarithmic evaluation should be used instead.

Also, you should use ghost files anyway, as you could hand your bad or good ratings for deleted files to other downloaders of the same file.

A user like me ... I find Ghost Files too gimmicky and useless. Reason being that when I download, heck when I launch Shareaza it is for specific reason and file, I usually know the hash and find more results by doing only Hash based results. I never see a need for ratings because where I sourced this hash already gave me credible comments, so I don't have to trust Shareaza's somewhat random rating scheme which is open to spam. As for viruses I don't download them, again because of my specifity of downloading files I know and sourced from reliable sites I have avoided downloading a virus and hence needing to erase and leave a ghost file in place. As for rating, my share library is now roughly 200GB I don't have the time nor the patience to rate each of those files ... I only ensure I have proper metadata ... and a proper queue setup that ensures the rare small files get distributed just as well as the big.