[Feature request] Compare ONLY on file name

[cv2702]

As the topic says, I would like to be able to compare ONLY on file name, excluding file date and size.

It doesn't matter why, let it be known that I've ended up in this situation more than once.

[Plerry]

If files have different names, FFS always considers those files to be "different" (unless files have been renamed, and you use the "detect renamed files" option).
FFS always only compares files with the same name (in the same (sub-)tree location).
For identically named files (in the same (sub-)tree location), FFS needs "something" more to determine a sync action or direction. Those options are the Comparison variants, otherwise FFS can simply not determine what to do.

[David.P]

While it doesn't support syncing, you can at least see whether (and where) files with only the same name are present with AllDup:



Hth

[xCSxXenon]

Yeah, that request makes no sense... The only reason to detect only a name change, is if you renamed a file, which FFS can detect

[lawrence-dol]

@cv2702

> It doesn't matter why, let it be known that I've ended up in this situation more than once.

Actually, "why" matters very much. Without a good description of the use-case and benefit a developer cannot evaluate the relative importance, value, and therefore priority of a new feature. With such a request, they'll likely assume it's a rare edge-case, and the request will be relegated to the dust heap of "when I run out of useful things to do"... which is "never".

(Also, for free software, saying it like that can be very... annoying to a developer. Just a heads up.)

[Paul Slater]

Sorry to revive old posts but...

Here's a use case: my camera produces .jpg and .nef files (that's Nikon's RAW image file format). They have the same root name name eg. DSC_5325.jpg and DSC_5325.nef. I take a lot of pictures and want to "cull" those I don't want to keep. It would be so helpful if deleting the jpg took the nef with it.

My $0.02

[xCSxXenon]

That is something you would want added to the functionality of File Explorer or the Nikon software, not FFS though. This wouldn't even affect your use-case because the extension is part of the filename

[therube]

pseudo-code:

for i in (*.nef)
set base=namepart(%i)
if  not exist %base%.jpg  del %base%.nef
next i


(namepart, would return the name part of the filename, sans extension.
Windows actually uses %~nI, I think it is, to accomplish that.)

[hugoleosp]

Yeah, that request makes no sense... The only reason to detect only a name change, is if you renamed a file, which FFS can detect

I started to use FFS to sync files from my PC to my Google Drive account and on this matter is a great tool. But Google Drive has some old photos that was imported from Google Photos (I may say I have over a hundred thousand files only in Google Photos folder) and I want them to be removed if I have the original file. The thing is both size and date are different from the original file, but name is exactly the same.

That's because my camera keeps the same name format as year, month, day, hour, etc etc... so it would be very useful to find files with the same name in different folders of a cloud service. There are situations when the name are exactly the same, but online services change both time and size at their convenience sometimes.

My workaround is to download both folders and let Windows compare them... but that takes a looooot of download/upload.

[xCSxXenon]

Now it's just going back into the realm of duplicate detection, which FFS doesn't and shouldn't do.

[hugoleosp]

Now it's just going back into the realm of duplicate detection, which FFS doesn't and shouldn't do.

It's not a matter to detect duplicate photos, but to check if there's one in the cloud with the same name but different date and size, so I can choose to keep the current cloud version or switch with my hard disk version which in my case has a better resolution considering online service decrease the quality for space.

Olay I could switch to a new cloud service but that's the same I could switch to another sync software. Which I think it's the best solution as I can see it's not a matter of software limitation but developer personal choice.

But thank you for interacting.