Unexpected file skipping in the queue

[squonk]

In 2.0.905

I got an unexpected file skipping after a "Transfer Failed" in the queue.
My "Keep failed transfers in queue" option is set in "Preferences/Advanced" and my skip list only contains "Home".

And yet I got the following trace in the status window :
[09:26:06] PORT W,X,Y,Z,11,40
[09:26:07] 200 PORT command successful.
[09:26:07] RETR dummy1
[09:26:07] 125 Using existing BINARY mode data connection for dummy1
(1254000 bytes).
[09:55:32] 426 Error. Transfere aborted. An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host.
[09:55:35] Transfer Failed!
[09:55:39] Skipping: dummy1

As you can see the transfer fails but the file is skipped and hence removed from the queue.
I think it should not be skipped and removed.

[squonk]

I forgot to say that my "file exist options" download to smaller destination was set to auto skip (from previous tests).
But my opinion is that a failed transfer should always stay is the queue if you check the "Keep failed transfers in queue", even if it's skipped later.

[bigstar]

technically it's not a failed transfer though. FlashFXP went to retry it and your file exist rules came into play skipping the file.

If you set FlashFXP not to retry broken transfers then it would of marked it failed without retrying.

I do have to wonder though, was the file zero bytes? Perhaps the file exists rule should consider files of zero bytes as non-existing when downloading.

[squonk]

Originally posted by bigstar
technically it's not a failed transfer though. FlashFXP went to retry it and your file exist rules came into play skipping the file.


Ok I understand. The transfer is really considered as failed when it has ended up with its retry count. Just the message "Transfer failed" in the status window that fooled me.


I do have to wonder though, was the file zero bytes? Perhaps the file exists rule should consider files of zero bytes as non-existing when downloading. [/B]

No, it wasn't. But I don't think 0 byte files should be automatically skipped. Read the previous thread about what I think of 0 byte and unknown size files for downloading.

[bigstar]

it doesn't look like 0 byte files apply to that rule. I haven't had time to actually test it though.

[squonk]

What is sure is that files assumed of 0 byte size because located in directories forbidding listing, apply file exists rules.
Read http://forum.flashfxp.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2339
And I think this should be changed to allow download resuming.

[bigstar]

I was referring to the target, not the source.

[squonk]

Yes you are right. Target files of 0 byte size don't trigger file exists rules.