Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Fixing misnamed downloads Internet
I've noticed when downloading programs from some sites that the file often doesn't show the proper name, but shows the name of the Perl script which initiated the download. (eg, filename.pl). This usually shows as a text file or generic document.

Experimenting by renaming the .pl extension to either .sit or .dmg, usually solves the problem as downloads are usually Stuffit files or Disk Images.

[Editor's note: I haven't noticed this problem in Mozilla...]
    •    
  • Currently 3.33 / 5
  You rated: 3 / 5 (3 votes cast)
 
[2,384 views]  

Fixing misnamed downloads | 3 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Fixing misnamed downloads' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
the culprit: IE ignores
Authored by: Dylan McNamee on Mar 18, '02 04:49:18PM

"for security reasons," they say, Explorer ignores the HTTP header
that suggests a filename for a download generated by a dynamic
web page (php, perl, etc.).

Netscape and Mozilla respect it. Funny they should impede this
reasonable behavior, yet still insist on various goofy activities with
email attachments in Outlook for Windows.

Anyway, this is a known difference between browsers.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Thanks for the clarification!
Authored by: robg on Mar 19, '02 12:34:30PM

Interesting rationale indeed! Nice to know that there's at least a logical explanation for it.

-rob.



[ Reply to This | # ]
the culprit: IE ignores
Authored by: 128K Mac on Mar 20, '02 03:25:56AM

My thanks too. I've often wondered why I.E. will tack an ampersand or some weird character on the end of a downloaded file name or otherwise garbage it making it mandatory for the user to correct the name and haul it over to Stuffit Expander (or whatever).

Security concerns? Sounds like an excuse for sloppy programming by Microsoft. I really hate to be such a skeptic, especially in view of Micro$loth's latest PR attempts for whatever reasons to improve their "security(less) image."

I wonder if "security reasons" will replace "feature" as a term for a bug in Micro$loth software?

:-)



[ Reply to This | # ]