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

Find 'non-findable' files Apps
Ever had trouble locating that httpd.conf file? Spotlight is of no help there. I've just released a free app called FindAnyFile that can help with this, as it can find any file on local Mac discs. It doesn't rely on a database like the locate command and Spotlight do, but instead uses the Mac OS operations for searching an entire disk on demand. Furthermore, it can run as root user (provided you know the admin password), allowing it find really any file existing on the disk.

If you end up with 100s of hits, you'll appreciate the new Folder View which shows you a hierarchical list of the folders in which the found items appear. Finally, you can save your searches and reopen them later again for convenience.

[robg adds: I tested this, and it worked quite well for finding those deeply-buried files that are ignored by Spotlight, or not found due to an out-of-date locate database. Since it's a free app, I felt it worth sharing here.]
    •    
  • Currently 2.11 / 5
  You rated: 2 / 5 (9 votes cast)
 
[22,834 views]  

Find 'non-findable' files | 48 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Find 'non-findable' files' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: djfiander on Jan 06, '09 07:41:51AM

For a command-line solution that has lots of flexibility, look at the documentation for the Unix command 'find'.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: tempel on Jan 06, '09 08:28:14AM

Developer's voice here:
My tool has the advantage to be much, much faster than "find" when you're only looking for names but not for content.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: S Barman on Jan 06, '09 12:32:03PM
The "find" command does not look for content. In fact, the "find" command can find files based on pattern matching criteria and can limit the directories it searches. Yes, the command line syntax is a bit cryptic for the "average" user, but I am not an average user (I started using Unix Version 7 in 1979). However, I like the wildcard matching capabilities of "find" that would allow me to find all httd.conf files, including renamed backups like http.conf2, etc. (find / -name "http.conf*" -print). And if I need to search root-owned content, just precede the command with "sudo" (e.g., sudo find ...). Cool stuff!

[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: tempel on Jan 06, '09 03:00:33PM

I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to point out that FAF's search is much faster than the "find" command, at least if you are searching an entire disk. The reason is the same as for why FAF is faster than EasyFind: "find" and EasyFind perform recursive directory descent for their search, while FAF performs a flat search on directories of HFS volumes, which avoids lots of seeking. FAF finishes a search on a 2 million items volume in about 15 seconds on my Mac Pro, while find (and EasyFind) take minutes. Sure, find has other advantages, but it doesn't win in every category. Otherwise, what would be the point of me having developed it? :)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: VesperDEM on Jan 06, '09 07:55:22AM

I found "Find Any File" a couple of weeks ago and really love it. It's pretty snappy and will help you locate any file you are looking for including files stored in Applications.

Sure, Unix's Find command will work too, but I personally would rather use GUI's to locate files than having to remember command line options and commands.

I strongly recommend that every Mac user should have this in their Applications folder.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: tifighter on Jan 06, '09 08:23:13AM

You can also use Spotlight to perform a search for these system files as well. Open a Finder search window and click on the dropdown menu that by default has 'Kind' selected. From the dropdown select 'other...'. In the search attributes sheet that is displayed search for 'system files' and then select the checkbox under 'In Menu' so that you don't have to go hunting for that particular attribute again to search with. Using these steps I was able to find the example .conf file in the hint above. I also have the 'File Visibility' attribute in the attribute pull-down as well so that I can search for invisible files in Spotlight.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: tempel on Jan 06, '09 08:33:01AM

(FAF Developer here) I disagree.

FAF finds really _every_ item on a disk, while Spotlight may choose to ignore certain folders, including system files. Also, Spotlight certainly won't find items that are root-only accessible (although, I admit, there's hardly any cases where one will want to locate those).
As a low level software delevoper I've often had Spotlight fail on me, even with the options enabled you mentioned. That's why I wrote FAF - to be sure I won't miss anything - while Spotlight always leaves a doubt.

And I made it free so that one shouldn't have any reason not to use FAF :)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: mzso on Jan 06, '09 12:07:20PM

I'm not sure what you mean regarding "looking for content". If I get it right, you wrote that your tool is not much faster than "find" when looking for content too (it might be similiar or slower in speed than "find" ... this is not trivial from that sentence).

I don't understand how "find" and "looking for content" come together. "find" has no options that allow you to look for content. Of course you can use the "-exec" with eg. grep, but that's a completely different story (since in this case "find" would launch another tool/process to do the string search, which is of course not comparable to solutions where the file search tool opens the file itself and looks for the string). Imho a tool ,that does both the file search and the string search itself, must be faster than find+grep, when looking for content.

Another good question is: how can your tool be faster than "find" (when looking just for names) if your tool does not utilize an index (sort of database to speed up search)? And if it does, than how much can it be different from Spotlight?



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: mzso on Jan 06, '09 12:10:51PM

Sorry. The prev. post was a reply to tempel's post on Tue, Jan 6 2009 at 8:28AM PST. I opened two reply screens and posted the prev. answer in the wrong textarea.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: mzso on Jan 06, '09 12:21:50PM

As for Spotlight's inability to find items that are only root-accessible: I suppose you meant that FAF can do that. That would be quite a thing.
File permissions are meant to restrict access regardless of what API or method you use to access the filesystem. If your app can circumwent file permissions, then the Mac OS X kernel got a pretty large whole.
If your app asks for proper credentials to find files with root-only access permissions, then it's no more clever than "find" (which can be run with su or sudo using root privileges). I don't know what user credentials does Spotlight's indexer run with (maybe not root ... since otherwise it would find any file, even the ones that are accessible only by root ... I don't use Spotlight), but I bet it can be modded to use "root".



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: leamanc on Jan 07, '09 06:05:57AM

The hint states that it requires an admin password to sudo-to-root to find those system files, so there's not a big security hole in the kernel.

I haven't tried the app yet, but I think many of you guys are missing the point. This app doesn't do everything 'find' does, it doesn't do everything 'locate' does, and it doesn't do everything Spotlight does. But it does do some unique things in (apparently) a very fast fashion, by using inherent features of the HFS+ filesystem that Apple themselves do not exploit anymore. This is similar to the Find File feature of the classic Mac OS, which many of you will remember was amazingly fast, even on disks full of gigabytes of data.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Spotlight does this too
Authored by: sd on Jan 07, '09 04:08:16AM

thanks for this. You should submit it as a hint on its own (if it is not in the database already)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: VJrabauke on Jan 06, '09 08:34:46AM
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: ejensen on Jan 06, '09 01:15:31PM

I have been using EasyFind for years. I just downloaded Find Any File and for several filename searches I tried, FAF was quite a bit faster to completion, and sometimes found one or two other files that EasyFind did not. My only quibble with FAF is that you can't see the list of found items until then end of searching so you can't start looking for the one you want until it is finished. Certainly a nice new tool- I will be using it.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: daybrother on Jan 06, '09 08:38:17AM

This is great! Thank you!



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: montylee on Jan 06, '09 11:29:18AM

I agree--this is a GREAT program. I needed to find 2 files (one a CUPS file) this past week and this is the only utility that found both of them. Google Desktop-nope. EasyFind-nope. Spotlight-no way. This found them in seconds! Absolutely great for finding just about any system type file. I highly recommend.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: Dr. T on Jan 06, '09 11:40:31AM

EasyFind, a free utility from Devontechnologies, also can find "hidden" files. It had no trouble finding every file containing "httpd.conf." EasyFind also can search just one disk, just one folder, all volumes, local volumes, or remote volumes. It can search for files, folders, both, or file contents. It supports boolean searches and wildcard characters. It also can search within packages.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: tempel on Jan 06, '09 02:51:19PM

Yes, EasyFind is popular and does a good job, and it can search contents which FAF can't. But it's also rather slow if you're searching an entire disk. FAF is much faster when you have a large disk with a million items or more to search.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: billclinton on Jan 06, '09 12:07:06PM

Path Finder has a non-Spotlight mode that I use for this kind of file-finding. But I'm trying out FindAnyFile as well.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: ex2bot on Jan 06, '09 01:55:31PM

I want to reiterate what (I believe) Tifighter said: "Spotlight CAN access system files." Do a smart search, look in "Kind - other" for "system files". If you wish, check the box that will put "system files" on the "Kind" menu.

I use this all the time when looking for more obscure files. System files, as near as I can tell, finds any file at all--as long as you can access it.

Bot



[ Reply to This | # ]
A summary of comments from the author
Authored by: tempel on Jan 06, '09 02:48:57PM

Yes, I have this "include system files" option enabled by default in the Finder's Find by default most of the time and happily use it. Yet, it won't list items that are explicitly excluded from Spotlight Search in the Sytem Prefs ("Privacy"), and that's what I meant with it not finding everything. A admit, though, that if Spotlight has indexed the item, it reveals them much faster than FAF usually.

What one can do in Terminal with "find" is really of no importance here. If you are comfortable withit, use it. Many of us aren't and that's who I made this tool for.

As a software developer I depend on knowing if and where a file exists. I can't depend on tools that use a separate database such as Spotlight therefore. I have written this tool for this purpose, for myself. Only recently I decided to make it public and polish it a bit because I think others find this useful, too.

I never claimed FAF to be the ultimate search tool, but it fills some gaps:
- finds some items Spotlight doesn't (e.g. on non-indexed volumes and those marked "private" for spotlight).
- has a hierarchical view which is quite helpful when you have a lot of hits. I wish Spotlight had this view, too.



[ Reply to This | # ]
A summary of comments from the author
Authored by: mario_grgic on Jan 07, '09 06:19:44AM

You are a software developer who is not comfortable using the command line. WTF.



[ Reply to This | # ]
A summary of comments from the author
Authored by: frgough on Jan 07, '09 07:51:55AM

I can hand-code HTML. It doesn't mean I particularly enjoy it. CLI zealots annoy the h*ll out of me.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: VSB on Jan 06, '09 03:15:58PM

Very useful app! Easy to use and fast.

Thanks!

I'd been trying to get rid of some Symantec Norton Antivirus (crappy software that just wont allow itself to be uninstalled) files which did not appear in Spotlight and kept posting system mail (in Terminal) periodically. Your app allowed me to find 4 files, 2 of them root owned and another 2 (user) that always reappeared after I'd deleted them. I opened Terminal, wrote sudo rm -rf and dragged the files FindAnyFile had discovered into Terminal (one at a time), so that the right path appeared.
It seems to have worked!
Now I'll follow djfiander's tip, man the command "find", and try to learn how to explore its full potential.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: Anonymous on Jan 07, '09 12:14:57AM
The mdfind command uses the same index/search stuff as Spotlight, without the new filtering-scary-stuff that Leopard added (I recall being able to find system files with Spotlight on 10.4.*)
$ mdfind httpd.conf | grep /etc/
/private/etc/apache2/httpd.conf
/private/etc/apache2/original/httpd.conf


[ Reply to This | # ]
What's next
Authored by: mario_grgic on Jan 07, '09 06:17:59AM

an easy way to change a directory?

OS X is a UNIX so learn to use it people. Perhaps man find would help?

I just can't believe that someone would go on and build a GUI around a command that's been available on UNIX for decades and advertise it here.



[ Reply to This | # ]
What's next
Authored by: frgough on Jan 07, '09 07:53:23AM

OS X is also a wonderful GUI that simplifies the power of UNIX. Stop worshipping the CLI. It isn't the best solution to every problem.



[ Reply to This | # ]
What's next
Authored by: mario_grgic on Jan 07, '09 03:24:19PM

Really? Simplicity yes. But power no. Let's look at a trivial example. Let's say I ask you how many Friday 13th there each year from 2000 to 2100?

How would a GUI user solve that. Open iCal and count manually?

What if I said "and you have 40 seconds to solve it!". Now what? Game over for the GUI user.

But for someone proficient in UNIX and CLI (touch typing first, then good in vi and then UNIX) you would do something like this:

$ ncal 2009

that gives you something like this:

2009
January February March April
Mo 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27
Tu 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28
We 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29
Th 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30
Fr 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24
Sa 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25
Su 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26
May June July August
Mo 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 31
Tu 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25
We 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26
Th 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27
Fr 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28
Sa 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29
Su 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30
September October November December
Mo 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28
Tu 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29
We 2 9 16 23 30 7 14 21 28 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30
Th 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31
Fr 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25
Sa 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26
Su 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25 1 8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27

Ok, so now you want all the lines that for Fridays. Easy, hit ESC k A and type | grep "^Fr" like

ncal | grep "^Fr"

that now prints:

Fr 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24
Fr 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 7 14 21 28
Fr 4 11 18 25 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 4 11 18 25

That's slightly better. Ok now let's print only the 13 from these lines

ncal 2009 | grep "^Fr" | perl -na -e 'foreach (@F) { print "$_\n" if /13/}'

This now gives us:
13
13
13

i.e the number of Friday 13th in year 2009. Nice. Let's count how many there are

Hit ESC k A type | wc -l to get the command

ncal 2009 | grep "^Fr" | perl -na -e 'foreach (@F) { print "$_\n" if /13/}' | wc -l

which prints:

3

Nice now let's decorate what we are printing:

printf "Number of Friday 13th in 2009: "; ncal 2009 | grep "^Fr" | perl -na -e 'foreach (@F) { print "$_\n" if /13/}' | wc -l

which outputs:

Number of Friday 13th in 2009: 3

Excellent. So now let's add the final step and print this for all years from 2000 to 2100

for year in {2000..2100}; do printf "Number of Friday 13th in $year: "; ncal $year | grep "^Fr" | perl -na -e 'foreach (@F) { print "$_\n" if /13/}' | wc -l; done

which prints:

Number of Friday 13th in 2000: 1
Number of Friday 13th in 2001: 2
Number of Friday 13th in 2002: 2
Number of Friday 13th in 2003: 1
Number of Friday 13th in 2004: 2
Number of Friday 13th in 2005: 1
.
.
.
Number of Friday 13th in 2097: 2
Number of Friday 13th in 2098: 1
Number of Friday 13th in 2099: 3
Number of Friday 13th in 2100: 1
$

which is what we wanted. A real UNIX power user can do this in 40 seconds ( 20 or so to think and the rest to type it).

"When I was little I looked at pictures. When I grew up I learned to read and write". Same goes for computer use. Power users type and read. While novices click on pictures.



[ Reply to This | # ]
What's next
Authored by: palahala on Jan 10, '09 04:35:26AM

So how does this single problem prove "Stop worshipping the CLI. It isn't the best solution to every problem" wrong?



[ Reply to This | # ]
There's always one like you...
Authored by: slb on Jan 07, '09 04:06:03PM

You need to put others down for your god-like ability to run everything in the CLI.
Good for you.
Some of us don't have that knowledge, and it takes time.
Why are you here?
To just slam all us idiots?
Do me (us) a favor, don't bother.



[ Reply to This | # ]
What's next
Authored by: rottenchops on Jan 09, '09 08:40:37AM

Wow, you can type and read man pages - good for you. This is not a religious discussion.
I know Unix quite well. This application blows the doors off of Unix "find" in terms of performance, so I use it.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: frantz on Jan 07, '09 07:41:10AM

I'm amazed with the number of people here that do not know how to use Spotlight. It's supposed to be a power-user website isn't it ? I can understand that using Terminal isn't for everybody, but Spotlight... You do can find everything in seconds with spotlight. Command people, it's so easy that you don't even have to RTFM!!!



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: baltwo on Jan 07, '09 10:23:17AM
It takes a lot more than a few seconds to reset Spotlight's Find or Finder's Find to open up System files, visibility, etc., to find everything. Then, there's the issue with having to undo Spotlight's search results restrictions, to find those things. Check out my Finder's Find mod at http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=6725932 for what you can change so you can find stuff.

[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: frantz on Jan 08, '09 03:11:28AM

Thanks for this tip.

I've done things differently : I have saved a blank search with invisibles and system files and named it "all files".
Now all I have to do to is to search in "all files"



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: tempel on Jan 08, '09 10:17:32AM

Neat. I always wanted to change the defaults for the Finder's Find window. I wonder if someone has made a GUI tool to alter this plist? Otherwise, that might be my next endeavour :)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Soreheads
Authored by: daybrother on Jan 07, '09 11:25:31AM

This is classic. Someone whips up a very nice GUI substitute for a CLI, posts it for free, and gets flamed by L337 that think that OSX would be great if it only ran a modded Darwin interface. Change your bookmark to /. and go there jack.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Soreheads
Authored by: dr_turgeon on Jan 07, '09 12:22:13PM

:D ftwin



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: Aeschylus on Jan 07, '09 07:31:34PM
I'm a "power user," not a programmer. Sometimes I need to find a file quickly - and Find Any File blows away both Spotlight and EasyFind in terms of finding files. Here is a simple test on my iMac G5:

In Spotlight, look on the entire disk, file names only, and set "System Files" to "Include".

In both, enter the term "fsevent"

Results: Spotlight finds 6 results, FAF finds 37 results.

FAF is MUCH faster than Spotlight, even if you don't count the time it takes to set Spotlight up. I have placed an alias to FAF in the Finder toolbar, and i find myself using it all the time.

Thanks to the author for a GREAT program!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: frantz on Jan 08, '09 02:13:48AM

First you did not ask Spotlight to find invisible files...
Then for the visible files that "Find Any Files" sees and Spotlight don't, do you use TimeMachine ? Are the files from your Time Machine backups ?



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: Aeschylus on Jan 08, '09 08:58:07PM
Right. So i added visibility - and here Spotlight really impresses. Set to "Visible' there are 6 results. Invisible: 1 result. Visible or invisible: the same item found with "invisible items". Hmm. The FAF results are for the boot drive only, not the Time Machine drive or any other. Ok, so there are really 7 results with Spotlight. FAF is no less awesome, right?

[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: frantz on Jan 09, '09 03:18:19AM

So the files FAF finds and Spotlight don't, are probably from packages like .app or .pkg.
Ok it's great that an app can find them Mac-wilde, but on a regular search basis you just do not want them to confuse you.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: Aeschylus on Jan 09, '09 06:28:10PM
I checked this. 14 were in packages, 6 were invisible (but theoretically Spotlight should have found these). There were 17 remaining files plus the 6 invisible ones - either 10 or 16 more than Spotlight found. Of course I'll still need spotlight, and I'll even use EasyFind when looking for a file in a subfolder. But it is great to have an FAF. A good example: I needed to locate GoogleSoftwareUpdater somewhere on my hard drive. Where did they hide that little stinker that I couldn't delete when I removed Google Notifier? Aha! FAF found it in a few seconds. Bravo!

[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: pgb0517 on Jan 08, '09 10:55:54AM

So for those of us who've been around long enough ... The Mac zealots used to cry, "We don't need no stinkin' command line!" Now, a developer is vilified in a Mac community forum for posting a simple GUI app that does a good job -- for free. That used to earn Mac users' praise. How ironic how times have changed.

Some of us just really don't like Spotlight, so it's great to have alternatives.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: ~Coxy on Jan 08, '09 11:42:37PM

A developer posts a nice, fast, FREE, easy-to-use tool that fills a niche that has been lacking in the Mac OS since 10.3 and people deride him for it! Shameful, in my opinion.

I say thank you very much to the developer for creating this.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: sojourner on Jan 10, '09 05:08:33PM

i'm reading some of the comments above and feeling wondrous at what seems to be nit-picking. normally, i read the comments and learn quite a bit about cli and getting under the os x hood. instead of constructive, helpful hints and explanations, it seemed like really baseless destruction.

thanks to the developer for developing and posting. i will be taking the app for a test run.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Version 1.1 released
Authored by: tempel on Jan 13, '09 12:42:16PM
A new version 1.1 has been released with a few user-requested improvements, such as:
  • Search works now also on non-HFS formatted volumes,
  • view settings are remembered,
  • "tooltips" show more information about an item under the mouse,
  • new options to filter hidden items and package contents.


[ Reply to This | # ]
Find 'non-findable' files
Authored by: jdsmith on Feb 19, '09 11:07:47AM
This and related tools I believe rely on the FSCatalogSearch, a feature of the HFS filesystem. I've been using a command line tool which calls this from John Chang, called findfile, available at this blog post, which is very informative and compares the results for several filename search methodologies. I believe he has more recently made a GUI tool of the same name.

I use findfile along with mdfind from the command line. Example:

% findfile fseventsd
/System/Library/Frameworks/CoreServices.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/CarbonCore.framework/Versions/A/Support/fseventsd
/System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.fseventsd.plist
/.fseventsd

and the equivalent mdfind usage:

% mdfind "kMDItemFSName == '*fseventsd*'"
/System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.fseventsd.plist
/System/Library/Frameworks/CoreServices.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/CarbonCore.framework/Versions/A/Support/fseventsd

Note that when called this way, mdfind (Spotlight's CLI equivalent) is faster than Spotlight since it doesn't match content or any other metadata, and about the same speed as findfile. Still findfile is more complete.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Version 1.1.1 released
Authored by: tempel on Mar 18, '09 03:56:24AM

Version 1.1.1 fixes a bug found only in 10.5.6 when searching on remote (network) volumes:

It can happen that a search runs several times longer than "normal", presenting multiple lines of the same found items.

Version 1.1.1 works around this.

Another new feature is that its window positions on the screen are now remembered between launches.



[ Reply to This | # ]