[GUI Plugin] FanFicFare

[JimmXinu]

Experimental Version Attached

2024-08-27
- New field in Chrome Simple cache?

Okay, it looks like Chrome 'simple' cache--on Mac at least--now has an extra field in the binary header. No idea what it is, but the fields we use are shifted over 4 bytes.

The attached version reads (and discards) the extra field. Plus a bunch of debug output.

The question is: is it just Mac, or all Chrome derived 'simple' cache using browsers? I know some Windows users end up with simple cache, but it's always 'block' cache on my computer.

So if some other people who use 'simple' can test it, that would help.

If you're running in debug mode, the output log will tell which cache version you're using. Search log for string Using. The options are "Using BlockfileCache", "Using FirefoxCache2", and "Using SimpleCache".

[booster-t]

Hmm ... no luck .. same error. Calibre 7.1.7 and plugin v4.37.2

Here's the log

Stephen

[booster-t]

Hello again Jim

I thought I'd try Firefox to see if that made a difference. When I go about:cache, Firefox returns this file name: ~Library/Caches/Firefox/Profiles/whbmctbq.default-release-1721846696620/cache2

I guess that's a hidden file because when I got to the /Profiles folder, it's empty even though my Mac says it's taking 56mb.

The plugin responds by saying: Directory does not contain a known browser cache type: '/~Library/Caches/Firefox/Profiles/whbmctbq.default-release-1721846696620/cache2'

Sometimes I want to go back in time when things just worked <sigh>

Stephen

[JimmXinu]

Originally Posted by booster-t

Hmm ... no luck .. same error. Calibre 7.1.7 and plugin v4.37.2

I was going to ask if you were sure you installed the new zip, but I double checked and it looks like I uploaded the wrong one.

Attached is experimental version 4.37.3. Same as I thought I'd posted, plus a version bump to confirm it.

Originally Posted by booster-t

The plugin responds by saying: Directory does not contain a known browser cache type: '/~Library/Caches/Firefox/Profiles/whbmctbq.default-release-1721846696620/cache2'

Firefox (my preferred browser, btw) browser cache uses different code, so it shouldn't have the same problems, at least.

I believe your problem is the leading '/' in '/~Library/...'. Should just be '~Library/...'

[booster-t]

Thank you ... that fixed the problem ... in the FWIW department, I *do* need the / before Library ... the tilde takes the place of Users/myname and it expects a / after that for the next bit of the long file name ... like:

Users/myname/Library/Caches/Google/Chrome/Default/Cache/Cache_Data

Stephen
PS: Here's the log file to conform that it worked :-)

[JimmXinu]

Originally Posted by booster-t

Thank you ... that fixed the problem ...

That's good.

Now the question is what happens for other people. Any volunteers? Any linux users maybe?

Originally Posted by booster-t

in the FWIW department, I *do* need the / before Library ... the tilde takes the place of Users/myname and it expects a / after that for the next bit of the long file name ... like:

Correct. But the copy paste showed '/~Library', not '~/Library' -- I was typing faster than I was thinking when I said "just '~Library'".

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by JimmXinu

That's good.

Now the question is what happens for other people. Any volunteers? Any linux users maybe?

Windows 10 + Vivaldi 6.8.3381.57, no errors when downloading a new fic from ffnet.

[JimmXinu]

Originally Posted by ownedbycats

Windows 10 + Vivaldi 6.8.3381.57, no errors when downloading a new fic from ffnet.

Thanks. Can you confirm in a debug log that your browser uses Simple cache?

The current change isn't really backward compatible -- if browser cache worked before and still works with this experimental version, odds are your browser uses the other cache code.

[ownedbycats]

I'm seeing entries for browsercache_blockfile, so maybe not so good a test

[JimmXinu]

Yep, that's the other Chrome cache type. Thanks for trying anyway.

[Clem2605]

Hello!

I'm currently in the process of trying to use the 'replace metadata' function to it's full potential, but I have a small question:

Does the order in which FFF replaces the metadata matter for the conditional expressions? And if it does, what is the order?

If I use the expression, let's say:

 category=>Star Wars|The Mandalorian=>Star Wars
 character==Luke=>Luke Skywalker&&category=>Star Wars

And I have a fanfiction in which 'Luke' is a character with only 'The Mandalorian' as a category:
- Will it catch it because FFF processes the expressions in the order I've written them?
- Will it catch it because FFF processes the category metadata before processing the character ones?
- Will it never catch it because FFF processes the character's metadata before the category ones?
- Will it never catch it because FFF will only use the 'raw' category metadata for the comparisons?

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by Clem2605

Hello!

I'm currently in the process of trying to use the 'replace metadata' function to it's full potential, but I have a small question:

Does the order in which FFF replaces the metadata matter for the conditional expressions? And if it does, what is the order?

Yes. In the order they're listed. Keep in mind the section precedence if you put specific replaces under a specific site. Here's an example:

replace_metadata: 

 category=>^(Mass Effect - Various Authors|Mass Effect: Paragon Lost|Mass Effect \d|Mass Effect - All Media Types)$=>Mass Effect
 category=>^Mass Effect$=>Mass Effect: Andromeda&&characters=~(Ryder|Jaal Ama Darav)
 category=>^Mass Effect$=>Mass Effect Trilogy&&characters=~(Garrus|Shepard|Oriana Lawson|Kaidan Alenko|Normandy Crew)
 category=>^Mass Effect$=>Mass Effect Trilogy&&publisher==FanFiction.net

Note that the first one combines several AO3 categories into a 'Mass Effect', which is also used by ffnet and older pre-Andromeda AO3 fics.

The next two then splits that 'Mass Effect' into Trilogy and Andromeda depending on characters.

The last one then has any ffnet fics fall back to Trilogy. However, most of the time, they've already been caught by the two character-conditionals replaces.



Your example should work as expected, I think.

[ownedbycats]

Note that include/exclude_metadatas also include _pre and _post variants, which determines whether they run before or after replaces are applied.