File short name

Another way to shorten the path and file name is LongPathTool. Works like a charm. Try it! Simple solution. Please log in again.

The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page. Set, as shown in the figure, the maximum number of allowed characters in the path or file name and the program only shows only those files that matches the filter criterion in the preview list. The picture shows the default configuration of the action.

Folder and file names are limited to 64 characters. This setting is optional and can be changed at will. The option "Short file names individually to reach a path length of x characters" limits all file names to the set number of characters, depending on the total path length. This allows files from folders with fewer characters in the name to retain a longer name.

The minimum length of the new file names can also be set. The next step is to set the maximum number of characters allowed in file names. There is a way to disable Windows 8. That should disable short names creation.

Refer to this Microsoft TechNet article to read more about the solution. On my system I get something like this: There have been a lot of security problems in the past related to short file names. After installing one of the plugins, I have requested a backup of my WordPress blog: The plugin creates a custom directory for this backup backup The solution There is a way to disable Windows 8. Get the latest content on web security in your inbox each week. The change was made in order to get reproducible builds.

So with gcc with -O2, would the string be indeed optimized and the build made reproducible? Show 2 more comments. This may or may not be practical. For example, you can add this near the top of file. At least for gcc, this will also affect the file name reported in diagnostic messages.

Keith Thompson Keith Thompson k 41 41 gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Keith Thompson it is great solution, thank You. At least with gcc 5. Klepak: You're right, and that's standard behavior. The directive "causes the implementation to behave as if the following sequence of source lines begins with a source line that has a line number as specified by the digit sequence". I'll update my answer. At line 0 of a file, I just do: line 2 "name. Also as a side note it is nice to know that it does not contaminate other files that include it at least on MSVC — Matt Eding.

Add a comment. Old Badman Grey 9 9 silver badges 18 18 bronze badges. Option -ffile-prefix-map indeed implies both -fdebug-prefix-map and -fmacro-prefix-map options. See also the references at reproducible-builds. I'll see if I can get a similar macro with no hard-coded length with macro recursion Seva Alekseyev Seva Alekseyev Cool answer. You need to use at least -O1 to use this to be compile-time. Isn't this backwards? Also, this did not work at compile-time for me, at -Os.

The full path strings were present in the output binary. Nope this is not purely compile time solution. Andry Andry 1, 18 18 silver badges 24 24 bronze badges. Man, that's beautiful and it works, thank you! No idea why this answer is so underrated. This should be the answer. It doesn't require cmake, modifying the makefile, or runtime computation. It has a small issue when the full path contains symbol-link.

Better solution. For those compilers do not support this, refer to the Robust way below. This macro is used in most exists codes. Simply redefine it can set you free.

Robust way for -Wno-builtin-macro-redefined. G Levi. G 83 1 1 silver badge 6 6 bronze badges. This does not work for contents coming from include files. A common case is to set variables in local scope and use it in another. Sean Sean I don't know whether gcc actually does it, I haven't checked, but I'm pretty sure that it does compute strlen of string literals at compile-time.

Steve - maybe, but that's a big dependency on compiler specific behaviour. I don't think it is a big dependency, because I very much doubt that this code is performance-critical. And if it is, move it out of the loop. In cases where this is a huge deal, because you absolutely need a string literal containing just the basename, you could perhaps compute the right string at build time by running some script over the source.

It may not be performance critical, but it can easily be seen as privacy critical. There's no real good reason for revealing my per-customer organizational practices in strings frozen into a released EXE file. Worse, for applications created on behalf of a customer, those strings might reveal things my customer might prefer not to, such as not being the author of their own product.

In this situation all output will need to be scrutinized and a special API should be introduced for output to customers.