SPAM! stop synchronize other's files
in [Windows Servers]
|
From: Anthony on 18 Oct 2007 11:02 I accept your apology. I think if I had said "google for" you would not have made that mistake. Because I said "look for" I think you misunderstood and jumped to conclusions. Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com "John John" <audetweld(a)nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:uEk%23yYZEIHA.484(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > The way your web link appears so close to the text in your answer it > appeared to me like you were telling readers to go to your web site and > search there. Perhaps having your web link under your name in your > signature would have given a different impression. I apologize for my > error. > > John > > Anthony wrote: > >> Hello John, >> That's amusing. >> The OP needs to google for "re-initialize offline cache". The reason I >> give the term is that if you are unfamiliar with it, it is not the most >> obvious choice of words to look for. But a quick search will give the >> answer. This is the top result. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/230738. I >> generally find that re-phrasing the knowledgebase article adds no value, >> since all the detail is contained there already. So if I can help the OP >> find the information they need quickly, I think its a job well done. >> The URL after my name is my "signature". Its what we do. I don't consider >> a signature to be spam, >> If you have any other comments or questions, or advice to offer, please >> feel free to express them, >> Anthony, http://www.airdesk.com >> >> >> >> "John John" <audetweld(a)nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message >> news:ewzFz9YEIHA.3880(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> >>>Why not provide a real and useful answer so that all users can benefit? >>>Or at least provide a link to your site where the useful answer is >>>available? All that you posted is SPAM for your pay for services, a >>>useless site where nothing is available unless you register and pay. >>> >>>John >>> >>>Anthony wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Hi ykffc, >>>>Look for "re-initialize offline cache" >>>>Anthony, "ykffc" <ykffc(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>news:41E2FE4B-D581-4328-BD9F-28C196A4B096(a)microsoft.com... >>>> >>>> >>>>>In a corporate computing environment we have two users, userA and >>>>>userB. >>>>> >>>>>UserA has been using its laptop for a long time. He has access >>>>>permission to >>>>>\\servername\aaa and has made its content available offline. It works >>>>>beautifully without problem. >>>>> >>>>>Now userA ( a He) bought a new laptop and gives its old one to userB (a >>>>>She). UserA continues to access its \\servername\aaa folder and files >>>>>and >>>>>makes them available offline to him. >>>>> >>>>>UserB uses the old laptop under her own Domain user account UserB. She >>>>>also >>>>>has access permission to \\servername\bbb folder in the server and is >>>>>also >>>>>having a need to make its contents available offline. >>>>> >>>>>But when the system does the sychronization, it not only synchronize >>>>>userB's >>>>>data/files but it appears it also tries to sychronize some 'remaining' >>>>>userA >>>>>data in the pc that she is using. Is this normal? >>>>> >>>>>There is an error message, however, it complains synchronization of >>>>>offline >>>>>files with the content of \\servrname\aaa cannot be completed due to >>>>>access >>>>>violation. >>>>> >>>>>The access violation part is no surprise to me. Because I know userB is >>>>>not >>>>>able to access userA's data in the file server. However, can we ask the >>>>>system to stop synchronize those 'residual' offline files in her laptop >>>>>with >>>>>the server? >>>>> >>>>>You may ask why I have a concern like this? What if userA signon his >>>>>pre-loved pc. The system may succeed in synchronizing. But they are >>>>>'old >>>>>unwanted data', isn't it. >>>>> >>>>>thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > |