HTML Page Linked to Windows Folder?

[pwncpa]

I would like to create an html page that lists files in a windows
folder, for use on my computer. I have found many utilities that will
print a list of the contents in an html format, but is there anything
that will link to that folder? In other words, if the contents of the
folder changes - like new files added, or files deleted, I would like
the html file to change automatically.

I am obviously not an HTML programmer, just looking for a simple tool.

Thanks in advance!

 

[pwncpa]

Create a custom HTML file/page with links in it such as:

file:///C:/
file:///C:/My%20Documents/
file:///C:/My%20Documents/My%20Music

The HTML code would look like (for example):

<a href="file:///C:/">Click here to view Drive C:</a>

Open the page in your browser and click on the links.  The browser will
display the folder contents as HTML.

You can easily create such a page with something like Kompozer:

http://www.kompozer.net/

Thanks so much for your help.

I have tried this, and what it does is open the windows File Folder,
which is fine. But I would love to have the html page list each of
the files individually. So, in your example, each of the files in c:/
mydocuments/mymusic would be listed. Right now, when I click the link
it just opens the folder in windows.

Thanks again for your kind help!

 

[pwncpa]

What does this mean? What, to you, is the "windows File Folder" and how
is that not what you want?


Mine does.



I need more details to understand what's happening with you and your system.

What browser are you using?

Exactly what are you seeing?

How is that different from what you want?

How is it different from what you expect?

Thanks:
When I click the link, it opens the file folder in windows, not an
HTML list of the contents of the folder. What I would like is an html
page that looks something like this:

Contents of my documents:
file1.doc
file2.xls
file3.doc

Then, the list would be linked to the folder, so it would refresh
based on the actual contents of the folder each time it is opened in a
browser. If a file were deleted or added, the next time the html file
is viewed in a browser, it would display the current actual contents
of the folder. As it stands now, I see one link on the html page that
says something like "click here", when I click it, it opens the
windows folder (not in the browser, but an actual windows folder),
with the list of files.

I am using IE 7.

Thanks again for your time.

 

[Neredbojias]

Thanks:
When I click the link, it opens the file folder in windows, not an
HTML list of the contents of the folder. What I would like is an
html page that looks something like this:

Contents of my documents:
file1.doc
file2.xls
file3.doc

Then, the list would be linked to the folder, so it would refresh
based on the actual contents of the folder each time it is opened in
a browser. If a file were deleted or added, the next time the html
file is viewed in a browser, it would display the current actual
contents of the folder. As it stands now, I see one link on the html
page that says something like "click here", when I click it, it opens
the windows folder (not in the browser, but an actual windows
folder), with the list of files.

I am using IE 7.

I get that same (latter) result, too. The browsers pretty much pick 'n
choose what they want to do with it, so here's what I'd do:

Since both Firefox and Opera seem to do this prety well, pick one and use
that exclusively (-so you get used to it.) Then simply bookmark the url
to whatever folders you may wish to view as Ed Mullen suggested. The main
idea is like to use a "dedicated" browser (instance) for it.

 

[David Segall]

I would like to create an html page that lists files in a windows
folder, for use on my computer. I have found many utilities that will
print a list of the contents in an html format, but is there anything
that will link to that folder? In other words, if the contents of the
folder changes - like new files added, or files deleted, I would like
the html file to change automatically.

I am obviously not an HTML programmer, just looking for a simple tool.

I'm afraid it's not simple. If I understand correctly you want
something that looks like <http://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/>. To do
that you will have to install a web server on your computer. That is
no more complicated than installing any other software but you will
also need to configure it to have access to your entire hard drive
which, for obvious reasons, is not the default behaviour. In addition
you will need to configure the web server to show a directory list
rather than a "page not found" error. The default and the method of
changing it depends on which web server program you choose. If you
decide that you must have this facility do make sure that the web
server on your computer is not accessible from the Internet!

 

[pwncpa]

I'm afraid it's not simple. If I understand correctly you want
something that looks like <http://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/>. To do
that you will have to install a web server on your computer. That is
no more complicated than installing any other software but you will
also need to configure it to have access to your entire hard drive
which, for obvious reasons, is not the default behaviour. In addition
you will need to configure the web server to show a directory list
rather than a "page not found" error. The default and the method of
changing it depends on which web server program you choose. If you
decide that you must have this facility do make sure that the web
server on your computer is not accessible from the Internet!

I have IIS installed on my computer. I guess I can poke around in
there to see if I can get it working. How about setting up an FTP
server?

Thanks again!

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

I have IIS installed on my computer. I guess I can poke around in
there to see if I can get it working. How about setting up an FTP
server?

From the sound of your experience level I would say this is a *very
bad* idea.

Basically if this is for your own use, you do not need a webserver in
order to do file management. Your OS already handles that function with
Windows Explorer. Great a shortcut to C:\Windows where ever it is most
convenient for you and be done with it! Use a webserver for serving *web
pages*.

 

[Neredbojias]

From the sound of your experience level I would say this is a *very
bad* idea.

Basically if this is for your own use, you do not need a webserver in
order to do file management. Your OS already handles that function
with Windows Explorer. Great a shortcut to C:\Windows where ever it
is most convenient for you and be done with it! Use a webserver for
serving *web pages*.

I agree with you. A webserver is an extra load on system resources; I
won't install one even though I use php a lot.

As I said earlier, Firefox and Opera do exactly what the OP wants
without a server crutch. Perhaps he's a confirmed ie-user, but I would
certainly try one of them extensively before installing a server.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

I agree with you. A webserver is an extra load on system resources; I
won't install one even though I use php a lot.

Simple to take an old system and throw Ubuntu or something on it...then
PHP away!

 

[Neredbojias]

Simple to take an old system and throw Ubuntu or something on
it...then PHP away!

There's a thought. And I do have the proverbial "old system". Don't
have the non-proverbial Ubuntu but maybe I'll do some searching
tonight. Thanks for the idea.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

On 10 Sep 2008, "Jonathan N. Little" <[email protected]> wrote:

There's a thought. And I do have the proverbial "old system". Don't
have the non-proverbial Ubuntu but maybe I'll do some searching
tonight. Thanks for the idea.

If you not afraid of the command line, Ubuntu server runs quite nicely
on a P3 512MB RAM. If not the Desktop is easy and you can add the
servers s/w via Synaptic Package Manager

I just SSH into my servers from my XP desktop with TeraTermPro

http://ttssh2.sourceforge.jp/ (free)

 

[Neredbojias]

Just throw an extra gigabyte of memory into it. Cheapest way
to update an old system. Even laptop memory has gone down to
$50 a gig lately.

Proverbial "old system" already has 4 gigs. And dual Intel P4 3.80s.
I think it'll work.

 

[Neredbojias]

If you not afraid of the command line, Ubuntu server runs quite
nicely on a P3 512MB RAM. If not the Desktop is easy and you can add
the servers s/w via Synaptic Package Manager

The Desktop - I'm not a command-line person.

The Ubuntu website looks good so I'll probably get it once I replace
unexpectedly misfunctioning non-proverbial old system mouse.

I just SSH into my servers from my XP desktop with TeraTermPro

http://ttssh2.sourceforge.jp/ (free)

Might have to contact you about that part (when I get to it.)

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Proverbial "old system" already has 4 gigs. And dual Intel P4 3.80s.
I think it'll work.

Wouldn't mind your "old system" for my "new system".

 

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On 2008-09-11, Neredbojias wrote:
....

It's an Hp. In less than 10 months, the harddisk crashed - totally.
Didn't have any substantial backups - who expects a hd crash in 10 months?
Anyway, I had to get another system,

Wouldn't a new drive have been cheaper?

 

[Neredbojias]

Wouldn't mind your "old system" for my "new system".

It's an Hp. In less than 10 months, the harddisk crashed - totally.
Didn't have any substantial backups - who expects a hd crash in 10 months?
Anyway, I had to get another system, which I did, figuring I'd migrate
back to the original, which I didn't mostly because, although _this_
system isn't quite up to the perfs of the old, I had a lot of progs
already embedded, the cable established, etc., etc., and I just didn't
feeling like dealing with it if I didn't have to.

Computers suck 'n then they die...

 

[Neredbojias]

Well, geez. I run WAMP on my main system for site development and
it's not eating up resources that I can tell. Intel dual core, 3GHz,
2GB RAM.

I wouldn't be afraid of that, anyway, since it's all I'll probably use it
for.

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

On 2008-09-11, Neredbojias wrote:
...

Wouldn't a new drive have been cheaper?

My thoughts exactly. I bought a new Seagate SATA-II 400GB performace
model with the 16MB cache last year for under $85. I sure it's cheaper
today...

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

My thoughts exactly. I bought a new Seagate SATA-II 400GB performace
model with the 16MB cache last year for under $85. I sure it's cheaper
today...

Also another tip many times a drive may crash and not be bootable, but
will run enough as slave to get data off of it. Depending on the crash,
the old "chill it in the freezer then dump data to new drive" dash can
also be a time saver.

 

[Neredbojias]

On 2008-09-11, Neredbojias wrote:
...

Wouldn't a new drive have been cheaper?

Uh, yeah, probably. <grin />

You have to understand the situation, and I s'pose it's not easy.

I'm not that good with hardware. Software, yes, but I've always
avoided dealing with hardware in favor of programming things like from
Basic and Dos (config.sys & autoexec.bat) on up. Also, I'm "disabled",
-a (rather severe, I'm afraid) breathing problem which limits my
mobility and other options considerably. Hold your thumb and
forefinger in front of your face about one-eighth of an inch apart. In
this past week, I came that close to dying 4 seperate times. No, it
wasn't a typical week at all, but the chance is always there, and my
health management essentially consists of minimizing that chance
whenever possible.

I don't have time to fix it or oversee fixing it myself. I don't have
time to try to out-hustle repair shops who can by policy only fix
things after they do an $80+ diagnostic or the like and then take days
over an hour procedure to justify extra bucks. And I don't have time
to wait without a system for all this; since the early 80s, I usually
_have_ had 2 or more, anyway.

So...a new hard drive would have been cheaper, but it wouldn't have
been more expedient. Funny enough, though, a new hard drive is just
what it got, just not in the way you meant.