[Thunar-dev] overwriting files and the trash
danny.milo at scratchpost.org
Sat Aug 12 14:41:16 CEST 2006
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 17:57:28 +0100, Erlend Davidson wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2006, at 17:37, Rodrigo Coacci wrote:
>> On 8/2/06, Erlend Davidson <E.R.M.Davidson at sms.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Samuel Verstraete wrote:
>> > Hi Benny,
>> > 2 small issues...
>> > First: I was wondering if the expected behaviour of overwriting
>> > would be to store the "overwritten" file in the trash... i certainly
>> > was expecting this but it might be just me ;)
I second that.
>> I guess what he meant was when you copy/move a file over another
>> (using Thunar), effectively overwriting it, it could get the to-be-
>> overwritten file and put it in trash before overwriting it.
Yeah, that would be expected.
> Ah now I see what he means - I like it, it's an interesting idea.
> Overwriting a file is similar to deleting the file and putting a file
> in its place with the same filename... except if you did this the
> file you deleted would be in the trash for you.
> It could be an option:
No, it's the right thing, so it isn't an option/button but mandatory. No
introducing of unbreak-my-application settings/buttons please.
>> But I don't really think this is reasonable...
For me, it is :) And consistency suggests it to be that way, too.
>>> And for big files,
>> create a big performance issue,
How so? Moving file names around on the disk is very fast.
>> not to tell about disk space....
Hm, maybe thunar should warn when Trash is getting > 10% of disk and disk
is almost full then? (Or just start expiring old stuff? probably not)
> That's going to be a problem for the trash system in general. If you
> give people an option (like above) this wouldn't be an issue (they can
> just opt out of putting it in the trash if the file is too big).
I suggest deleting huge files instead of trashing them ("huge file": if
file size > amount of available space on that mount), after confirmation.
> What about standards though? I don't *think* this breaks any standards
> because overwriting is comparable to deleting then writing again (as
> mentioned above).
More information about the Thunar-dev