Does anyone have a work-around for the right-click file handling behavior in Rox? [unresolved]

[Governor]

This is not a quirk, it is an actual error. When you right-click on a file and a different file appears in the dialog box, it is an error.

Why do GUI errors persist?

.......
alternate-1 protocol:
1) Try another linux filemanager
------

Thunar requires gvfs-fuse, but the file is not there.

Error installing gvfs-fuse.jpg (31.88 KiB) Viewed 549 times

Xfe and pcmanfm look promising.

[mikeslr]

...
I like using Rox, but since is has no "Trash or undelete", I will have to find an alternative. A few have been suggested.

Although I set up Bookworm64 10.0.10, F-96 is at the top of my boot-menu so I usually boot into it. But the Governor's comment caught my eye. So I booted into Bookworm64, right-clicked a file and both Trash and Delete appeared on the Right-Click Menu. Then I remembered the question I had, "What if you're running PupMode5, i.e., without a SaveFile/Folder." Without a SaveFile/Folder The Right-Click Menu did not offer the Trash Option.

However, the Trash Application is present, can be added to the Right-Click menu and when added functions; the Trash folder being the hidden: /root/.Trash. To make it so you have to open one Rox window to /usr/local/apps. You'll see the Trash app. Open another rox-window, select a file and from the Right-Click Menu select Customize Menu; then drag & drop /usr/local/apps/Trash into the GUI which opens.

Of course, it will not survive a reboot unless a Save is created; and the above is not necessary if you had always intended to work with a Save. But if your preference is to run 'pfix=ram', then you'll either have to remaster or use amethyst's Save2SFS module.

Radky might want to consider the above on Bookworm64's next iteration, if any.

[Governor]

Why would you left click on an item to select it and then right click on some other item to bring up the right click menu?

if I (right)click a .txt file and choose "Open As Text" , close it, then (right)click another .txt file and choose "Open As Text", it will open the orginal .txt file again.

A perfect illustration of the issue.
Edit: I missed your question, so I answered that in another post.

[williwaw]

Admitting errors is a good thing. It soothes the soul

thats usually the kind of thing one tells oneself.

I like using Rox, but since is has no "Trash or undelete", I will have to find an alternative.

why not just make a folder called trash and drag it to your desktop?

[williwaw]

A perfect illustration of the issue.

I cannot duplicate this,
perhaps someone who can will explain what app they are using to open the file with and how they closes that app.

[geo_c]

This is not a quirk, it is an actual error. When you right-click on a file and a different file appears in the dialog box, it is an error.

Why do GUI errors persist?

.......
alternate-1 protocol:
1) Try another linux filemanager
------

Thunar requires gvfs-fuse, but the file is not there.
Error installing gvfs-fuse.jpg

Xfe and pcmanfm look promising.

When you're running a true puppy, I believe that pmount and whatever native mounting systems don't play well with gvfs-fuse, someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that.

I don't think it means you can't use Thunar. What I think it means is that you can't mount from Thunar. But if you mount using pmount the normal puppy way, then you should see the drive in Thunar.

I'm not a huge of Thunar, I like pcmanfm better, but don't really use that either. I'd go with Xfe. Again you can't mount from Xfe either. But it works the same as Thunar, just mount the drive and it will show up in Xfe.

Have you discussed the GUI error with the Rox developers yet? What did they say?

[bigpup]

Why would you left click on an item to select it and then right click on some other item to bring up the right click menu?

if I (right)click a .txt file and choose "Open As Text" , close it, then (right)click another .txt file and choose "Open As Text", it will open the orginal .txt file again.

A perfect illustration of the issue.

That is because in double click operation left click selects the item. (it takes two clicks to do it)
left click selects the item.
Right click on the same item brings up options menu for the selected item.

What you want to have happen does in Rox single click navigation.
Left or right click selects along with right click brings up option menu.
Left or right click on different item it is now the selected item.

[bigpup]

I like using Rox, but since is has no "Trash or undelete", I will have to find an alternative.

The trash for Rox is the trash icon on the desktop. ( a Rox app program)

Drag and drop an item from a Rox window onto the trash icon, removes it, puts it in trash.

Left click on the trash icon to see what is in it.
Right click on trash icon to see options.
Right click on item in the trash open window to get options for that item. (restore, permanently delete, etc....)

some Puppy versions have trash option in Rox right click menu.
Selecting it moves item to the desktop trash icon.
this gives you two ways to do it.

[MochiMoppel]

So I booted into Bookworm64, right-clicked a file and both Trash and Delete appeared on the Right-Click Menu.

Yes, I can confirm that Trash is at the top of the list (provided you right-click a file type that Trash was configured to recognize)

Then I remembered the question I had, "What if you're running PupMode5, i.e., without a SaveFile/Folder."

and I tried to answer your question. The presence of a SaveFile/Folder is irrelevant. I always run in PUPMODE 5

Without a SaveFile/Folder The Right-Click Menu did not offer the Trash Option.

You just wrote "Trash and Delete appeared on the Right-Click Menu". So what is it? I'm confused.

[Governor]

Why would you left click on an item to select it and then right click on some other item to bring up the right click menu?

if I (right)click a .txt file and choose "Open As Text" , close it, then (right)click another .txt file and choose "Open As Text", it will open the orginal .txt file again.

In my previous response, I missed your question.
Instead of acknowledging the error, it sounds like you are trying to blame the error on the user. No dice, you are sidetracking.
The question is not why would someone do an activity which brings forth the error, the real question is: how to fix the error?

When a user right-clicks on a file, obviously, they intend to take an action with that file and not on a different file. Period.
As it is now, to avoid this issue (and be absolutely sure the correct file is acted upon), a user must first left-click on the desired file before right-clicking on it. Or left-click on blank space in the file manager window before right-clicking on the desired file.

2 clicks increases the required user's actions by 100%, and is a ridiculous inconvenience.

When I right-click on a file, I have to trust that the OS has selected the file I told it to select by right-clicking on it. Anything else is bogus.
And yet people here are defending the error!?

And people wonder why this OS does not attract more users.

[Governor]

I like using Rox, but since is has no "Trash or undelete", I will have to find an alternative.

The trash for Rox is the trash icon on the desktop. ( a Rox app program)

Drag and drop an item from a Rox window onto the trash icon, removes it, puts it in trash.

Left click on the trash icon to see what is in it.
Right click on trash icon to see options.
Right click on item in the trash open window to get options for that item. (restore, permanently delete, etc....)

some Puppy versions have trash option in Rox right click menu.
Selecting it moves item to the desktop trash icon.
this gives you two ways to do it.

Ok, looks like drag and drop works with multiple files, but what about the numerical suffix placed on the filename?
How can the deleted files be restored?

[fredx181]

@Governor

how to fix the error?

The 'error' can only be fixed by the rox developers.
You keep on repeating the same as if you think that "we" (forum members) can fix it, probably the only way is contacting the rox developers.
Btw, It seems to me that most of us agree with you already (or at least acknowledging that it's an inconvenience that right-clicking doesn't always select the chosen file).

[Governor]

A perfect illustration of the issue.

I cannot duplicate this,
perhaps someone who can will explain what app they are using to open the file with and how they closes that app.

With single-click turned off in Rox options.
I created 2 files, temp1.txt and temp2.txt.
I left-clicked on temp1 txt.
I right-clicked on temp2.txt, and temp1.txt appeared in the dialog box.

[Governor]

.......
alternate-1 protocol:
1) Try another linux filemanager
------

Thunar requires gvfs-fuse, but the file is not there.
Error installing gvfs-fuse.jpg

Xfe and pcmanfm look promising.

When you're running a true puppy, I believe that pmount and whatever native mounting systems don't play well with gvfs-fuse, someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that.

I don't think it means you can't use Thunar. What I think it means is that you can't mount from Thunar. But if you mount using pmount the normal puppy way, then you should see the drive in Thunar.

I'm not a huge of Thunar, I like pcmanfm better, but don't really use that either. I'd go with Xfe. Again you can't mount from Xfe either. But it works the same as Thunar, just mount the drive and it will show up in Xfe.

Have you discussed the GUI error with the Rox developers yet? What did they say?

Do you really think a newbie is the right person to point out errors to the developer(s)?
Are seasoned veterans not interested in reporting this error??

[fredx181]

...
Are seasoned veterans not interested in reporting this error??
...

Apparently not, or perhaps they have no time or have other priorities, so what now? Endlessly talking about this issue becomes very boring IMO.

[Governor]

...
Are seasoned veterans not interested in reporting this error??
...

Apparently not, or perhaps they have no time or have other priorities, so what now? Endlessly talking about this issue becomes very boring IMO.

Some people wonder why the OS is not more popular. And there you have it.

[fredx181]

...
Are seasoned veterans not interested in reporting this error??
...

Apparently not, or perhaps they have no time or have other priorities, so what now? Endlessly talking about this issue becomes very boring IMO.

Some people wonder why the OS is not more popular. And there you have it.

And what do you do to make it more popular ? Complaining doesn't help, I'd say.
Btw, does it matter if it's popular or not ?

edit: to summarize this thread of 2 pages already:

• Question by the OP: Does anyone have a fix for the right-click file handling error in Rox?
• Answer: No, live with it or try another filemanager.

Done!

[MochiMoppel]

Endlessly talking about this issue becomes very boring IMO.

Btw, does it matter if it's popular or not ?

If you want to end this boring issue maybe you stop asking more questions

The 'error' can only be fixed by the rox developers.

For those willing to read the 'error' can hopefully be understood by reading the manual, because the developers explained the behavior:
"if you open the menu with some items selected then the operation applies to those items. If you open then menu over an item while there is no selection then that item is temporarily selected."

Lesson 1:Selection is done by Ctrl+Leftclick (when single-select is on) or Leftclick (when single-select is off)
Lesson 2: Rightclicking does not select files. It always works only on already selected files
Lesson 3: Temporarily selecting a file via Rightclick when no other files are selected is an exception, a mere convenience to spare the user unnecessary selecting and deselecting.

[geo_c]

2 clicks increases the required user's actions by 100%, and is a ridiculous inconvenience.

Using your math, double click navigation increases your ENTIRE file manager work flow by 100%.

So what should take you 5 minutes, now takes 10 minutes.

You are literally pissing away days and weeks of your life as the years roll by using double click navigation. And using double click navigation, then complaining about it adding 1 extra click to avoid right click action on the SELECTED file instead of the file you hover your mouse over the top of is.......

....ridiculous.

[Governor]

2 clicks increases the required user's actions by 100%, and is a ridiculous inconvenience.

Using your math, double click navigation increases your ENTIRE file manager work flow by 100%.

So what should take you 5 minutes, now takes 10 minutes.

You are literally pissing away days and weeks of your life as the years roll by using double click navigation. And using double click navigation, then complaining about it adding 1 extra click to avoid right click action on the SELECTED file instead of the file you hover your mouse over the top of is.......
....ridiculous.

Yes, I would like to omit extraneous actions, double click navigation not withstanding.
I find single-click is risky in Linux. In Windows, you generally know what you are clicking on due to the file extension.

[Governor]

Apparently not, or perhaps they have no time or have other priorities, so what now? Endlessly talking about this issue becomes very boring IMO.

Some people wonder why the OS is not more popular. And there you have it.

And what do you do to make it more popular ? Complaining doesn't help, I'd say.
Btw, does it matter if it's popular or not ?

edit: to summarize this thread of 2 pages already:

• Question by the OP: Does anyone have a fix for the right-click file handling error in Rox?
• Answer: No, live with it or try another filemanager.

Done!

I am sure you are right, many people couldn't care less about attracting users, and I can understand that since it is only a hobby OS.
Not too long ago, it was the stated goal in this forum to make Puppy more popular. There was discussion about reorganizing the forum, SEO, even censoring posts, in the interest of gaining popularity. I am merely pointing out that if this OS is to be more popular, it must become more user-friendly, and persistent errors should be fixed. And you can take that to the bank. But as you point out, almost no one is really interested in the welfare of the OS, they are focused on their own use and tinkering.

[Governor]

Endlessly talking about this issue becomes very boring IMO.

Btw, does it matter if it's popular or not ?

If you want to end this boring issue maybe you stop asking more questions

The 'error' can only be fixed by the rox developers.

For those willing to read the 'error' can hopefully be understood by reading the manual, because the developers explained the behavior:
"if you open the menu with some items selected then the operation applies to those items. If you open then menu over an item while there is no selection then that item is temporarily selected."

Lesson 1:Selection is done by Ctrl+Leftclick (when single-select is on) or Leftclick (when single-select is off)
Lesson 2: Rightclicking does not select files. It always works only on already selected files
Lesson 3: Temporarily selecting a file via Rightclick when no other files are selected is an exception, a mere convenience to spare the user unnecessary selecting and deselecting.

Lesson 4: Left click on the desired file, or on a blank area (to make sure there are no other files selected), before right-clicking on the desired file, or you may perform an unintended action.

[bigpup]

In single click navigation in Rox.

The only thing that can happen, is what you left click on, will run or open in a program for accessing it.

How is that dangerous?

Double click navigation is what requires always two clicks to do a proper operation.

Single click navigation only requires one click.

[MochiMoppel]

In single click navigation in Rox.
The only thing that can happen, is what you left click on, will run or open in a program for accessing it.
How is that dangerous?

It's dangerous because you might inadvertently start an application that is supposed to be run from a terminal. Particularly nasty if it's an interactive shell script that now awaits user input in the background. You will have to fire up the task manager, find the stuck application and kill it. In the worst scenario it can crash or mess up your system.

Double click navigation is what requires always two clicks to do a proper operation.

So what? That's a GTK standard. All file chooser dialogs, e.g "Save As" or "Open file", work this way. Most alternative file managers work this way.
I switched to double click navigation many moons ago and I'm glad I did. Safer, more consistent with the behavior of other applications and without the need to push the Ctrl key selecting single files is easier.

[Governor]

In single click navigation in Rox.
The only thing that can happen, is what you left click on, will run or open in a program for accessing it.
How is that dangerous?

It's dangerous because you might inadvertently start an application that is supposed to be run from a terminal. Particularly nasty if it's an interactive shell script that now awaits user input in the background. You will have to fire up the task manager, find the stuck application and kill it. In the worst scenario it can crash or mess up your system.

Double click navigation is what requires always two clicks to do a proper operation.

So what? That's a GTK standard. All file chooser dialogs, e.g "Save As" or "Open file", work this way. Most alternative file managers work this way.
I switched to double click navigation many moons ago and I'm glad I did. Safer, more consistent with the behavior of other applications and without the need to push the Ctrl key selecting single files is easier.

I find I have less control with the single click, and I have inadvertently and unintentionally run programs (sometimes with detrimental effect).
You explained it much better than I could.

[MochiMoppel]

Care to see a real of the Right-Click menu?

As we have learned in Lesson 3, a file that is right-clicked when no other files are selected will be selected temporarily.
This can easily be verified:

Step 1: In List View make the Name column very wide so that it will not be fully covered by the Right-Click menu

Step2: Make sure that no other file is selected and right-click on a file. Immediatedly the "Name" will change color, marking the file as selected.
From the menu select "Rename". The Rename dialog pops up and the "Name" changes color back to unselected. When renaming is finished, the file is indeed unselected. So far the manual is correct.

Step3: Repeat step 2, but this time you change your mind after right-clicking. You decide to abandon the Right-Click menu by pressing the Esc key. It works but the file remains selected That's wrong!
More confusing: It works correctly depending on the mouse cursor position. With the cursor hovering over the left main menu, the file will be properly deselected. When hovering within a submenu, the file remains selected.

[Governor]

Care to see a real of the Right-Click menu?

As we have learned in Lesson 3, a file that is right-clicked when no other files are selected will be selected temporarily.
This can easily be verified:

Step 1: In List View make the Name column very wide so that it will not be fully covered by the Right-Click menu

Step2: Make sure that no other file is selected and right-click on a file. Immediatedly the "Name" will change color, marking the file as selected.
From the menu select "Rename". The Rename dialog pops up and the "Name" changes color back to unselected. When renaming is finished, the file is indeed unselected. So far the manual is correct.

Step3: Repeat step 2, but this time you change your mind after right-clicking. You decide to abandon the Right-Click menu by pressing the Esc key. It works but the file remains selected That's wrong!
More confusing: It works correctly depending on the mouse cursor position. With the cursor hovering over the left main menu, the file will be properly deselected. When hovering within a submenu, the file remains selected.

My impression is that no one really seems to be interested in doing anything about the issues that surface.
I am reminded of when you go and look at a used car for sale. The guy selling it, tells you about the car and says the front brakes are fairly new. You remove a wheel and discover that the pads are almost down to the metal. So, then you wonder what else might be wrong with the car. Same here. When one issue pops up, and then another, and then another, it does not impart a sense of security or professionalism to the user. On the contrary, you wonder about unknown issues popping up later. So you keep driving the OS (or car) with known and unknown issues and hope you don't break down or have an accident. Makes me wonder: if the programmer has gotten simple things wrong, what about more complex things?

Here is another issue, this one is with pFind. Is it harmful? Probably not. I have seen this error in Windows 3 or 4 times, and if I kept going (in Windows), the memory would eventually run out and the OS would freeze requiring a reboot.

pFind error.JPG (172.37 KiB) Viewed 125 times

[geo_c]

Here is another issue, this one is with pFind. Is it harmful? Probably not. I have seen this error in Windows 3 or 4 times, and if I kept going (in Windows), the memory would eventually run out and the OS would freeze requiring a reboot.
pFind error.JPG

1) What did you do? When the dialog says "searching all files," what drives and/or directories did you search?
2) Why is the dialog being drug around the desktop while this apparently massive search of "all files" is running?
3) What did you do in Windows (which is not a hobby OS and has billions of dollars of devlopment resources) to accomplish the same result?
4) Does it do the same thing on a more limited search, of say /usr/bin?
edit: 5) And what was Windows support reply to your issue ticket?

Perhaps it is a "bug," I don't know (and I'm not going to take time out of my day to test for you) since I don't use pfind really ever, someone else might confirm or clarify.

But it's incumbent upon the reporter to give the pertinent information that applies to the result cited.

[Governor]

Here is another issue, this one is with pFind. Is it harmful? Probably not. I have seen this error in Windows 3 or 4 times, and if I kept going (in Windows), the memory would eventually run out and the OS would freeze requiring a reboot.
pFind error.JPG

1) What did you do? When the dialog says "searching all files," what drives and/or directories did you search?
2) Why is the dialog being drug around the desktop while this apparently massive search of "all files" is running?
3) What did you do in Windows (which is not a hobby OS and has billions of dollars of devlopment resources) to accomplish the same result?
4) Does it do the same thing on a more limited search, of say /usr/bin?
edit: 5) And what was Windows support reply to your issue ticket?

Perhaps it is a "bug," I don't know (and I'm not going to take time out of my day to test for you) since I don't use pfind really ever, someone else might confirm or clarify.

But it's incumbent upon the reporter to give the pertinent information that applies to the result cited.

Search for a string that will take a long time searching. Grab the window with the mouse and drag it around. This is a bug.. But no one cares, so why bother?

[geo_c]

Here is another issue, this one is with pFind. Is it harmful? Probably not. I have seen this error in Windows 3 or 4 times, and if I kept going (in Windows), the memory would eventually run out and the OS would freeze requiring a reboot.
pFind error.JPG

1) What did you do? When the dialog says "searching all files," what drives and/or directories did you search?
2) Why is the dialog being drug around the desktop while this apparently massive search of "all files" is running?
3) What did you do in Windows (which is not a hobby OS and has billions of dollars of devlopment resources) to accomplish the same result?
4) Does it do the same thing on a more limited search, of say /usr/bin?
edit: 5) And what was Windows support reply to your issue ticket?

Perhaps it is a "bug," I don't know (and I'm not going to take time out of my day to test for you) since I don't use pfind really ever, someone else might confirm or clarify.

But it's incumbent upon the reporter to give the pertinent information that applies to the result cited.

Search for a string that will take a long time searching. Grab the window with the mouse and drag it around. This is a bug.. But no one cares, so why bother?

You didn't answer any of the questions