Copy Fast - Right click option
Pardon my stupid question, but why not just highlight the files you want to copy, then drag them to the folder where you want them? This works well in ROX, except the transfer is not always done in the alphanumerical order of the file names, which causes problems with mp3 players, but nowhere else that I'm aware of.
The visual drag-and-drop method has the advantage of reducing the likelihood of mistakes caused by fat fingered typing, at least for me.
The visual drag-and-drop method has the advantage of reducing the likelihood of mistakes caused by fat fingered typing, at least for me.
- MochiMoppel
- Posts: 2084
- Joined: Wed 26 Jan 2011, 09:06
- Location: Japan
Actually a good question, which keeps me wondering why you use a tool like CopyFast? Or is your copy order problem the only reason to use it? I've seen you mentioning this problems a couple of times, but I was never able to reproduce it. I use a mp3 player myself which insists on playing tracks in the copy order, not alphabetical order (the company regarded this as a bug and offered a patch, which I will never ever install since the copy order makes so much more sense), but I had never problems to copy in the order I choose. Maybe you can revive your still unsolved ancient post and give a reproducable example.Flash wrote:Pardon my stupid question, but why not just highlight the files you want to copy, then drag them to the folder where you want them?
Typing? Where do you see typing involved in any of the other methods?The visual drag-and-drop method has the advantage of reducing the likelihood of mistakes caused by fat fingered typing
Really, I thought it was a partition like sda5? Anyhow, you can't copy to the root directory of /mnt/home (frugal install with save file) or /initrd/mnt/dev_ro2 or sda5 or the root directory of any other partition for that matter with SFS's application. And yes, I do actually copy to the root directory of a partition often (not hard to believe at all).MochiMoppel wrote:/mnt/sda1 is a folder and you can copy to it. If you need to copy to the very bottom of your filesystem ("/") and you need this often (really hard to believe!), you could create a symlink to it and then copy to the symlink:nic007 wrote:Files can not be copied to the root of a partition, has to be to a folder (in other words you can't copy to sda1 for example needs to be sda1/downloads or whatever). If that can be sorted, it will work perfectly.You can't change this limitation of SFR's application without changing the whole application.Code: Select all
ln -s / /HERE
- MochiMoppel
- Posts: 2084
- Joined: Wed 26 Jan 2011, 09:06
- Location: Japan
Well, I mean the root of a partition, you can't with SFR's application. / (top filesystem), /root or root of any partition = can't copy to with SFR's application. You seem to selectively quote parts without comprehending the full paragraph (that's dangerous and could lead to all sorts of wrong answers) Why do you reckon sda1 or sda5 are folders and not partitions? StrangeMochiMoppel wrote:I cannic007 wrote:Anyhow, you can't copy to the root directory of /mnt/homeI didn't say root directory of a partiton, I said root directory of the whole filesystem ("/").I do actually copy to the root directory of a partition often (not hard to believe at all).
- neerajkolte
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Mon 10 Feb 2014, 07:05
- Location: Pune, India.
I think he just meant Everything is a file on Linux.nic007 wrote:Why do you reckon sda1 or sda5 are folders and not partitions? Strange
I don't know why SFR's app doesn't copy to root of partition. I haven't used it.
But logic says, once mounted a partition is just another folder.
Hope I am right (I am still learning Linux).
Thanks.
- Neeraj.
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson
“We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.â€
- Amara’s Law.
- Ken Thompson
“We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.â€
- Amara’s Law.
Ok, I feel obliged to sort things out.
MochiMoppel is right - with MultiCopyPaste you can paste stuff into the root of any partition.
The only inaccessible place if the root of the entire filesystem (/).
An example:
Now simply click the up arrow, which will bring you to the parent (/mnt) directory.
At this point you can right-click home symlink and choose "Multi-Paste" action.
The same goes to other partitions like sda1, sdc5 etc.
To recap: if you need to copy something into the directory where you currently in, just move one level up (up arrow) and right-click that directory.
Hope it's clearer now...
PS. @Don: sorry for kinda hijacking your thread.
Greetings!
MochiMoppel is right - with MultiCopyPaste you can paste stuff into the root of any partition.
The only inaccessible place if the root of the entire filesystem (/).
An example:
Let's say you have ROX-Filer's window already opened in /mnt/home.nic007 wrote:Anyhow, you can't copy to the root directory of /mnt/home
Now simply click the up arrow, which will bring you to the parent (/mnt) directory.
At this point you can right-click home symlink and choose "Multi-Paste" action.
The same goes to other partitions like sda1, sdc5 etc.
To recap: if you need to copy something into the directory where you currently in, just move one level up (up arrow) and right-click that directory.
Hope it's clearer now...
PS. @Don: sorry for kinda hijacking your thread.
Greetings!
[color=red][size=75][O]bdurate [R]ules [D]estroy [E]nthusiastic [R]ebels => [C]reative [H]umans [A]lways [O]pen [S]ource[/size][/color]
[b][color=green]Omnia mea mecum porto.[/color][/b]
[b][color=green]Omnia mea mecum porto.[/color][/b]
Actually, yes. Drag-and-drop in ROX works fine for everything else. Sorry it took so long to reply. I was busy.MochiMoppel wrote:Actually a good question, which keeps me wondering why you use a tool like CopyFast? Or is your copy order problem the only reason to use it?Flash wrote:Pardon my stupid question, but why not just highlight the files you want to copy, then drag them to the folder where you want them?
Well there you go then, you know what I mean. However I don't understand what you meant by that last sentence. How do you choose the copy order?I've seen you mentioning this problems a couple of times, but I was never able to reproduce it. I use a mp3 player myself which insists on playing tracks in the copy order, not alphabetical order (the company regarded this as a bug and offered a patch, which I will never ever install since the copy order makes so much more sense), but I had never problems to copy in the order I choose.
Thanks for reminding me about that thread.Maybe you can revive your still unsolved ancient post and give a reproducible example.
If you have an mp3 player that plays files in the order they were loaded, then all you have to do is find a folder that contains a large number of mp3 files numbered in sequential order (at least a hundred I would guess, though I've never tried to find the fewest number that will cause the problem) and drag it into the mp3 player, in ROX. Pay close attention to the order in which ROX transfers the files and you will probably see that it does not follow their number sequence from first to last.
Using a command-line program, I have to type in paths, directory names, etc. Also, if those directory names contain spaces, I have to remember to deal with that. It's slow, tedious work and I often make mistakes. Point-and-click or drag-and-drop, where feasible, is way more accurate for me.Typing? Where do you see typing involved in any of the other methods?The visual drag-and-drop method has the advantage of reducing the likelihood of mistakes caused by fat fingered typing
- MochiMoppel
- Posts: 2084
- Joined: Wed 26 Jan 2011, 09:06
- Location: Japan
For normal files this should be obvious: I copy them in the order I require. If the ROX sort order is what I need, I select all and copy them over, if not, then I have to copy one by one. But I assume that you refer to folders. To make sure that the folder and its content is copied in a specific order, I have to make sure the files were written to the folder in the desired order.Flash wrote: I don't understand what you meant by that last sentence. How do you choose the copy order?
This I can't confirm. The important information in your explanation is missing: How were the files ordered in the source folder? You can find out with ls -fl <folderpath> command. This gives you the order of files on the disk. I have tested with 250 files. Copied the folders around in Puppy, copied them to a FAT partion, copied between FAT partions...Result: The file order in the folder never changed. Input = output. No mix-up after 100 files or similar spooky things.If you have an mp3 player that plays files in the order they were loaded, then all you have to do is find a folder that contains a large number of mp3 files numbered in sequential order (at least a hundred I would guess, though I've never tried to find the fewest number that will cause the problem) and drag it into the mp3 player, in ROX. Pay close attention to the order in which ROX transfers the files and you will probably see that it does not follow their number sequence from first to last.
When you copy a folder which contains files with sequential names, you can't expect that the copy program copies the content of the folder in alphabetical order. In fact the program doesn't care about names, dates or any other metadata of the files, it simply copies in the order it find the files on disk. For copying in alphabetical order it would have to run a pre-check and only then start the copy process - this is what rsync is doing. Unfortunately I must say, because my mp3 files are named <artist>-<title> and tracks within albums are sorted by file creation date and were originally copied to the folder in this order. The last thing I want is a copy tool like rsync to change this order.
Why yes, I can. In fact, I expect ROX's copy program to copy files in the order that ROX displays the files. For ROX to copy them in any other order when I drag and drop them is unexpected behavior.MochiMoppel wrote:...When you copy a folder which contains files with sequential names, you can't expect that the copy program copies the content of the folder in alphabetical order...
Maybe my problem is caused by the fact that I'm not copying from a hard disk, but from a USB flash drive. I don't even have a hard disk drive in my computer. Who knows what the controller in a USB flash drive does with the files it's recording....In fact the program doesn't care about names, dates or any other metadata of the files, it simply copies in the order it find the files on disk...
Then that must be what I inadvertently did by clicking ROX's first column order, as I believe I described in the first post in the old thread you mentioned....For copying in alphabetical order it would have to run a pre-check and only then start the copy process - this is what rsync is doing...
- MochiMoppel
- Posts: 2084
- Joined: Wed 26 Jan 2011, 09:06
- Location: Japan
Yes, and I never challenged this. It copies files which it displays in the order it displays them (you confirmed this in your other thread), but there is no rule for the files it does not display. i.e. all the files and subfolders contained in a folder.Flash wrote:I expect ROX's copy program to copy files in the order that ROX displays the files. For ROX to copy them in any other order when I drag and drop them is unexpected behavior.
Maybe it's clearer with a simple example. Go to /root and sort by name. Now select the folder .local and the 2 regular files .bashrc and .Xdefaults. You now have 3 files selected. When you drag these files to a target folder ROX calls the cp command and passes a command line which may look like this:
cp -a /root/.local /root/.bashrc /root/.Xdefaults /Targetfolder
The cp command will copy from left to right, which is the order you saw in ROX and is probably what you want, but cp has no idea that you pulled the files from a sorted ROX display, it has no idea that .local followed by .bash is considered an ascending order in ROX, it has no idea that this is the result of a sort by name and not of a sort by size - in which case you would expect the contents of .local copied in size order?. There is no way ROX can instruct cp to copy the contents of the folder .local in a particular order. Everything beyond the order of the 3 files you see in the command line is decided by cp and the most efficient copy algorithm and not by you or me or anyone else, not even by ROX
new version 2.3 - new German translation added
5 languages now supported.
Automatically lists Windows share folder (see image below)
Some notes: Fat 32 disk doesn't support some characters such as colon :
therefore the file won't copy. You don't get a warning of this problem.
Also linux links aren't supported in fat32 and ntfs partitions so if a folder with
some links is copied to a windows partition an error is reported in rsync log window.
However the other files will transfer.
5 languages now supported.
Automatically lists Windows share folder (see image below)
Some notes: Fat 32 disk doesn't support some characters such as colon :
therefore the file won't copy. You don't get a warning of this problem.
Also linux links aren't supported in fat32 and ntfs partitions so if a folder with
some links is copied to a windows partition an error is reported in rsync log window.
However the other files will transfer.
- LazY Puppy
- Posts: 1934
- Joined: Fri 21 Nov 2014, 18:14
- Location: Germany
Entering Copy AND Fast into the search field will find the topic.
RSH
"you only wanted to work your Puppies in German", "you are a separatist in that you want Germany to secede from Europe" (musher0) :lol:
No, but I gave my old drum kit away for free to a music store collecting instruments for refugees! :wink:
"you only wanted to work your Puppies in German", "you are a separatist in that you want Germany to secede from Europe" (musher0) :lol:
No, but I gave my old drum kit away for free to a music store collecting instruments for refugees! :wink:
- MochiMoppel
- Posts: 2084
- Joined: Wed 26 Jan 2011, 09:06
- Location: Japan
That's why it is called "Search" and not "Find"Flash wrote:When I enter Copy Fast in the Forum Search, it never finds this thread.
The forum search is a constant source of joy and surprises. Let's see:
copy fast , All posts: no match (should match hundreds of posts)
copy fast , 1 year only: 201 matches
copyfast , All posts: 15 matches, "Copy Fast" is second. Best result! But: Nowhere is it written as one word "copyfast"
copyfast , 1 year only: no match
copy AND fast , All posts: 14 matches, "Copy Fast" is seventh
copy AND fast , 1 year only: 28 matches, "Copy Fast" is third
copy OR fast , All posts: 29 matches, "Copy Fast" is not included
copy OR fast , 1 year only: 201 matches (apparently same as above 'copy fast')
Google search puppy linux "copy fast": "Copy Fast" is first match!
version 2.5
Version 2.5
Added the icon to be sure it appears
/mnt/home will appear if possible
more open office documents should have a right click menu item
___________________________________
There is also a fatdog64 710 version available...
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 020#973020
_______________________________________