Request: overwrite option when renaming a file

[fgagnon]

@ trying to convince -
Not really, Ian. Just sharing what I do and (usually) why, in case it might be useful to folks.  

nikos,
(getting back on topic ...)
Back a few posts you didn't respond to narayan's Q. about what to put in the next edition of the User Manual.  :twisted:

[wasker]

Ouch. I would definitely not want x2 to look a popinjay like that copier software.

[nikos]

well, keep them ideas coming, and if one is actually simpler than the problem you are trying to combat here i'll think about it!

[Ian]

fgagnon: "Just sharing.."
But, fgagnon. If someone use your shared info and find it useful, I'm sure you would be glad, because of many reasons. In other words, unconsciously, you were trying to convince me. lol, just joking, you know how someone doesn't like to be wrong.
Anyway, thanks for sharing the info, I find it really helpful.

wasker: "..look a popinjay .."
I'm not really sure what popinjay is. But, that copier software has all the needed things in its transfer window. Without it, user would need to do additional actions just to change the settings. The idea could be useful to use (not bloated & improved productivity).
I take it, you have different opinion?

[BRX]

Ian,
The Robust Transfer F5/F6 functions are designed for copying/moving files robustly. [/i]

As I recall it's default that there's no robust move with F6 if the target is on the same partition.

This is good of course and I personally don't want it in another way since the speed advantage of using the "windows move" on the same partition is just to big.

But, Nikos, could you consider for the same reason an option for copy on the same partition with F5 which creates hardlinks instead of physical copies on the same partition?

I'd very much like that.

[snakebyte]

But, Nikos, could you consider for the same reason an option for copy on the same partition with F5 which creates hardlinks instead of physical copies on the same partition?

+1

[narayan]

Fred-

But it gets tricky here: the robust rename feature needs to assign a temporary unambiguous name (in the background) to the newly promoted CFBR before renaming the first CFBR.

I am not sure where/why this would be needed, but a (long) random number for temporary filename would serve. x2 would also have to suppress its "are you sure? Y/N" response.

With that, the two-field window looks simple enough to me.

If that looks complicated, allow only one file to be renamed.

[fgagnon]

@ the two-field window -

Yes, I like Ian's idea.  Clearly simpler than our machinations or my currently recurring five-step process.   Furthermore...

if one is actually simpler than the problem you are trying to combat here i'll think about it!

[pschroeter]

We can’t Windows allow two files to have the same name? Two files with the same name aren’t going to be identical in any other characteristic (creation date, file size, ect). I think Windows should allow files to have the same names, but have a setting that says that when files have the same name use Creation Date to distinguish them, and then maybe even append the creation date and time in gray (ghost writing that is an un-editable part of the name) to the end of the name.

I just want two editable name fields added to the Confirm File Replace dialog.

[FrizzleFry]

What filesystems do you know about that allow files with the same name in the same folder. I can't think of any.

The VAX filesystem does allow previous versions of files but it appends a counter to the older copies.

[Ian]

I don't think same name in a folder is possible at all in Windows. All file executing, processing and command prompt would need additional syntax only to point a specific file, it could mean more work and confusion. Except, there is a certain rule, ex: if there are 2 same names.. use the newest one by default.

Regarding robust transfer. With it, I realized that I can not make a copy or duplicate a file. Normally, in Explorer, if I copy and paste a file in the same dir, it will create a duplicate of the file with added name "Copy of ...".
Robust transfer gives me warning, and it gives me 2 options  (ok and cancel), that I think, are not necessary needed as both give the same result. Maybe put it on status bar for less click. So, suggestion: enable user to make file duplicate by using copy-paste.
That's it for now, hope Nikos will think about it.

[fgagnon]

before you start the transfer, set Rename target
(under options in the Existing objects overwrite area)
A sequential number will be appended to files with name conflicts.

[Ian]

I'm not sure, but it didn't work.
First, I click on a file and press F5. Then I click options and check the "Rename target", then press ok.
After that, I click "Here" and set it to the same folder as the file I want to duplicate. After press copy, it still shows error.

Then I tried again, the option is set to (last used), the "Rename target" is still checked. But pressing copy still gives error message. Of course, the normal copy and paste shows the same error.
I must have missed something here.

[fgagnon]

I cannot duplicate that ...
unless ...
the target folder is the same as the source folder.  :shock:

Robust transfer only works for source and destination folders being different.  
To make microsoft-style copies in the same folder, use Ctrl+c, Ctrl+v assuming you have not set that to paste robustly.  And if you have, you can still get MS-style copies by r-drag and release in same folder.  

[Ian]

Thanks for the confirmation, fgagnon.
I cannot use r-drag, my r-drag is set for scroll++. Scroll++ is a program to scroll horizontal or vertical only by r-drag.

So, my only hope is for Nikos to make improved robust transfer.
But, somehow I feel very pessimist about this. I guess, eventually I would turn off the robust transfer.