(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

When using ROX for "copy"

What is the proper Usage of "Newer" option
versus
What is the proper Usage of "Ignore Older" option

...

The "Newer" option will overwrite an existing file in the destination without prompting if the file you are copying is newer, and the "Ignore Older" option will skip copying files that are older than an existing destination file without asking if you want to overwrite it.

Both of these options will only apply to the remaining files in the group you are copying, you will still have to choose what to do with the file that brought up the copy dialogue.

If you want to change the default settings of these options, they can be found in the "Action windows" section of the Options dialogue.

woodenshoe-wi wrote:The "Newer" option will overwrite an existing file in the destination without prompting if the file you are copying is newer, and the "Ignore Older" option will skip copying files that are older than an existing destination file without asking if you want to overwrite it.

Both of these options will only apply to the remaining files in the group you are copying, you will still have to choose what to do with the file that brought up the copy dialogue.

If you want to change the default settings of these options, they can be found in the "Action windows" section of the Options dialogue.

Thanks.
In our mind, "Newer" and "Older" seem to do the same thing.
In fact, why would I not choose "both" ?
So, we will do some testing between both, and then examine the results.

"woodenshoe-wi" is an imaginative name.

Thanks for the post.

I made some testings on the new FossaPup64.
This has a Rox filer installed without all that great new additions.
It even won't merge directories automated anymore.
On each directory I have to hit Enter or clicking Ok.
Even the Still option activated doesn't change this behavior.
This is just like the older Rox filers like they were in Lucid Puppy.

hi woodenshoe-wi,

i have posted an issue at woofce that may have been missed https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/r ... r/issues/3

Apparently I wasn’t "watching" the puppylinux-woof-CE/rox-filer repo, so I didn’t get a notification. That should be fixed now.

I downloaded fossapup64-9.0.2.iso and installed rox-filer-17w from http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/pe ... mmon64.pet

Is there something in particular that I have to do to get the problem to show up? I am using a laptop, but tapping on directories seems to be working normally.

Jamesbond has patches that are applied to the Jun7 rox-filer to get the version for FatDog, they might fix the problem with the drive icons.

I wanted my version of rox-filer to compile even in the retro pups, but if you are building based on fossa there should be no reason why you can’t use the Jun7 version plus patches.

I have submitted pull requests to Jun7 in the past, and Jun7 even merged some changes that I didn’t know how to integrate into the newer code. There shouldn’t be any special features in my version that aren’t in Jun7’s version, just my version is meant to still compile in older distros.

I had been working on icon auto placement improvements that I don’t think are in Jun7’s version, but I don’t think that they actually got integrated into woof-CE. FatDog has a patch that implements something similar, so I want to change it again.