[Bug 39376] Re: Allow hidding of backup files
Bug Watch Updater
39376 at bugs.launchpad.net
Mon Oct 8 14:36:41 UTC 2012
Launchpad has imported 68 comments from the remote bug at
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3212.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment
will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about
Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at
https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2000-05-05T16:19:20+00:00 Dgwatson wrote:
(*** This bug was imported into bugs.kde.org ***)
Package: konqueror
Version: 1.9.2 (KDE Almost 2.0 Alpha)
Severity: wishlist
It would be nice if you could hide backup files (files ending in ~ or
#). This would make working with a large number of files much easier.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2003-04-11T10:19:02+00:00 Andrey Cherepanov wrote:
I need this option too. KOffice generate a large number of annoying backup files (anybody
know how to disable this KOffice behavior?).
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2003-11-10T06:19:29+00:00 Smt-o wrote:
The problem, as I see it, is that there is no standard backful file
suffix, at least in the same sense that dotFile are standard.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2003-11-10T07:13:14+00:00 dvogel wrote:
So why not implement it as a regexp; hide all files that either match or
don't match the regexp. That way I could specify ".+(~|#)", or something
similar.
Then again, we'd make most people happy by hiding just .+~
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-09-15T11:47:03+00:00 Michael-jahn wrote:
*** Bug 79248 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-09-15T11:53:08+00:00 Marcin-kasperski-m wrote:
Bug 79249 suggests creating and applying some common convention for the
backup file names....
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-10-03T23:28:32+00:00 Stephan Binner wrote:
*** Bug 90568 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-01-22T08:38:47+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
I actually hacked the Konqueror/KFileDialog code to do this (except it
had the ability to hide any file matching a glob, not just backups, and
I'll make a patch against CVS when I get around to it.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-02-16T11:31:02+00:00 IceSheep wrote:
I had a similar idea and posted two example screenshots on kde-look.org:
http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=20803
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-02-16T15:01:02+00:00 Sébastien Laoût wrote:
I think it's a good idea too!
Then, I would also be able to hide those hideous ~/evolution/ and ~/tmp/
folders !!!
So, it would be a filter, not regarding only to the filename but also to
the entire path (as I wouldn't want ~/Projects/evolution/ for example).
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-02-16T18:33:19+00:00 Benjamzz wrote:
I vote for it
If it does in a clean way, what should allow to hide
-> files or folders
-> according to full path
-> OR according to the name, with respect of regular expressions (*.tmp etc...)
It could make Highly Incompetents Users (HUI) feel better on their mandrake-like distro without annoying purists.
It could also prevent my mother (she barely understand what's a file) to go and get lost in /usr, /etc, /proc etc...
without renaming all system-related files, starting with a point ...
BUT We have to keep in mind this is dual to the known convention
"starting with a point is a hidden file". Which is hard to apply to
system files ...
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-03-20T05:02:01+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
Created attachment 10208
This is a patch to allow you specify glob patterns for hidden files
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-03-20T05:03:16+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
OK, here is my patch, and AFAIK it works. You can now control what files
are hidden with a list of globs under the [KDE] HiddenFiles key in
kdeglobals, or if that key does not exist (it won't in your case) then
it uses the default ".*". It does some weird things like deprecate the
KFileItem::isDotFile() in favor of a new isHiddenFile() (because it is
now not just dot files) - I hope this does not offend anybody. In my
kdeglobals, for example, I have "HiddenFiles=.*,*~". Note that this
patch only changes what files are hidden; it does not add any GUI
element to configure it, but if that is desired, I will add it as well.
I hope this gets committed as it is my first patch ;-).
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-03-20T05:06:22+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
Oh yeah, one more thing: this patch only deals with file names, it is
not suitable for hiding paths such as /usr. If you want to prevent your
mother from browsing anything except her home dir, look into KIOSK
maybe, I don't know.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-03-23T16:39:35+00:00 IceSheep wrote:
That sounds interesting. But how do I apply it correctly?
The following command (executed in the kdelibs directory with the patch inside) doesn't do anything.
patch -p0 patch.diff
Can anybody help? Thanks!
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-04-11T02:28:45+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
Don't execute it from inside the kdelibs directory. Go one level up
(e.g. the directory that contains the kdelibs directory), and then
execute it. Note: this is more or less a quick hack, it won't
necessarily work everywhere, but it would be good to get some feedback.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-06T19:57:49+00:00 2-nicolasg wrote:
I do not think that patch #10208 is the right way.
First hidden files are hidden files and backup files are backup files. A
user might want to see the hidden files but not the backup files for
example when he tries to edit some of them or on contrary he may only
want backups to recover a backup.
Also I do not know why it is needed to redefine what a backup file is,
as backup files have the mime type application/x-trash .
Have a nice day!
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-07T16:36:49+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
>A user might want to see the hidden files but not the backup files for
example when he tries to edit some of them or on contrary he may only
want backups to recover a backup.<
That's why it's configurable! Use the HiddenFiles= entry in kdeglobals.
For instance, I have HiddenFiles=.*,*~
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-07T17:01:43+00:00 2-nicolasg wrote:
On Sunday 07 August 2005 16:36, Luke Sandell wrote:
(...)
>
> >A user might want to see the hidden files but not the backup files for
> > example when he tries to edit some of them or on contrary he may only
> > want backups to recover a backup.<
>
> That's why it's configurable! Use the HiddenFiles= entry in kdeglobals. For
> instance, I have HiddenFiles=.*,*~
I meant to have such things in Konqueror's menu (in file manager mode). I will
not edit a file for having the backup files for a few miniutes.
Have a nice day!
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-09T02:06:00+00:00 S-kdebug8-h wrote:
>A user might want to see the hidden files but not the backup files for
example when he tries to edit some of them or on contrary he may only
want backups to recover a backup.<
Well, there can only be one definition of a "hidden file." Either we are
going to include backup files or we are not (a nice way this dilemma
could be solved is by just including a dot at the beginning of the
backup file).
What you are talking about is a way to show and hide certain types of
files at certain times. That is a View Filter (see under the Tools
menu), and Konqueror has those as well. Unfortunately they are not very
versatile at this time.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-09T09:00:56+00:00 Peter-s-d wrote:
Is the suggestion that all application should (optionally) save backup
files as "dot whatever tilde"? Or that Tools -> View Filter should be
extended to include "don't show files matching pattern...."? Or both?
Or something else again?
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-09T09:50:02+00:00 Toby Dickenson wrote:
> A user might want to see the hidden files but not the backup files
> for example when he tries to edit some of them or on contrary he
> may only want backups to recover a backup.
There are several places in KDE which already have a 'show hidden files' toggle.... For example File Chooser dialog and KDevelop's file chooser sidebar. I think it is important that whatever mechanism we use for 'hiding' backup files should be toggled by that same control. That is inconsistent with the requirement quoted above.
An alternative design....
How about including a "hidden file" flag in the mime-type definition. Include a checkbox on Konqueror's file association configure page. I personally would check that box for application/x-trash and application/x-python-bytecode.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/21
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-09T12:38:49+00:00 2-nicolasg wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 02:06, Luke Sandell wrote:
[bugs.kde.org quoted mail]
MS Windows has anyway a totally other way of thinking about hidden files and
that is quite different than a file name starting with a dot. That I also a
reason why I would prefer not to mix the two things together.
>
(...)
Have a nice day!
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/22
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-09T14:23:29+00:00 2-nicolasg wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 09:50, Toby Dickenson wrote:
(...)
> > A user might want to see the hidden files but not the backup files
> > for example when he tries to edit some of them or on contrary he
> > may only want backups to recover a backup.
>
> There are several places in KDE which already have a 'show hidden files'
> toggle.... For example File Chooser dialog and KDevelop's file chooser
> sidebar. I think it is important that whatever mechanism we use for
> 'hiding' backup files should be toggled by that same control. That is
> inconsistent with the requirement quoted above.
>
> An alternative design....
> How about including a "hidden file" flag in the mime-type definition.
> Include a checkbox on Konqueror's file association configure page. I
> personally would check that box for application/x-trash and
> application/x-python-bytecode.
Now (independently of this issue) there was a change in KIO to let the KIO
slave control that a file is hidden or not.
That probably means that the isHidden() should not be changed in its meaning.
(And probably the patch does not apply anymore.)
Have a nice day!
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/23
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2005-08-19T19:00:30+00:00 SadEagle wrote:
*** Bug 111101 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-01-17T15:17:36+00:00 Jakob Petsovits wrote:
For the record, I proposed a different mechanism for backup files to get
rid of the clutter in Bug 120313.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2006-12-10T22:06:40+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
I'd like to throw in my vote for Nautilus-style .hidden files, perhaps
by merging the existing Kubuntu patch which adds such to Konqueror and
KDE file dialogs.
While setting up Kubuntu for my brother, I noticed that they had used .hidden to clear out most of his root (I believe it only contained home, media, and usr) and, despite being a very technical person, my first thought after realizing how it was done was "What a great idea." for the following reasons:
1. .hidden can be customized folder-by-folder
2. No effect on my rootly duties since they're done through a terminal window.
3. Already supported by all my GTK+ 2.x apps. One file works for both.
4. Less clutter means less searching as I bounce around the filesystem.
It has it's flaws. For example, it can't be set on a per-application or
per-user basis, but I think those are outweighed by the fact that it's
already supported by GTK+ 2.x and Nautilus.
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/29
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-04-05T08:14:26+00:00 Tommi-tervo wrote:
*** Bug 121195 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-05-07T16:34:21+00:00 Estellnb-8 wrote:
Implementing the proposial at #142091 would probably be the best way to
fix this !!
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/31
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2007-05-07T16:34:49+00:00 Estellnb-8 wrote:
Bug 142091
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/32
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T16:07:54+00:00 FiNeX wrote:
*** Bug 153881 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/35
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T16:09:40+00:00 FiNeX wrote:
Like ppenz suggested to me, this is related to kdelibs. If implemented
it could be used by dolphin (the current file manager).
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/36
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T18:21:40+00:00 David Faure wrote:
Unfortunately, making everything configurable isn't a solution to every
problem; it bloats the configuration dialogs or introduces hidden config
keys which only solve the problem for the 5 users in this report.
I do see the need for a way to hide backup files and other such unwanted
files [but let's not talk about hiding entire directories in this bug
please, that's unrelated].
The purpose of backup files is that users _know_ they are there, to recover a document after a crash or a wrong deletion or overwriting of a document. Therefore they should not be hidden by default, unlike dot files.
So this means a possible solution would be to have "[X] Show backup files" in addition to "[ ] Show hidden files" (separate, because enabled by default).
This brings me back to Peter: what do you think about this? I know you might not like yet-another-menu-item... (and I'm not sure it's the best solution either).
Well I guess another solution is improving the dirfilter plugin, but
then it'll be konqueror-only, no option in dolphin. That's a possibility
though, if Peter prefers to keep Dolphin simpler (less configuration).
Note for comment #1: you can configure koffice so that it puts all
backup files into a single directory, no more pollution of the real user
directories.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T18:31:55+00:00 Peter-penz19 wrote:
@David: I'm not sure honestly speaking about this issue. I don't think
the solution is yet another menu entry "[ ] Show backup files". E. g.
the next request might be "please also allow to hide Amaroks *.m3u
files" or "Digikams *.db" files.
What might a nice solution would be providing a general filter string
per directory. This could be stored inside the .directory entry and
filtered on application side. So we would have a generic solution that
does not only work for backup files. Any thoughts?
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/38
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T19:05:19+00:00 Gerd v. Egidy wrote:
@Peter: if you mean a regex operating on filename (basename) with
"general filter string" this would be a great solution for me, solving
all my needs.
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T19:11:36+00:00 Gravix-v wrote:
filter string sounds good to me; simple and powerful.
there is nothing to stop an interested party from making a simple gui
editor for the filter string in a separate window at a later date that
helps less capable users choose which types of files they want to hide.
that way you can avoid cluttering the main window with checkboxes and
options as desired.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-26T23:53:53+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
Has anyone considered just adding support for obeying the .hidden file
that Nautilus already supports? I think Kubuntu even has a patch for
that.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T01:41:57+00:00 David Bailey wrote:
Some information about the Nautilus .hidden file:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=789684
Another option might be extended attributes so that the fact that the
file is hidden becomes metadata of the file, and moves with the file if
it's moved, for instance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_file_attributes
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T02:41:01+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
Extended attribute hiding does have it's benefits as any Windows user
knows. It IS nice to be able to hide a file without renaming it and, in
the process, confusing any application which depends on it.
However, I'm sure there are arguments against it to. I haven't
considered it, so I'm currently in "either would be fine" mode.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/43
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T02:48:15+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
Aha! One argument I didn't consider (since I use KDE with one or two
GTK+ apps) is that a sane ~/.hidden implementation would be cross-
compatible with Nautilus, thereby reducing hassle for integrators and
any users who, for whatever reason, like to use both Nautilus and
DolphinPart.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T11:31:02+00:00 Benoit Minisini wrote:
That is really something I do not understand: why storing directory view
information inside the directory itself????
It makes only sense when this view is the same for every user reading
the directory. Otherwise, it is a bad design.
"Hidden" files, backup files I don't want to see, icon view, list view,
background color... All these things that define the way the user want
to see a specific directory, should be stored outside of that directory,
in some sort of user-specific database or configuration file.
This mechanism should not prevent of using .directory or .hidden files,
provided that it is clear that these files define the view for all
users.
My two cents.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/45
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T12:32:36+00:00 Gravix-v wrote:
Another issue (as noticed on MacOS X a while back with their .DS_INFO
files) is that they can expose valuable info to an attacker when web or
other types of file servers are improperly configured to serve them
them. When all the metadata is stored in the user's directory and has a
consistent set of permissions this is less likely to happen.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/46
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T15:33:25+00:00 David Bailey wrote:
>From my perspective, I really don't like the store-the-file's-extra-
attributes-in-another-file approach. It's complicated to handle and keep
updated when the files are renamed or moved.
I think the best approach would be two-fold.
1. Use an (xattr) attribute of the file to determine whether its hidden
or not. A user can bring up the individual file properties and set this
attribute. This is a good solution for a file-centric approach that
transfers the attributes with the file when copying to other
disks/systems, etc.
2. Use a regex pattern list ala adblock, both globally-defined for the
system, for example any file starting with a dot, as well as user-
defined for the user, for example I don't want to see any filename~
files. This is a mass-effect approach that is system/OS-centric. The
user configuration can override the system global configuration for
users who don't want their dot-files being hidden.
With #2 implemented, it wouldn't be that hard to add support for
including other files, if they exist, such as a .hidden file. For
example: "#include ~/.hidden". However, I'd like to re-emphasize keeping
a separate list of individual files is not an elegant way to do this. It
would simply be included for compatibility reasons.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/47
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T17:57:53+00:00 Gerd v. Egidy wrote:
I agree with gambas: hidden or not hidden is not something you want to
have per file or per directory but it is per view. Each user can decide
which view he wants to use where, even two different views in different
windows at once.
So I think it makes sense to store a filter regex in a central,
application specific configuration. Konqueror e.g. should store the
filter regex in its "view profile" to make it easy to switch between
views.
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/48
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-27T22:18:24+00:00 David Bailey wrote:
I fail to see the purpose of saying, it's okay if a file or folder is
hidden if it has a dot in front of it, but otherwise, it's a bad thing.
All the leading dot is in the Linux context is a file attribute that has
the side-effect of changing the file name. This is very similar to
Windows file extensions. Changing the name, such as ending in .txt or
.exe, changes the file type. Frankly, the fact that you can't configure
this leading-dot=hidden-file/folder seems to exude UNIX-quirkishness to
me. (Yes, I made up a word.)
Frankly, I think developers or system administrators should have the
option of hiding individual files or directories without leading periods
in the filenames if they want them hidden. Of course, users should also
be able to view hidden files or folders if they choose. If we're in the
business of hiding ad-hoc files or directories, it makes sense that that
metadata be stored in an extended attribute (xattr) rather than in a
separate file. This is similar to if I add a dot in front of a file name
and move it, I don't have to update a configuration file somewhere to
keep it hidden.
My #2 sounds very similar to your ideas Gerd/Gambas, except that there
would be two levels. One which is a system-wide filter list, which BTW
already exists as a de facto standard through leading-dot-filename
=hidden-file/folder notation. This could be implemented as a global
configuration file which empowers the system administrator at the
expense of the user, or perhaps a set of default user settings. (i.e.-
This is what most users want hidden, but you can change this.) The
latter approach leaves the user in charge but makes it hard for the
system administrator to role out a new file-hiding standard. This may be
a good thing or not depending on your perspective.
Finally you would certainly also have a per-user configuration set of
filters that could work as a view as you stated Gerd.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/49
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T00:26:29+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
My main worry with a filter regex is that it could get unwieldy very
quickly and, depending on how it's implemented, could be useless anyway.
For example:
.+(~|#|\.bak)|/home/ssokolow/StepMania
Imagine how that would look as the number of special-case files like
~/StepMania grew. As for "useless", it's utility depends on being able
to match against the entire path... which is rather unlikely in a well-
designed system.
Hence why I think that, if there is a filter regex, it should be in
addition to something based around xattrs or .hidden. I do agree that,
if it's going to be "done right", xattrs are the way to go. However,
keep in mind that per-view hiding is outside the scope of the .hidden
design since it's basically a way to duplicate Windows' familiar "Hide a
file without renaming it" ability.
While I do agree that renaming files to mark them hidden is a quirky
hack and as bad as using extensions to identify files, I don't like the
idea of a system-wide filter list at the expense of the user. I envision
all sorts of problems because applications could start basing their
filenames on the most popular hiding regexes, resulting in confusion for
users with non-default ones. Therefore, I think it'd be best if anything
global was an /etc/skel-ish default rather than being an actual runtime-
checked config setting.
In short, I suggest this:
- Per-user filter regex (perhaps stored in a DE-independent /etc/skel-able file)
- System-wide xattr-based hidden file attribute (Possibly with a .hidden compatibility mode)
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T01:53:16+00:00 David Faure wrote:
Well it doesn't have to be -one- regex, consider that we could have a configurable list of hidden files patterns.
(Most users know patterns like *.bak more than real regexps like .*\.bak)
So a solution could indeed be a configurable list of patterns, like .*, *~, *#, *.bak, *.db, *.m3u (the comma is just
for this mail; graphically it would appear like a list box with 6 items and add/remove buttons).
I guess it solves my use case of "using a backup file even though it's usually hidden", since the user could
simply toggle "Show Hidden Files" temporarily for this.
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/51
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T11:07:24+00:00 Toby Dickenson wrote:
The "configurable list of patterns" idea has nearly come full circle to
my suggestion in comment #21 that it be based on mime types.
application/x-trash ("Backup Files") already comes with a fairly long
list of patterns including *~ and *.bak
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T12:49:40+00:00 Peter-s-d wrote:
The more that I think about this the less I like it.
Should hiding be an operating system thing, a filing system thing, an
installation thing, a (creating) application thing, a (viewing)
application thing, a view thing, or a user thing? Or some evil
combination of the above? We could have a hierarchy of configurations.
>:-> There must be a dozen places that you can insert "vi" options.
Option A)
"ls" already has "-a" and "-A" options. Let's just badger all application maintainers to create dotted backup files.
Option B)
Keep the current drop down menu "View". Replace, "Show hidden files" with a sub menu, "hide files =>" and have a check box for each of; dot files, bak files, tllde files, [[every other daft convention that you can think of]] and finally a check box for a user's regex expression. The default should be to have "dot files" checked and all others unchecked.
Just my 2 cents worth. ;-)
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/53
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T14:35:43+00:00 Dean Serenevy wrote:
Mostly in response to #48: Presenting a view of the filesystem that
facilitates easy file management is the role of a file manager. A
flexible mechanism to ignore a particular set of files helps out in this
ares considerably. Whenever I launch konqueror to organize a directory I
must first delete all of the stupid files (for me this is more than just
backups, LaTeX generates a large number of auxiliary files that just
clutter up the view). Disk is cheap, cleaning out these auto-generated
files every time I want to organize my content is annoying and gets in
the way of doing actual work.
To me, both supporting the existing .hidden approach and a configurable
list of globally applied "backup" patterns (or globs) [I would vote for
a separate "[X] Show backup files" menu item, but would be nearly as
satisfied if they were all lumped together as "hidden" files] meet an
appropriate expectation level for power users and could be made
sufficiently obscure to avoid annoying individuals who do not want this
feature. A general "filter contexts" submenu would be a nice general
solution, but that is probably over the top and would get in the way of
users who are not interested in using it so I am not pushing for that.
In summary: Several of the commenters here were interested in hiding
non-backup files. Even if all application developers could be convinced
to make their backup files dotfiles, this bug would not be fully
resolved since that would not cover all of the desired usage patterns.
It is useful and appropriate for a file manager to implement a feature
that cleans up the user's view of the filesystem. Perhaps a better title
for this bug is "Option to hide clutter as well as dotfiles".
Thanks for listening to my rant.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/54
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T18:29:54+00:00 David Bailey wrote:
I'm with Stephen on his conclusions and with David Faure on the point
that you don't want a single regex, but a list of regex expressions.
I also like Toby's idea that we could store the hidden file regex list
as part of the file-type/mime-types list. What's also good about this
approach is that it is defined at the system level, but users can
customize, so it empowers the users by getting around the idea of users
being at the developers leading-dot preference whims.
So that would mean you could right-click on the file, get the properties
of any file you have rights to, and hide (xattr) it.
Or, you could right-click a file, select the file type definition, and
check a box to hide all files of that particular type. You could also
create a new file type to cover any special "filename pattern" or regex
and hide those as well.
The first way is a file-by-file system approach that is portable,
between filesystems supporting xattrs. The second way is a user
preference approach.
The only downside is that you don't get the flexibility of having
multiple views that you could quickly switch between to hide different
sets of files. Can anyone think of why that would be a desired function?
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-06-28T19:15:28+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
On a well-organized system, I can't really think of a clear benefit to
multiple saved views. Perhaps as a way to switch between viewing
different types of files in a source tree, but that tends to be easily
done using the filter box.
The main benefit I can think of would be for organizing an "unsorted
junk" folder full of stuff that you let build up... but even then,
setting "sort by type" and/or using the filter box (possibly with a
split view) seem to solve the problem perfectly well.
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2008-12-31T02:21:04+00:00 Gsking1-5 wrote:
I'm trying out kde4.2beta2 and like the implementation in the desktop
folder > folder view settings > filter > hide files matching.... Very
useful. Something like this in dolphin would be great.
Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-01-09T04:43:16+00:00 Chris Y. wrote:
Another possibility could be that, like KOffice, backup files could be
optionally rerouted to a set folder.
Thanks for pointing the folder view hide files thing out, Geoff. I too
hope that functionality will come to Dolphin.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/61
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-04-09T19:03:06+00:00 Angel Blue01 wrote:
Couldn't this be resolved with .hidden files per this issue:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64740 ?
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/62
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-04-09T20:02:19+00:00 Kde-bugzilla-2 wrote:
.hidden files are useful, but they don't let you say "Hide files which
match this pattern ANYWHERE ON THE FILESYSTEM". (You'd need to create
and maintain a .hidden file for every directory on your system)
This is about a global pattern ignore list. .hidden files are directory-
local pattern ignore lists.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-04-10T14:15:18+00:00 David Bailey wrote:
Regarding my earlier comments in #50, of course, the user would have an
option in the interface to "show all hidden files", and thusly switch
between the view that hides the files marked (xattr) as hidden, and the
file types (mime) option which are hidden.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/64
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-06-10T01:35:21+00:00 Christoph-maxiom wrote:
*** Bug 195767 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/65
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-07-29T23:59:07+00:00 FiNeX wrote:
*** Bug 201678 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/66
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2009-08-20T21:43:03+00:00 Christoph-maxiom wrote:
*** Bug 204428 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/67
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2010-07-13T04:29:07+00:00 AaronPeterson wrote:
That is a good point,
Applications create backup files so that users can find them.
Backup files clutter the enviornment for users.
Regarding the argument: yet-another-menu-item ... [ to twiddle a setting few people care about]
We don't need a menu option, IF there is a global kde settings editor, like firefox's about:config. Is there such a thing? and can we make it?
.hidden file compatibility with gnome would be nice. Does this work by
having a list of files in it?
Extended attributes support would be nice,
regular expression method to hide files would be nice too (we have a
filter to SHOW files,, why not have a negative filter too?)
Basically, lets just get the features and not worry about the GUI
configuration, it should be handled in a glob of other configuration
info.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/69
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2010-07-13T16:25:46+00:00 Todd R wrote:
I think the last thing we want is a hidden config options editor like
about:config, gnome settings, or regedit. I think it a bad approach and
once we set the precedent we will end up with a lot of untested,
unstable, hard to find, and hard to understand options (like we have in
all of those cases). Hidden options should be hidden only because they
are known to be incomplete, unstable, working poorly, or no one has
found a good place for them yet. Options that are intended for people
to use normally should be properly organized.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2010-07-25T08:33:55+00:00 AaronPeterson wrote:
A general, configurable, with memory of configuration(for context (which
folder), application, and global settings) File hiding filter.
If I get a build environment up, I'll start playing with your patch.
(need somebody in Seattle area who can figure out how to make kdesrc-
build to work)
===
Then these should be properly tested options only, It can't hurt to
have another way to do stuff.
It works for firefox--hidden was the wrong word. --
Less floofy --mostly text-- managed-- method to configure options that
people would otherwise have to search tab by tab to find.
This about:config like configuration method would allow us to have
options that power users need, and make it so that people don't file
20 million feature requests for the same feature--they can find
it--problem solved once and for all.
So, In short, I agree fully that proper organization is important, and
a column in the table could explain what it does, and there should be
error checking on these configs. I fould find this easier to use than
tabs or editing config files. Telling people to edit config files is
much worse than telling them to edit the list view of the options.
Starting to feel bad about continuing here, Will file new request.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/71
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2010-11-02T10:52:57+00:00 NickElliott wrote:
I'd like to add my support for the original request (over 10 years old
now - impressive!).
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/72
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2011-02-01T12:05:18+00:00 flying sheep wrote:
i want a glob list of file/folder names and paths to hide.
this way i can hide the stupid folder in my home directory, whose path
is hardcoded in some stupid application (let’s call it appX), and this
way i can hide all backup files, no matter where they are.
the file would then look like this:
~/appX
*~
*.backup
*.bak
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/73
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2011-02-23T23:35:01+00:00 Ricardo Graça wrote:
This is the oldest bug/wish I've cast my vote on :D Fortunately I really
like History! I came here after finding that there is no way in dolphin
to hide those annoying (but usefull) backup files that keep poping up
all over the place.
PS: Hello visitor from the future ;)
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/74
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2011-12-14T13:18:37+00:00 Ignaciogp80 wrote:
I too ended up here after looking for a way to do this.
A user here http://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=82350 gives a
workaround:
Settings -> Configure Kate... -> Open/Save -> Advanced -> add "." (dot)
to "Prefix" under "Backup on Save".
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2012-04-24T08:01:16+00:00 Vascom wrote:
Very bad bug.
Reply at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde4libs/+bug/39376/comments/77
** Bug watch added: KDE Bug Tracking System #64740
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64740
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/39376
Title:
Allow hidding of backup files
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/kde-baseapps/+bug/39376/+subscriptions
More information about the kubuntu-bugs
mailing list