12:56 p.m.
Maybe the problem is in KDE. Sometimes ctrl-c works; sometimes it
does not. Sometimes highlight->right-click->copy works.
But the biggest problem is with paste. ctrl-v never works.
Shift-insert works but I never know what it will paste. Similarly,
the middle button of my mouse works but I never know what I will get
and it is different from the results of shift-insert.
So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether shift-insert
or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
neither works properly.
Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
that is extremely frustrating at times.
--
Our DNSRBL - Eliminate Spam: http://www.TQMcube.com
Multi-RBL Check: http://www.TQMcube.com/rblcheck.php
The Dirty Dozen Spammiest Ranges: http://tqmcube.com/dirty12.php
1:13 p.m.
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 13:56 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether
shift-insert
or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
neither works properly.
Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
that is extremely frustrating at times.
Middle-mouse should paste what is currently highlighted (without
needing an extra copy step), right-mouse/paste or the keyboard
equivalent should paste whatever you last right-mouse/copied.
Usually application menu edit/copy edit/paste are the same
as the right-mouse versions but sometimes they go their own way.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
2:23 p.m.
On Tue, 30 May 2006 13:13:12 -0500, Les Mikesell
<lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> opined:
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 13:56 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
> So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether
> shift-insert or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut
> text. Frequently, neither works properly.
>
> Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor
> annoyances that is extremely frustrating at times.
Middle-mouse should paste what is currently highlighted (without
needing an extra copy step), right-mouse/paste or the keyboard
equivalent should paste whatever you last right-mouse/copied.
Usually application menu edit/copy edit/paste are the same
as the right-mouse versions but sometimes they go their own way.
That's actually a huge help. I have been highlighting + ctrl-c and
THAT is what creates the problem.
Thanks MUCH!
--
Our DNSRBL - Eliminate Spam: http://www.TQMcube.com
Multi-RBL Check: http://www.TQMcube.com/rblcheck.php
The Dirty Dozen Spammiest Ranges: http://tqmcube.com/dirty12.php
1:18 p.m.
On Tue, 30 May 2006 13:56:44 -0400 David Cary Hart <Fedora(a)TQMcube.com> wrote:
Maybe the problem is in KDE. Sometimes ctrl-c works; sometimes it
does not. Sometimes highlight->right-click->copy works.
But the biggest problem is with paste. ctrl-v never works.
Shift-insert works but I never know what it will paste. Similarly,
the middle button of my mouse works but I never know what I will get
and it is different from the results of shift-insert.
So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether shift-insert
or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
neither works properly.
Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
that is extremely frustrating at times.
David,
I am using Gnome and I am not having any problems with those keyboard shortcuts.
Hope that helps.
I would try to login to Gnome and see if it works.
Will
3:50 p.m.
On Tuesday 30 May 2006 10:56, David Cary Hart wrote:
Maybe the problem is in KDE. Sometimes ctrl-c works; sometimes it
does not. Sometimes highlight->right-click->copy works.
But the biggest problem is with paste. ctrl-v never works.
Shift-insert works but I never know what it will paste. Similarly,
the middle button of my mouse works but I never know what I will get
and it is different from the results of shift-insert.
Anything you highlight will be copied into the clipboard. Shift-insert will
paste the last thing you selected from the clipboard. That means you have to
look at the clipboard and select it. This works great for copying a URL from
an email in kmail into Firefox in a different desktop.
The standard ctrl-c, ctrl-v and ctrl-x work fine within most KDE programs but
not all; it also works fine in Abiword.
HTH,
Tom
So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether
shift-insert
or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
neither works properly.
Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
that is extremely frustrating at times.
--
Tom Taylor
Linux user #263467
Federal Way, WA
7:34 a.m.
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 13:56 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether
shift-insert
or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
neither works properly.
Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
that is extremely frustrating at times.
Using Oracle and Netscape we had to use Abiword in-between to cut &
paste at all. Copy from Netscape, paste to Abiword, copy from Abiword,
paste to Oracle. What a royal pain. It was explained to me, but I have
forgotten the reason. Linux will never make it to Joe Lunchbucket's
computer until it becomes resolved, and this problem goes back a LONG
way. It was 6 years ago when we were doing that procedure to copy, cut &
paste. I feel your pain. :) Ric
7:52 a.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 07:34, Rickey Moore wrote:
> So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether
shift-insert
> or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
> neither works properly.
>
> Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
> that is extremely frustrating at times.
Using Oracle and Netscape we had to use Abiword in-between to cut &
paste at all. Copy from Netscape, paste to Abiword, copy from Abiword,
paste to Oracle. What a royal pain. It was explained to me, but I have
forgotten the reason. Linux will never make it to Joe Lunchbucket's
computer until it becomes resolved, and this problem goes back a LONG
way. It was 6 years ago when we were doing that procedure to copy, cut
& paste. I feel your pain. :) Ric
Things really have to go out of their way to break the basic
X mechanism of highlight/middle-mouse to snarf and barf.
Unfortunately, a few things do - and it isn't that great
if you only have a 2-button mouse. The additional clipboard
mechanisms added by desktop environments and applications
aren't always compatible but you only have to use them in
situations where you can't keep the source highlighted or
you want to select an area on the target to be replaced by
the paste operation without losing the copied section.
Once you get used to using the middle-mouse method, having
to do an extra step to copy becomes really annoying.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
8:11 a.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 07:52 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Things really have to go out of their way to break the basic
X mechanism of highlight/middle-mouse to snarf and barf.
Unfortunately, a few things do
Pan and Evolution are two things that come to mind.
--
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
3:05 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 22:41 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 07:52 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Things really have to go out of their way to break the basic
> X mechanism of highlight/middle-mouse to snarf and barf.
> Unfortunately, a few things do
Pan and Evolution are two things that come to mind.
What doesn't work as expected in evolution?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
10:28 p.m.
Les Mikesell:
>> Things really have to go out of their way to break the basic
>> X mechanism of highlight/middle-mouse to snarf and barf.
>> Unfortunately, a few things do
Tim:
> Pan and Evolution are two things that come to mind.
Les Mikesell:
What doesn't work as expected in evolution?
Frequently, when trying to middle-mouse paste something that you've
highlighted, nothing gets pasted. Particularly when trying to work
between two Evolution windows (e.g. an editor as well as the reader).
Pan just won't do it, at all.
--
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
12:48 p.m.
From: "Rickey Moore" <wayward4now(a)gmail.com>
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 13:56 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
> So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether shift-insert
> or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
> neither works properly.
>
> Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
> that is extremely frustrating at times.
Using Oracle and Netscape we had to use Abiword in-between to cut &
paste at all. Copy from Netscape, paste to Abiword, copy from Abiword,
paste to Oracle. What a royal pain. It was explained to me, but I have
forgotten the reason. Linux will never make it to Joe Lunchbucket's
computer until it becomes resolved, and this problem goes back a LONG
way. It was 6 years ago when we were doing that procedure to copy, cut &
paste. I feel your pain. :) Ric
Cut and paste in Linux is the single most frequent cause for me lapsing
into extremely unladylike language. I've had to replace dozens of melted
keyboards. And the melt ripples on the face of my monitor are annoying.
It may be time to get a replacement. Cut and Paste in Linux stinks on
hydrogen ice.
{^_^}
12:57 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
jdow wrote:
Cut and paste in Linux is the single most frequent cause for me
lapsing into extremely unladylike language.
In some circles unladylike language is considered a plus. :)
I've had to replace dozens of melted keyboards. And the melt
ripples
on the face of my monitor are annoying. It may be time to get a
replacement. Cut and Paste in Linux stinks on hydrogen ice.
Oddly enough, I've always found it to be a plus and when I get on a
windows box it drives me nuts that I have to actually do something
other than select the text to get it to the clipboard. I use X's
highlight select for text all the time.
So it all depends on your usage patterns really. I avoid office apps
like the plague on the theory that if I am using them, I'm doing
office work. I'd much rather do the sysadmin voodoo so that other
people have systems they can do actual work on. ;-)
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
You can't depend on the man who made the mess to clean it up.
-- Richard Nixon, 1952
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkR92R4mGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1qofgCfTCG7YFal/s/Y14HFNbL5D+jTyf0An0RBkezQ
tCalWMPuw0nXfws9N90V
=hE5j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
10:33 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 13:57 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote:
Oddly enough, I've always found it to be a plus and when I get on
a
windows box it drives me nuts that I have to actually do something
other than select the text to get it to the clipboard. I use X's
highlight select for text all the time.
I find the Linux way of doing it a right pain in the bum. Two typical
scenarios:
First
-----
Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I *have*
to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement, paste it
into the document.
Windows: Highlight the word to be replaced, and paste the new word over
the top of it. I can do this multiple times, just with new pastes. I
don't have to delete + copy + paste ad nauseum. And, no, sometimes
doing a search and replace through an editor function isn't always
doable. What I put in the copy buffer stays there until I want rid of
it.
Second:
Linux: I've highlighted some details from an e-mail that I want to put
into the email configuration. I open up the configuration, and the
first editable data in it is already highlighted by the application.
It's now in the copy buffer, and I can't paste what *I* had previously
copied. I can't go back to the other window and copy again, because
operations with it are blocked. I can't even see the other window,
because two other windows are on top of it, and only one of them can be
moved. I have to close one window, move the middle one, re-open the one
I want to edit.
This is a HELL of a lot of mucking around.
--
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
10:56 p.m.
Tim wrote:
I find the Linux way of doing it a right pain in the bum.
There's no "linux way". X offers you the flexibility to use multiple
clipboards, but doesn't force you to use any one, particularly not one
that's a pain.
First
-----
Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I *have*
to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement, paste it
into the document.
Windows: Highlight the word to be replaced, and paste the new word over
the top of it.
Yeah, you can do that in X, too. Use the clipboard (ctrl+c or "copy"
menu item) instead of the primary selection. If you behave like you're
using Windows, you'll get the results that you want.
Second:
Linux: I've highlighted some details from an e-mail that I want to put
into the email configuration. I open up the configuration, and the
first editable data in it is already highlighted by the application.
It's now in the copy buffer, and I can't paste what *I* had previously
copied.
If that's true, it's a bug in the application. The primary selection is
only supposed to be replaced if the user selects something. If you open
a window and something is automatically highlighted, it does not also
magically replace the primary selection.
Since I don't know of any application that does that, I'll note that if,
in Firefox, you press "Ctrl+l", the location bar's contents are
highlighted, but the primary selection is not replaced. If you try to
paste the primary selection, you'll get whatever was selected before you
pressed "Ctrl+l".
Even if the application that you're using *is* buggy, you should still
be able to copy text to the clipboard (rather than the primary
selection) before you open the configuration, and paste the text.
12:10 a.m.
From: "Gordon Messmer" <yinyang(a)eburg.com>
Tim wrote:
>
> I find the Linux way of doing it a right pain in the bum.
There's no "linux way".
Stop typing right there. You have it exactly.
X offers you the flexibility to use multiple
clipboards, but doesn't force you to use any one, particularly not one
that's a pain.
Now you went and spoiled your simple exposition with fantasy. That's
a crying shame. Ah well.
> First
> -----
> Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I *have*
> to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement, paste it
> into the document.
>
> Windows: Highlight the word to be replaced, and paste the new word over
> the top of it.
Yeah, you can do that in X, too. Use the clipboard (ctrl+c or "copy"
menu item) instead of the primary selection. If you behave like you're
using Windows, you'll get the results that you want.
That works so little percentage of the time for me that it's worthless
advice. Worse it seems to be utterly unpredictable when it will and
will not work.
> Second:
> Linux: I've highlighted some details from an e-mail that I want to put
> into the email configuration. I open up the configuration, and the
> first editable data in it is already highlighted by the application.
> It's now in the copy buffer, and I can't paste what *I* had previously
> copied.
If that's true, it's a bug in the application. The primary selection is
only supposed to be replaced if the user selects something. If you open
a window and something is automatically highlighted, it does not also
magically replace the primary selection.
X-Windows is one huge bug. I prefer consoles for Linux.
{^_^}
12:31 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 00:10, jdow wrote:
>
> Yeah, you can do that in X, too. Use the clipboard (ctrl+c or "copy"
> menu item) instead of the primary selection. If you behave like you're
> using Windows, you'll get the results that you want.
That works so little percentage of the time for me that it's worthless
advice. Worse it seems to be utterly unpredictable when it will and
will not work.
Can you list a few things where the right-mouse/copy paste
functions don't work predictably?
X-Windows is one huge bug. I prefer consoles for Linux.
Real consoles are painful. Xterms (gnome-terminals, etc.)
give you everything you can do in a console plus more
of them and cut/paste between them - even when some of
the windows are remote machines.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
11 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 22:33, Tim wrote:
> Oddly enough, I've always found it to be a plus and when I
get on a
> windows box it drives me nuts that I have to actually do something
> other than select the text to get it to the clipboard. I use X's
> highlight select for text all the time.
I find the Linux way of doing it a right pain in the bum. Two typical
scenarios:
First
-----
Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I *have*
to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement, paste it
into the document.
You get your choice: highlight the source, middle-mouse to paste, then
select and delete the previous (which is no harder than selecting ahead
of the paste), or select and right-mouse/copy
the source, select the target and right-mouse/paste to replace
it. I tend to do the latter in places like a browser URL window
or other cramped places where having 2 copies pushes one out
of sight and the former in free-form areas where there is
room to see what you are doing because it tends to be faster
and you may just be doing an insert, not a replace.
Windows: Highlight the word to be replaced, and paste the new word
over
the top of it.
You forgot to mention the extra step necessary here. After you
highlight the selection to copy you must do an extra step to
copy it to the clipboard.
I can do this multiple times, just with new pastes. I
don't have to delete + copy + paste ad nauseum. And, no, sometimes
doing a search and replace through an editor function isn't always
doable. What I put in the copy buffer stays there until I want rid of
it.
No difference there if you used the right-mouse copy/paste
method.
Second:
Linux: I've highlighted some details from an e-mail that I want to put
into the email configuration. I open up the configuration, and the
first editable data in it is already highlighted by the application.
If you don't want to copy to the clipboard, do it the other way
around. That is, open the thing that does the silly auto-select
first, then go select the text you want.
It's now in the copy buffer, and I can't paste what *I* had
previously
copied. I can't go back to the other window and copy again, because
operations with it are blocked.
Huh?
I can't even see the other window,
because two other windows are on top of it, and only one of them can be
moved. I have to close one window, move the middle one, re-open the one
I want to edit.
I think you need a different application if it won't let you
put whatever window you want on top. I've never understood
why applications that run under a perfectly good windowing
system try to manage multiple windows themselves and do it
badly.
This is a HELL of a lot of mucking around.
Agreed, but it's not necessary.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
11 p.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 13:03 +0930, Tim wrote:
I find the Linux way of doing it a right pain in the bum. Two
typical
scenarios:
There isn't "a Linux way of doing it". There is an explicit
copy/cut/paste mechanism using ^C, ^X and ^V, and there is the X11
"mouse select and paste" mechanism. Only the first one works in Windows,
both work in Linux (at the same time). Yes, under X11 in Linux (both
Gnome and KDE) you have two independent clipboards.
First
-----
Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I *have*
to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement, paste it
into the document.
Windows: Highlight the word to be replaced, and paste the new word over
the top of it. I can do this multiple times, just with new pastes. I
don't have to delete + copy + paste ad nauseum. And, no, sometimes
doing a search and replace through an editor function isn't always
doable. What I put in the copy buffer stays there until I want rid of
it.
Guess what, it works exactly that way in Linux, too. Just tried it in
gedit and ooo.
Second:
Linux: I've highlighted some details from an e-mail that I want to put
into the email configuration. I open up the configuration, and the
first editable data in it is already highlighted by the application.
It's now in the copy buffer, and I can't paste what *I* had previously
copied. I can't go back to the other window and copy again, because
operations with it are blocked. I can't even see the other window,
because two other windows are on top of it, and only one of them can be
moved. I have to close one window, move the middle one, re-open the one
I want to edit.
This is a HELL of a lot of mucking around.
Just do it the ^C/^V way then. Works just like in Windows. It is amazing
you parade your lack of skill and/or knowledge and try to palm it off as
some sort of Linux shortcomings.
All the best
Steffen.
1:51 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 14:00 +1000, Steffen Kluge wrote:
Just do it the ^C/^V way then. Works just like in Windows. It is
amazing you parade your lack of skill and/or knowledge and try to palm
it off as some sort of Linux shortcomings.
Nice try with the insults, jackass, but CTRL + C or V doesn't work in
*all* applications, neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click pasting
work in *all* applications. You *have* to do combinations, some of
which have really annoying effects.
--
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
2:54 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:21 +0930, Tim wrote:
Nice try with the insults, jackass, but CTRL + C or V doesn't
work in
*all* applications,
That's right, and your point is? On the bash command line ^C does
something quite different, and vi implements it paste buffers in another
way again. Bloody xeyes doesn't even blink when I use ^C or ^V...
neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click pasting
work in *all* applications.
It is obviously up to the application developers to decide which key
bindings they want to support in which context. It is up to the desktop
style guides to define what should work. The Gnome apps I'm using behave
as expected, and support both clipboards. In some cases, alternative
keyboard shortcuts must be used (like SHIFT-^C), e.g. in a terminal
window running a shell - for obvious reasons.
There are a few broken apps, like gcalctool (the Gnome calculator). It
supports ^C/^V/right-click just fine, but also does a ^V on
middle-click. That's a bug, IMO.
You *have* to do combinations, some of
which have really annoying effects.
What combinations? You use one or the other, even simultaneously, but
not in combination (like gcalctool does). Keeping that in mind,
copy&paste works very well on all my boxes, even across vmware, vnc or
citrix sessions.
As for the insults, I suppose I overreacted a bit, and apologise for
that. I just had to vent some frustration that's been building up for a
while. I'm getting increasingly annoyed with a trend I'm seeing in this
forum. Where are the times when people described their problems with
adequate detail and asked for help? Nowadays, throwing tantrums and
stomping feet seems more fashionable. This being a very friendly forum
people get away with that. In other places (such as misc@openbsd) they
would have been larted so badly that they wouldn't dare asking another
question for 6 months...
"Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare"? Give me a break!
Cheers
Steffen.
10:53 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 17:54 +1000, Steffen Kluge wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:21 +0930, Tim wrote:
> neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
> and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click
pasting
> work in *all* applications.
It is obviously up to the application developers to decide which key
bindings they want to support in which context. It is up to the
desktop
style guides to define what should work. The Gnome apps I'm using
behave
as expected, and support both clipboards. In some cases, alternative
keyboard shortcuts must be used (like SHIFT-^C), e.g. in a terminal
window running a shell - for obvious reasons.
Well, there you go. With better standards that are recognized and
honored, a developer won't be in the position of power and authority to
'decide' which keybindings they use. It would be a standard, with no
deviations.
> You *have* to do combinations, some of
> which have really annoying effects.
What combinations? You use one or the other, even simultaneously, but
not in combination (like gcalctool does). Keeping that in mind,
copy&paste works very well on all my boxes, even across vmware, vnc or
citrix sessions.
Obviously your experiece says one thing and Tim has experienced
something different. This is allowed and considered 'normal' in the
course of human events. :)
As for the insults, I suppose I overreacted a bit, and apologise for
that. I just had to vent some frustration that's been building up for
a
while. I'm getting increasingly annoyed with a trend I'm seeing in
this
forum. Where are the times when people described their problems with
adequate detail and asked for help?
"Failure of others to meet our expectations"
Nowadays, throwing tantrums and
stomping feet seems more fashionable. This being a very friendly forum
people get away with that. In other places (such as misc@openbsd) they
would have been larted so badly that they wouldn't dare asking another
question for 6 months...
Well, Gee! That would take care of the problem! <smirk> Lot's of
aggression there, from a pack of (label removed) letter-bomb writers who
wouldn't dare make the confrontation up close and personal. There's no
'getting away with' anything here, according to my perspectives. We have
developers and we have users. All with varying degrees of savvy. Look at
jdow's stats... you think one of those openbsd folks are going to tangle
with her? Yet, she aired her complaint. Would you go as far as to say
that she was throwing a tantrum and stomping feet? I'd bet you wouldn't.
She's paid more dues than -anyone- on this list, and then some. Airing
problems is considered "properly assertive" and "compromise' is the
goal. So is "teamwork", which is hard as hell to arrive at when many
coder-heads lack empathy and social skills. Linus calls ithe experience
"herding cats".
"Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare"? Give me a break!
And, as has been posted, it -is- a nightmare for some, including the
likes of jdow, Tim, myself and others. As I posted previously, it was a
nightmare in the hallowed halls of RedHat with the CRM system the entire
operation depended on... for customer support, development, sales /
marketing and administration. The entire Research Triangle Park group,
here in North Carolina, was running a work-around, as I detailed, just
to cut & paste between CRM and other applications, with all of the
brainpower at their disposal. Please accept my perspective from my
experience. I was there in 1999-2000 and that was a large problem then.
Maybe Rahul will clarify if the problem is fixed in 2006. If not, then
wouldn't it be a good thing for people to air their complaints just a
little louder, to get heard? And, quite possibly, someone with the power
and authority to set a standard into stone, for all applications, will
set resolution to this problem into motion. That is a goal wished for by
many user members of the linux community, and reasonable assertive goals
are considered good, within a "polite society". The antithesis of this
is naked aggression; no compromise, no teamwork, "my way or the
highway", objectification, and a pile of other "elements of criminal
behavior". From what I gathered from your post, the BSD crowd has
"Offenders" that abuse others. I got something for them. <cackles> Ric
A: Because it's annoying to read.
Q: Why is top-posting bad?
A: Top posting.
Q: What's the most annoying thing about usenet?
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
2:02 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 11:53 -0400, Rickey Moore wrote:
> It is obviously up to the application developers to decide which
key
> bindings they want to support in which context. It is up to the
> desktop
> style guides to define what should work. The Gnome apps I'm using
> behave
> as expected, and support both clipboards. In some cases, alternative
> keyboard shortcuts must be used (like SHIFT-^C), e.g. in a terminal
> window running a shell - for obvious reasons.
Well, there you go. With better standards that are recognized and
honored, a developer won't be in the position of power and authority
to 'decide' which keybindings they use. It would be a standard, with
no deviations.
What? What does a new standard mean to something you've already
been using for the last 30 years? For me, it would mean that
the new standard would be ignored.
> "Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare"? Give me a break!
And, as has been posted, it -is- a nightmare for some, including the
likes of jdow, Tim, myself and others.
Yet, none of them have bothered to post where the right-mouse cut/paste
menu choices fail to work as expected.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
5:27 p.m.
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 14:02:20 -0500, Les Mikesell
<lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> opined:
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 11:53 -0400, Rickey Moore wrote:
> > It is obviously up to the application developers to decide
> > which key bindings they want to support in which context. It is
> > up to the desktop
> > style guides to define what should work. The Gnome apps I'm
> > using behave
> > as expected, and support both clipboards. In some cases,
> > alternative keyboard shortcuts must be used (like SHIFT-^C),
> > e.g. in a terminal window running a shell - for obvious reasons.
>
> Well, there you go. With better standards that are recognized and
> honored, a developer won't be in the position of power and
> authority to 'decide' which keybindings they use. It would be a
> standard, with no deviations.
What? What does a new standard mean to something you've already
been using for the last 30 years? For me, it would mean that
the new standard would be ignored.
> > "Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare"? Give me a break!
> And, as has been posted, it -is- a nightmare for some, including
> the likes of jdow, Tim, myself and others.
Yet, none of them have bothered to post where the right-mouse
cut/paste menu choices fail to work as expected.
This issue is most troublesome because select is captured. Therefore,
in some applications, you cannot select what you want to replace
because the selected text-to-be replaced becomes the
text-that-you-want-to-replace-it-with. -;) In some applications
neither ctrl-c nor ctrl-v work at all.
I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they are
expected to work across the board. That the functionality seems to
vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
line.
--
Our DNSRBL - Eliminate Spam: http://www.TQMcube.com
Multi-RBL Check: http://www.TQMcube.com/rblcheck.php
The Dirty Dozen Spammiest Ranges: http://tqmcube.com/dirty12.php
6:07 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 18:27 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
>
> Yet, none of them have bothered to post where the right-mouse
> cut/paste menu choices fail to work as expected.
>
This issue is most troublesome because select is captured. Therefore,
in some applications, you cannot select what you want to replace
because the selected text-to-be replaced becomes the
text-that-you-want-to-replace-it-with. -;)
Is that the already-fixed KDE bug? Where does a simple select
replace what you right-mouse/copied?
In some applications
neither ctrl-c nor ctrl-v work at all.
And right-mouse/copy?
I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they
are
expected to work across the board.
I expect control-c to interrupt and kill an application as it has
for decades. Why would you want to change that?
That the functionality seems to
vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
line.
Still, no one has said what doesn't work with right-mouse/copy and
paste. I use those with synergy making a single keyboard/mouse
span several machines, both Linux and windows and there are few
exceptions to right-mouse copy/paste working the same even when
the clipboard gets dragged over to a different OS.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
8:33 p.m.
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 18:27 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
> I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they are
> expected to work across the board.
I expect control-c to interrupt and kill an application as it has
for decades. Why would you want to change that?
CTRL-C in a terminal window kills the running program launched from that
window. CTRL-C doesn't (and never has in my recollection) kill the window
itself.
> That the functionality seems to
> vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
> shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
> be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
> around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
> line.
Still, no one has said what doesn't work with right-mouse/copy and
paste. I use those with synergy making a single keyboard/mouse
span several machines, both Linux and windows and there are few
exceptions to right-mouse copy/paste working the same even when
the clipboard gets dragged over to a different OS.
Having to reach for the mouse is a pain in the butt. Usually, keyboard
shortcuts are much more efficient (modulo the need to learn new ones for
every damned program--the fact that CTRl-W in the location field kills the
current Firefox window is annoying as all get-out, because in most
terminals it just backward-deletes a word).
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
9:22 p.m.
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 18:27 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
>
>> I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they are
>> expected to work across the board.
>
> I expect control-c to interrupt and kill an application as it has
> for decades. Why would you want to change that?
CTRL-C in a terminal window kills the running program launched from that
window. CTRL-C doesn't (and never has in my recollection) kill the
window itself.
I'm fairly sure that is what Les meant. Application="running program".
>> That the functionality seems to
>> vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
>> shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
>> be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
>> around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
>> line.
>
> Still, no one has said what doesn't work with right-mouse/copy and
> paste. I use those with synergy making a single keyboard/mouse
> span several machines, both Linux and windows and there are few
> exceptions to right-mouse copy/paste working the same even when
> the clipboard gets dragged over to a different OS.
Having to reach for the mouse is a pain in the butt. Usually, keyboard
shortcuts are much more efficient (modulo the need to learn new ones for
every damned program--the fact that CTRl-W in the location field kills
the current Firefox window is annoying as all get-out, because in most
terminals it just backward-deletes a word).
How would "backward-deletes a word" have any meaning in the context of
running Firefox?
Speaking of context, Ctrl-C has had meaning in the context of a hardware
terminal that predates any windows based system. I was never big on DOS
as my experience was with terminals connected to mainframe systems.
However, I don't recall that DOS had a concept of Ctrl-C being a "copy"
operation. So, maybe we have to back determine who thought Ctrl-C was a
good idea to start out?
Whoever imagines "Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V" is universally implemented in the MS
world apparently has used a limited number of applications in that
world. (I suppose that should be applauded.) One well known terminal
emulation program uses "Ctrl-Insert/Shift-Insert" for copy/paste
operations.
Personally, I'm not bothered by the fact that methods for cut/paste (and
other things) may vary between applications. I tend to adapt and think
in the context in which I am working. I can't think of any examples,
but the only thing that would truly be annoying would be if key strokes
took on different meaning within a given application depending on what
window of that application you had open. And, I get mildly annoyed if
the methods change between versions of an application. Yet, I do adapt.
I give the developers the benefit of the doubt...I'm sure the decision
to change it wasn't taken lightly.
I will say one thing....it is not helpful when folks reply with "what
nightmare?". It doesn't help to minimize someone's pain. We've all
seen parents at the doctor's office trying to comfort their screaming
child by saying..."Oh, its a small needle...it doesn't hurt". Right,
the parent feels no pain at all.
I guess the question I would have asked at the start of this thread
would have been "What applications are you trying to cut and paste
between?" and then go about trying to solve that problem.
I suppose one could insist on rejecting the resolution because it isn't
the way they want it to be. But, that would simply be a
misunderstanding of the terms: "Works as expected" and "Works as
Designed".
--
Nobody's gonna believe that computers are intelligent until they start
coming in late and lying about it.
5:43 a.m.
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Ed Greshko wrote:
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 18:27 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
>>
>>> I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they are
>>> expected to work across the board.
>>
>> I expect control-c to interrupt and kill an application as it has
>> for decades. Why would you want to change that?
>
> CTRL-C in a terminal window kills the running program launched from that
> window. CTRL-C doesn't (and never has in my recollection) kill the
> window itself.
I'm fairly sure that is what Les meant. Application="running program".
But it's not what David Cary Hart was referring to. He's talking about a
text-editor window or other GUI app, not the terminal from which it was
launched. Launch any GUI from a terminal, then type CTRL-C in the
terminal window and the app is killed (unless it handles SIGKILL). Type
CTRL-C in the window you launched and it is handled in an app-specific
way, but doesn't kill the window.
>>> That the functionality seems to
>>> vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
>>> shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
>>> be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
>>> around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
>>> line.
>>
>> Still, no one has said what doesn't work with right-mouse/copy and
>> paste. I use those with synergy making a single keyboard/mouse
>> span several machines, both Linux and windows and there are few
>> exceptions to right-mouse copy/paste working the same even when
>> the clipboard gets dragged over to a different OS.
>
> Having to reach for the mouse is a pain in the butt. Usually, keyboard
> shortcuts are much more efficient (modulo the need to learn new ones for
> every damned program--the fact that CTRl-W in the location field kills
> the current Firefox window is annoying as all get-out, because in most
> terminals it just backward-deletes a word).
^^^^^^^^^ shells
How would "backward-deletes a word" have any meaning in the context of
running Firefox?
When I want to replace the URL in the location bar or fill in text fields
in a form, I might very well want to backard-delete-word.
Speaking of context, Ctrl-C has had meaning in the context of a hardware
terminal that predates any windows based system. I was never big on DOS
as my experience was with terminals connected to mainframe systems.
However, I don't recall that DOS had a concept of Ctrl-C being a "copy"
operation. So, maybe we have to back determine who thought Ctrl-C was a
good idea to start out?
I don't know for sure who was "first" to use CTRL-C for copy, but it's
been common (though not universal) in GUI apps on Windows since its
inception--certainly MS GUI apps such as Word. CTRL-C in DOS also killed
the running program in text mode, but may not have done in full-screen
apps.
Emacs has handled CTRL-C even in text mode since its inception. That was
in the mid to late '70's. In Emacs, CTRL-C is one form of command prefix.
Killing Emacs from within its window requires CTRL-X CTRL-C.
Whoever imagines "Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V" is universally implemented in the MS
world apparently has used a limited number of applications in that
world. (I suppose that should be applauded.) One well known terminal
emulation program uses "Ctrl-Insert/Shift-Insert" for copy/paste
operations.
Personally, I'm not bothered by the fact that methods for cut/paste (and
other things) may vary between applications. I tend to adapt and think
in the context in which I am working. I can't think of any examples,
but the only thing that would truly be annoying would be if key strokes
took on different meaning within a given application depending on what
window of that application you had open. And, I get mildly annoyed if
the methods change between versions of an application. Yet, I do adapt.
I give the developers the benefit of the doubt...I'm sure the decision
to change it wasn't taken lightly.
Generally, I agree. But
(a) It would be helpful if common tasks did have common keystrokes across
apps--having to relearn new keystrokes to accomplish the exact same simple
tasks in each new program is not an efficient use of one's time. I've
been thinking of switching from pine to mutt for e-mail, but the mutt
keystroke command reference is seven (24-line) screens long!.
(b) It is not a good idea to have keystrokes that are used commonly with
small effects (backward-kill-word) didn't suddenly have catastrophic
effects (mercilessly-kill-window-without-comfirmation-dialogue) in some
apps;
(c) Often it seems as though the decisions about what keys to use for what
purposes (and many other UI design decisions) are made by the developers
with no attention paid to context, history, or relevant standards and
guidelines.
I will say one thing....it is not helpful when folks reply with "what
nightmare?". It doesn't help to minimize someone's pain. We've all
seen parents at the doctor's office trying to comfort their screaming
child by saying..."Oh, its a small needle...it doesn't hurt". Right,
the parent feels no pain at all.
Hear, hear!
I guess the question I would have asked at the start of this thread
would have been "What applications are you trying to cut and paste
between?" and then go about trying to solve that problem.
I suppose one could insist on rejecting the resolution because it isn't
the way they want it to be. But, that would simply be a
misunderstanding of the terms: "Works as expected" and "Works as
Designed".
"Works as Designed" is not necessarily a compliment. Other relevant terms
include "Well Designed", "Consistent", "Principle of Least
Surprise", etc.
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
6:11 a.m.
New subject: mutt with pine keybindings (was Re: Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Matt,
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
I've been thinking of switching from pine to mutt for e-mail,
but
the mutt keystroke command reference is seven (24-line) screens
long!.
If it helps (and in case you haven't seen this already), there is a
Pine.rc in the mutt package that sets up the keybindings in mutt to be
similar to those of Pine 3.95. As I've never used pine more than a
few minutes I couldn't tell you how close these are to the pine one's
you are used to, but they might make it easier for you to try out
mutt.
The Pine.rc is installed in /usr/share/doc/mutt-*/Pine.rc.
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
You have to be 100% behind someone, before you can stab them in the
back.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkSBbmomGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1rHhACg98gLXsCGDrs4zUzM9aokbBeguikAn25H1t6A
M6UhjPnT3wLdCKwepvgc
=/jYW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
6:19 a.m.
New subject: mutt with pine keybindings (was Re: Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I wrote:
Matt,
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> I've been thinking of switching from pine to mutt for e-mail, but
> the mutt keystroke command reference is seven (24-line) screens
> long!.
If it helps (and in case you haven't seen this already), there is a
Pine.rc in the mutt package that sets up the keybindings in mutt to be
similar to those of Pine 3.95. As I've never used pine more than a
few minutes I couldn't tell you how close these are to the pine one's
you are used to, but they might make it easier for you to try out
mutt.
The Pine.rc is installed in /usr/share/doc/mutt-*/Pine.rc.
Oh, and perhaps I should have mentioned that the simplest way to use
them is to add a line like this to ~/.muttrc:
source /usr/share/doc/mutt-1.4.2.1/Pine.rc
HTH,
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
I could never recommend the use of drugs or alcohol to anyone, but
they've always worked for me.
-- Hunter S. Thompson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkSBcCcmGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1qoDgCeJhE94PFSRFZ/eAqdd1eXZpCFY50AnisVyHIk
rS87VKZJM71jbM0Lt7uq
=cW1w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
4:55 p.m.
New subject: mutt with pine keybindings (was Re: Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare)
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Todd Zullinger wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Matthew Saltzman wrote:
>> I've been thinking of switching from pine to mutt for e-mail, but
>> the mutt keystroke command reference is seven (24-line) screens
>> long!.
>
> If it helps (and in case you haven't seen this already), there is a
> Pine.rc in the mutt package that sets up the keybindings in mutt to be
> similar to those of Pine 3.95. As I've never used pine more than a
> few minutes I couldn't tell you how close these are to the pine one's
> you are used to, but they might make it easier for you to try out
> mutt.
>
> The Pine.rc is installed in /usr/share/doc/mutt-*/Pine.rc.
Oh, and perhaps I should have mentioned that the simplest way to use
them is to add a line like this to ~/.muttrc:
source /usr/share/doc/mutt-1.4.2.1/Pine.rc
HTH,
Interesting idea. I might try that, although it seems like a crutch. If
I'm going to change, it seems like I ought to just dive in.
Thanks.
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
6:26 p.m.
New subject: mutt with pine keybindings (was Re: Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
Interesting idea. I might try that, although it seems like a
crutch. If I'm going to change, it seems like I ought to just dive
in.
I never used pine so I can't make any great comparison, but I've been
a happy mutt user for many years now. Should you decide to dive in
(with or without using the pine keybindings), the mutt-users list is a
very helpful place.
Cheers,
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
Let them call me rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I
should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my
soul.... --Thomas Paine
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkSDbBImGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1rGTwCg3LfkTPCd+WEJvXFkx7nnNst5t+IAoIwZNyaO
3jrAExCTSAGKktPtFm8F
=0ccF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
6:41 p.m.
New subject: mutt with pine keybindings (was Re: Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare)
On 04Jun2006 19:26, Todd Zullinger <tmz(a)pobox.com> wrote:
| Matthew Saltzman wrote:
| I never used pine so I can't make any great comparison, but I've been
| a happy mutt user for many years now. Should you decide to dive in
| (with or without using the pine keybindings), the mutt-users list is a
| very helpful place.
I'll second that. I've also been a happy mutt user for years and can confirm
that the mutt-users list is a very helpful place.
--
Cameron Simpson <cs(a)zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/
The word is not the thing.
The map is not the territory.
The symbol is not the thing symbolized. - S.I. Hayakawa
9:43 p.m.
New subject: mutt with pine keybindings (was Re: Cut, Copy, Paste Nightmare)
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 09:41:59AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 04Jun2006 19:26, Todd Zullinger <tmz(a)pobox.com> wrote:
| Matthew Saltzman wrote:
| I never used pine so I can't make any great comparison, but I've been
| a happy mutt user for many years now. Should you decide to dive in
| (with or without using the pine keybindings), the mutt-users list is a
| very helpful place.
I'll second that. I've also been a happy mutt user for years and can confirm
that the mutt-users list is a very helpful place.
There's also mutt-ng, which I am running (after many years of happy mutt use).
http://mutt-ng.berlios.de/
---Kayvan
--
Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids:
Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan, | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89)
http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | my beautiful Queen. | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
7:46 a.m.
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Matthew Saltzman wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 18:27 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they are
>>>> expected to work across the board.
>>>
>>> I expect control-c to interrupt and kill an application as it has
>>> for decades. Why would you want to change that?
>>
>> CTRL-C in a terminal window kills the running program launched from that
>> window. CTRL-C doesn't (and never has in my recollection) kill the
>> window itself.
>
> I'm fairly sure that is what Les meant. Application="running
program".
But it's not what David Cary Hart was referring to. He's talking about
a text-editor window or other GUI app, not the terminal from which it
was launched. Launch any GUI from a terminal, then type CTRL-C in the
terminal window and the app is killed (unless it handles SIGKILL). Type
CTRL-C in the window you launched and it is handled in an app-specific
way, but doesn't kill the window.
Ahh...you took exception to what Les said and to which I was responding.
But, never mind....it isn't important.
>
>>>> That the functionality seems to
>>>> vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
>>>> shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
>>>> be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
>>>> around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
>>>> line.
>>>
>>> Still, no one has said what doesn't work with right-mouse/copy and
>>> paste. I use those with synergy making a single keyboard/mouse
>>> span several machines, both Linux and windows and there are few
>>> exceptions to right-mouse copy/paste working the same even when
>>> the clipboard gets dragged over to a different OS.
>>
>> Having to reach for the mouse is a pain in the butt. Usually, keyboard
>> shortcuts are much more efficient (modulo the need to learn new ones for
>> every damned program--the fact that CTRl-W in the location field kills
>> the current Firefox window is annoying as all get-out, because in most
>> terminals it just backward-deletes a word).
^^^^^^^^^ shells
>
> How would "backward-deletes a word" have any meaning in the context of
> running Firefox?
When I want to replace the URL in the location bar or fill in text
fields in a form, I might very well want to backard-delete-word.
You probably wouldn't want it in the URL location bar. I just tested
Ctrl-W on a URL in a bash shell and it deletes the entire URL.
>
> Speaking of context, Ctrl-C has had meaning in the context of a hardware
> terminal that predates any windows based system. I was never big on DOS
> as my experience was with terminals connected to mainframe systems.
> However, I don't recall that DOS had a concept of Ctrl-C being a
"copy"
> operation. So, maybe we have to back determine who thought Ctrl-C was a
> good idea to start out?
I don't know for sure who was "first" to use CTRL-C for copy, but it's
been common (though not universal) in GUI apps on Windows since its
inception--certainly MS GUI apps such as Word. CTRL-C in DOS also
killed the running program in text mode, but may not have done in
full-screen apps.
Emacs has handled CTRL-C even in text mode since its inception. That
was in the mid to late '70's. In Emacs, CTRL-C is one form of command
prefix. Killing Emacs from within its window requires CTRL-X CTRL-C.
Right, common...not universal. Humm...emacs uses CTRL-X combined with
other control characters to mean something. Yet, Ctrl-X means "cut" in
other contexts. So, is emacs doing something "wrong" or can one deal
with when running in the context of emacs?
>
> Whoever imagines "Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V" is universally implemented in the MS
> world apparently has used a limited number of applications in that
> world. (I suppose that should be applauded.) One well known terminal
> emulation program uses "Ctrl-Insert/Shift-Insert" for copy/paste
> operations.
>
> Personally, I'm not bothered by the fact that methods for cut/paste (and
> other things) may vary between applications. I tend to adapt and think
> in the context in which I am working. I can't think of any examples,
> but the only thing that would truly be annoying would be if key strokes
> took on different meaning within a given application depending on what
> window of that application you had open. And, I get mildly annoyed if
> the methods change between versions of an application. Yet, I do adapt.
> I give the developers the benefit of the doubt...I'm sure the decision
> to change it wasn't taken lightly.
Generally, I agree. But
(a) It would be helpful if common tasks did have common keystrokes
across apps--having to relearn new keystrokes to accomplish the exact
same simple tasks in each new program is not an efficient use of one's
time. I've been thinking of switching from pine to mutt for e-mail, but
the mutt keystroke command reference is seven (24-line) screens long!.
(b) It is not a good idea to have keystrokes that are used commonly with
small effects (backward-kill-word) didn't suddenly have catastrophic
effects (mercilessly-kill-window-without-comfirmation-dialogue) in some
apps;
(c) Often it seems as though the decisions about what keys to use for
what purposes (and many other UI design decisions) are made by the
developers with no attention paid to context, history, or relevant
standards and guidelines.
I guess you will have to point out the standard. What RFC is it? Or,
is it an ISO document? Or, whose guideline is it? I get the feeling
that Ctrl-C was picked by some US company because it would be easy to
remember because C-opy. Wonder if the German's would rather the
"guideline" K-opie? :-)
> I guess the question I would have asked at the start of this
thread
> would have been "What applications are you trying to cut and paste
> between?" and then go about trying to solve that problem.
>
> I suppose one could insist on rejecting the resolution because it isn't
> the way they want it to be. But, that would simply be a
> misunderstanding of the terms: "Works as expected" and "Works as
> Designed".
"Works as Designed" is not necessarily a compliment. Other relevant
terms include "Well Designed", "Consistent", "Principle of
Least
Surprise", etc.
Well Designed seems subjective to me....
FWIW, as far as my experience is cut/copy/paste is doable within and
between applications. It is consistent within a given application. It
is not consistent between applications....but doeable.
There is no way to achieve nirvana, if ones definition of nirvana is
that all keystrokes will have the same precise meaning within all
application developed by everyone.
So, unless someone can get everyone to agree on the path to nirvana or,
if the discussion/question becomes "how to copy data between application
X and application Y this thread is useless.
Time to take a page from the Borg book and adapt and assimilate.
--
Who's on first?
8:11 a.m.
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 20:46 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> Matthew Saltzman wrote:
>>
>> Speaking of context, Ctrl-C has had meaning in the context of a hardware
>> terminal that predates any windows based system. I was never big on DOS
>> as my experience was with terminals connected to mainframe systems.
>> However, I don't recall that DOS had a concept of Ctrl-C being a
"copy"
>> operation. So, maybe we have to back determine who thought Ctrl-C was a
>> good idea to start out?
>
> I don't know for sure who was "first" to use CTRL-C for copy, but
it's
> been common (though not universal) in GUI apps on Windows since its
> inception--certainly MS GUI apps such as Word. CTRL-C in DOS also
> killed the running program in text mode, but may not have done in
> full-screen apps.
>
> Emacs has handled CTRL-C even in text mode since its inception. That
> was in the mid to late '70's. In Emacs, CTRL-C is one form of command
> prefix. Killing Emacs from within its window requires CTRL-X CTRL-C.
Right, common...not universal. Humm...emacs uses CTRL-X combined with
other control characters to mean something. Yet, Ctrl-X means "cut" in
other contexts. So, is emacs doing something "wrong" or can one deal
with when running in the context of emacs?
>
>>
>> Whoever imagines "Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V" is universally implemented in the MS
>> world apparently has used a limited number of applications in that
>> world. (I suppose that should be applauded.) One well known terminal
>> emulation program uses "Ctrl-Insert/Shift-Insert" for copy/paste
>> operations.
>>
----
I remember this on a Macintosh pre-dating Windows and any Microsoft
acceptance of this.
It was the 'Apple' modifier and the bottom row, left to right...
Z = Undo
X = Cut
C = Copy
V = Paste
'twas always thus but Apple had some power to make it stick because of
the single menu design and the Apple Uniform Interface Guidelines
published very early on. Microsoft saw the wisdom of this and has
implemented it across their applications. GUI applications tend to
leverage this to provide for user familiarity.
Obviously an application such as emacs which has roots which never
anticipated a GUI interface doesn't conform to this familiarity.
Craig
12:05 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 08:11, Craig White wrote:
----
I remember this on a Macintosh pre-dating Windows and any Microsoft
acceptance of this.
It was the 'Apple' modifier and the bottom row, left to right...
Z = Undo
X = Cut
C = Copy
V = Paste
'twas always thus but Apple had some power to make it stick because of
the single menu design and the Apple Uniform Interface Guidelines
published very early on. Microsoft saw the wisdom of this and has
implemented it across their applications. GUI applications tend to
leverage this to provide for user familiarity.
Obviously an application such as emacs which has roots which never
anticipated a GUI interface doesn't conform to this familiarity.
Don't forget that apple also had the power to supply a keyboard
with the same key set with its machines. Back in the day when
our most useful programs were written (pre-dating the IBM PC by
many years), terminals were connected by serial lines, had no
alt key, few or no function keys, and had no standard for what
the arrow keys sent if they had any. That's why the control
keys are so overloaded and why vi has modes to use normal
keys for commands. There are many side effects to this ancient
history, including the fact that you can have canned complex
vi edit command sequences stored in a text file so you can simply
paste them into an open edit window using the standard paste
mechanism where doing the same with GUI editor usually means
learning yet another different macro language and yet another
way to save and invoke them.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
5:05 p.m.
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Ed Greshko wrote:
Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> Matthew Saltzman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 18:27 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would be very happy if ctrls c, x and v would work the way they
are
>>>>> expected to work across the board.
>>>>
>>>> I expect control-c to interrupt and kill an application as it has
>>>> for decades. Why would you want to change that?
>>>
>>> CTRL-C in a terminal window kills the running program launched from that
>>> window. CTRL-C doesn't (and never has in my recollection) kill the
>>> window itself.
>>
>> I'm fairly sure that is what Les meant. Application="running
program".
>
> But it's not what David Cary Hart was referring to. He's talking about
> a text-editor window or other GUI app, not the terminal from which it
> was launched. Launch any GUI from a terminal, then type CTRL-C in the
> terminal window and the app is killed (unless it handles SIGKILL). Type
> CTRL-C in the window you launched and it is handled in an app-specific
> way, but doesn't kill the window.
Ahh...you took exception to what Les said and to which I was responding.
But, never mind....it isn't important.
OK...
>
>>
>>>>> That the functionality seems to
>>>>> vary among applications (along with right-click, middle-click and
>>>>> shift-insert) makes life a whole lot more complicated than it should
>>>>> be. Sometimes, it is rather frustrating if you are moving text
>>>>> around a great deal between applications and sometimes the command
>>>>> line.
>>>>
>>>> Still, no one has said what doesn't work with right-mouse/copy and
>>>> paste. I use those with synergy making a single keyboard/mouse
>>>> span several machines, both Linux and windows and there are few
>>>> exceptions to right-mouse copy/paste working the same even when
>>>> the clipboard gets dragged over to a different OS.
>>>
>>> Having to reach for the mouse is a pain in the butt. Usually, keyboard
>>> shortcuts are much more efficient (modulo the need to learn new ones for
>>> every damned program--the fact that CTRl-W in the location field kills
>>> the current Firefox window is annoying as all get-out, because in most
>>> terminals it just backward-deletes a word).
> ^^^^^^^^^ shells
>>
>> How would "backward-deletes a word" have any meaning in the context of
>> running Firefox?
>
> When I want to replace the URL in the location bar or fill in text
> fields in a form, I might very well want to backard-delete-word.
You probably wouldn't want it in the URL location bar. I just tested
Ctrl-W on a URL in a bash shell and it deletes the entire URL.
That's actually what I was using it for, because classic X select/paste
doesn't give me a way to select the text to be replaced.
>
>>
>> Speaking of context, Ctrl-C has had meaning in the context of a hardware
>> terminal that predates any windows based system. I was never big on DOS
>> as my experience was with terminals connected to mainframe systems.
>> However, I don't recall that DOS had a concept of Ctrl-C being a
"copy"
>> operation. So, maybe we have to back determine who thought Ctrl-C was a
>> good idea to start out?
>
> I don't know for sure who was "first" to use CTRL-C for copy, but
it's
> been common (though not universal) in GUI apps on Windows since its
> inception--certainly MS GUI apps such as Word. CTRL-C in DOS also
> killed the running program in text mode, but may not have done in
> full-screen apps.
>
> Emacs has handled CTRL-C even in text mode since its inception. That
> was in the mid to late '70's. In Emacs, CTRL-C is one form of command
> prefix. Killing Emacs from within its window requires CTRL-X CTRL-C.
Right, common...not universal. Humm...emacs uses CTRL-X combined with
other control characters to mean something. Yet, Ctrl-X means "cut" in
other contexts. So, is emacs doing something "wrong" or can one deal
with when running in the context of emacs?
Touche.
>
>>
>> Whoever imagines "Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V" is universally implemented in the MS
>> world apparently has used a limited number of applications in that
>> world. (I suppose that should be applauded.) One well known terminal
>> emulation program uses "Ctrl-Insert/Shift-Insert" for copy/paste
>> operations.
>>
>> Personally, I'm not bothered by the fact that methods for cut/paste (and
>> other things) may vary between applications. I tend to adapt and think
>> in the context in which I am working. I can't think of any examples,
>> but the only thing that would truly be annoying would be if key strokes
>> took on different meaning within a given application depending on what
>> window of that application you had open. And, I get mildly annoyed if
>> the methods change between versions of an application. Yet, I do adapt.
>> I give the developers the benefit of the doubt...I'm sure the decision
>> to change it wasn't taken lightly.
>
> Generally, I agree. But
>
> (a) It would be helpful if common tasks did have common keystrokes
> across apps--having to relearn new keystrokes to accomplish the exact
> same simple tasks in each new program is not an efficient use of one's
> time. I've been thinking of switching from pine to mutt for e-mail, but
> the mutt keystroke command reference is seven (24-line) screens long!.
>
> (b) It is not a good idea to have keystrokes that are used commonly with
> small effects (backward-kill-word) didn't suddenly have catastrophic
> effects (mercilessly-kill-window-without-comfirmation-dialogue) in some
> apps;
>
> (c) Often it seems as though the decisions about what keys to use for
> what purposes (and many other UI design decisions) are made by the
> developers with no attention paid to context, history, or relevant
> standards and guidelines.
I guess you will have to point out the standard. What RFC is it? Or,
is it an ISO document? Or, whose guideline is it? I get the feeling
that Ctrl-C was picked by some US company because it would be easy to
remember because C-opy. Wonder if the German's would rather the
"guideline" K-opie? :-)
Didn't have a formal standard in mind related to this discussion. (c) is
more of a general complaint, but I have run into exactly this sort of
thing before in my work.
>> I guess the question I would have asked at the start of this thread
>> would have been "What applications are you trying to cut and paste
>> between?" and then go about trying to solve that problem.
>>
>> I suppose one could insist on rejecting the resolution because it isn't
>> the way they want it to be. But, that would simply be a
>> misunderstanding of the terms: "Works as expected" and "Works as
>> Designed".
>
> "Works as Designed" is not necessarily a compliment. Other relevant
> terms include "Well Designed", "Consistent", "Principle of
Least
> Surprise", etc.
Well Designed seems subjective to me....
I can't define it but I know it when I see it 8^)
FWIW, as far as my experience is cut/copy/paste is doable within and
between applications. It is consistent within a given application. It
is not consistent between applications....but doeable.
There is no way to achieve nirvana, if ones definition of nirvana is
that all keystrokes will have the same precise meaning within all
application developed by everyone.
So, unless someone can get everyone to agree on the path to nirvana or,
if the discussion/question becomes "how to copy data between application
X and application Y this thread is useless.
Since when have you known that to stop anyone from joining in lustily?
Time to take a page from the Borg book and adapt and assimilate.
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
12:21 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 05:43, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
Emacs has handled CTRL-C even in text mode since its inception. That
was
in the mid to late '70's. In Emacs, CTRL-C is one form of command prefix.
Killing Emacs from within its window requires CTRL-X CTRL-C.
Emacs is it's own world. I don't think it is reasonable to compare
its command set to anything else.
(c) Often it seems as though the decisions about what keys to use for
what
purposes (and many other UI design decisions) are made by the developers
with no attention paid to context, history, or relevant standards and
guidelines.
Except that many of the decisions predate the history and context
you expect them to follow. Most of what we expect these days
is at least slightly related to IBM's CDE work and motif
circa 1989 but motif's licensing kept it from being used
in the early open source work. I don't think MS Windows
follows it strictly either.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
3:54 p.m.
On Sat, 3 Jun 2006, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 05:43, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> Emacs has handled CTRL-C even in text mode since its inception. That was
> in the mid to late '70's. In Emacs, CTRL-C is one form of command prefix.
> Killing Emacs from within its window requires CTRL-X CTRL-C.
Emacs is it's own world. I don't think it is reasonable to compare
its command set to anything else.
Fair enough. Try CTRL-C in a Firefox window and see that nothing
happens. If you want to kill Firefox started from a terminal window,
CTRL-C in the terminal window is needed (or you can apply the usual exit
methods--click on the window bar, use the menu, or use a keyboard
shortcut). To kill Firefox started from the menu, there is nothing you
can do with CTRL-C. An unresponsive Firefox must be killed with xkill or
the GNOME app-killer.
> (c) Often it seems as though the decisions about what keys to use for what
> purposes (and many other UI design decisions) are made by the developers
> with no attention paid to context, history, or relevant standards and
> guidelines.
Except that many of the decisions predate the history and context
you expect them to follow. Most of what we expect these days
is at least slightly related to IBM's CDE work and motif
circa 1989 but motif's licensing kept it from being used
in the early open source work. I don't think MS Windows
follows it strictly either.
Also a fair point, but the problems crop up often enough with new software
as well. I commend the GNOME folks for trying to standardize the behavior
of GNOME apps, though I occasionally think they carry the idea too far.
(It seems they can't win, though. If they push standards too hard, folks
bitch about lack of flexibility. If they don't push hard enough, we get
threads like this one. It's a delicate balance, and we will know they've
achieved it when nobody is entirely happy.)
--
Matthew Saltzman
Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs
5:04 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 15:54, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
I commend the GNOME folks for trying to standardize the behavior
of GNOME apps, though I occasionally think they carry the idea too far.
(It seems they can't win, though. If they push standards too hard, folks
bitch about lack of flexibility. If they don't push hard enough, we get
threads like this one. It's a delicate balance, and we will know they've
achieved it when nobody is entirely happy.)
Isn't that the whole point of having standards committees?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
5:11 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 17:04 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 15:54, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> I commend the GNOME folks for trying to standardize the behavior
> of GNOME apps, though I occasionally think they carry the idea too far.
> (It seems they can't win, though. If they push standards too hard, folks
> bitch about lack of flexibility. If they don't push hard enough, we get
> threads like this one. It's a delicate balance, and we will know they've
> achieved it when nobody is entirely happy.)
Isn't that the whole point of having standards committees?
----
or marriage?
;-)
Craig
8:22 p.m.
I have been fighting with this cut, copy and paste problem for ages as
well. One example where it hasnt worked for me is if I cut and paste
between.
Openoffice spreadsheet -> VNC (Windows Machine)
it does work if I do
Openoffice spreadsheet - gedit (gnome text editor) -> vnc.
Reading this thread I started looking around again and found this nifty
program, thank goodness it works! Maybe it will work for you.
http://www.lepton.fr/tools/autocutsel/
Cheers,
Roy.
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 15:11 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 17:04 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-06-03 at 15:54, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> > I commend the GNOME folks for trying to standardize the behavior
> > of GNOME apps, though I occasionally think they carry the idea too far.
> > (It seems they can't win, though. If they push standards too hard, folks
> > bitch about lack of flexibility. If they don't push hard enough, we get
> > threads like this one. It's a delicate balance, and we will know
they've
> > achieved it when nobody is entirely happy.)
>
> Isn't that the whole point of having standards committees?
----
or marriage?
;-)
Craig
3:52 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:21 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 14:00 +1000, Steffen Kluge wrote:
> Just do it the ^C/^V way then. Works just like in Windows. It is
> amazing you parade your lack of skill and/or knowledge and try to palm
> it off as some sort of Linux shortcomings.
Nice try with the insults, jackass, but CTRL + C or V doesn't work in
*all* applications, neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click pasting
work in *all* applications. You *have* to do combinations, some of
which have really annoying effects.
--
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
Hi All
Through out this thread I have not read any SPECIFICS,
which applications don't work?
which window manager are you using?
which application won't let you switch windows?
It seems to me that there is a lot of calling of the "system" without
the detail to back it up, is it the "system" or a few buggy/misbehaving
applications?
If the applications don't work the way you think they should, have you:-
a) checked that you are allowed to do what you want, some applications
won't let you copy data for security reasons, putting data in pictures
on web pages for instance.
b) reported the bug/feature to the application developers/supporters.
c) checked your configuration to make sure you don't have something that
is inhibiting the action.
d) checked that something you have done has stopped it working. One of
my programs has to use CTRL + C to close files cos thats what the user
wanted. Another user had used CTRL + v to trigger their own macro (in
Excel!).
e) have you documented the precis actions that work/don't work so we can
look at the problem
Thank you for your time
Laurence
p.s. and we are not kids, so PLEASE lets not get into name calling and
play nice!
4:18 a.m.
From: "Laurence Orchard" <laurence(a)orchards.org.uk>
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:21 +0930, Tim wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 14:00 +1000, Steffen Kluge wrote:
> > Just do it the ^C/^V way then. Works just like in Windows. It is
> > amazing you parade your lack of skill and/or knowledge and try to palm
> > it off as some sort of Linux shortcomings.
>
> Nice try with the insults, jackass, but CTRL + C or V doesn't work in
> *all* applications, neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
> and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click pasting
> work in *all* applications. You *have* to do combinations, some of
> which have really annoying effects.
>
> --
> (Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
>
> Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
> I read messages from the public lists.
>
Hi All
Through out this thread I have not read any SPECIFICS,
which applications don't work?
which window manager are you using?
which application won't let you switch windows?
It seems to me that there is a lot of calling of the "system" without
the detail to back it up, is it the "system" or a few buggy/misbehaving
applications?
If the applications don't work the way you think they should, have you:-
a) checked that you are allowed to do what you want, some applications
won't let you copy data for security reasons, putting data in pictures
on web pages for instance.
b) reported the bug/feature to the application developers/supporters.
c) checked your configuration to make sure you don't have something that
is inhibiting the action.
d) checked that something you have done has stopped it working. One of
my programs has to use CTRL + C to close files cos thats what the user
wanted. Another user had used CTRL + v to trigger their own macro (in
Excel!).
e) have you documented the precis actions that work/don't work so we can
look at the problem
Thank you for your time
1) When these problems bite I do NOT have time to debug them, create a
fix, or even send a message to bugfart that there is a problem. I have
my OWN problem to fix.
2) The problem with the program and X-Windows should not exist in the
first place.
Laurence
p.s. and we are not kids, so PLEASE lets not get into name calling and
play nice!
3) This is a Fedora Core mailinglist. What's this play nice and no name
calling nonsense? (Of course, for an average "ix-ish" mailing list
this one is modestly polite.)
{^_^} Joanne
8:03 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 02:18 -0700, jdow wrote:
From: "Laurence Orchard" <laurence(a)orchards.org.uk>
> On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:21 +0930, Tim wrote:
>> On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 14:00 +1000, Steffen Kluge wrote:
>> > Just do it the ^C/^V way then. Works just like in Windows. It is
>> > amazing you parade your lack of skill and/or knowledge and try to palm
>> > it off as some sort of Linux shortcomings.
>>
>> Nice try with the insults, jackass, but CTRL + C or V doesn't work in
>> *all* applications, neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
>> and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click pasting
>> work in *all* applications. You *have* to do combinations, some of
>> which have really annoying effects.
>>
>> --
>> (Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
>>
>> Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
>> I read messages from the public lists.
>>
> Hi All
>
> Through out this thread I have not read any SPECIFICS,
> which applications don't work?
> which window manager are you using?
> which application won't let you switch windows?
>
> It seems to me that there is a lot of calling of the "system" without
> the detail to back it up, is it the "system" or a few buggy/misbehaving
> applications?
>
> If the applications don't work the way you think they should, have you:-
> a) checked that you are allowed to do what you want, some applications
> won't let you copy data for security reasons, putting data in pictures
> on web pages for instance.
> b) reported the bug/feature to the application developers/supporters.
> c) checked your configuration to make sure you don't have something that
> is inhibiting the action.
> d) checked that something you have done has stopped it working. One of
> my programs has to use CTRL + C to close files cos thats what the user
> wanted. Another user had used CTRL + v to trigger their own macro (in
> Excel!).
> e) have you documented the precis actions that work/don't work so we can
> look at the problem
>
> Thank you for your time
1) When these problems bite I do NOT have time to debug them, create a
fix, or even send a message to bugfart that there is a problem. I have
my OWN problem to fix.
Can I ask what you do when Windows crashes
or one of Microsoft's applications doesn't work the way you think it
should?
2) The problem with the program and X-Windows should not exist in
the
first place.
I agree that problems shouldn't exist, but as far as I know only Buddha
has reached Nirvana.
I think you will find more problems elsewhere, with fewer people willing
to listen, do something about it or suggest an alternative.
> Laurence
>
> p.s. and we are not kids, so PLEASE lets not get into name calling and
> play nice!
3) This is a Fedora Core mailinglist. What's this play nice and no name
calling nonsense? (Of course, for an average "ix-ish" mailing list
this one is modestly polite.)
End of the day, no-one is saying you have to use Fedora, if you prefer
other offerings, go use them, stop whining, be constructive.
{^_^} Joanne
1:12 p.m.
From: "Laurence Orchard" <laurence(a)orchards.org.uk>
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 02:18 -0700, jdow wrote:
> From: "Laurence Orchard" <laurence(a)orchards.org.uk>
>
> > On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:21 +0930, Tim wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 14:00 +1000, Steffen Kluge wrote:
> >> > Just do it the ^C/^V way then. Works just like in Windows. It is
> >> > amazing you parade your lack of skill and/or knowledge and try to palm
> >> > it off as some sort of Linux shortcomings.
> >>
> >> Nice try with the insults, jackass, but CTRL + C or V doesn't work in
> >> *all* applications, neither *do* all applications have right-click copy
> >> and paste options, and neither does highlight and middle-click pasting
> >> work in *all* applications. You *have* to do combinations, some of
> >> which have really annoying effects.
> >>
> >> --
> >> (Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
> >>
> >> Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
> >> I read messages from the public lists.
> >>
> > Hi All
> >
> > Through out this thread I have not read any SPECIFICS,
> > which applications don't work?
> > which window manager are you using?
> > which application won't let you switch windows?
> >
> > It seems to me that there is a lot of calling of the "system" without
> > the detail to back it up, is it the "system" or a few
buggy/misbehaving
> > applications?
> >
> > If the applications don't work the way you think they should, have you:-
> > a) checked that you are allowed to do what you want, some applications
> > won't let you copy data for security reasons, putting data in pictures
> > on web pages for instance.
> > b) reported the bug/feature to the application developers/supporters.
> > c) checked your configuration to make sure you don't have something that
> > is inhibiting the action.
> > d) checked that something you have done has stopped it working. One of
> > my programs has to use CTRL + C to close files cos thats what the user
> > wanted. Another user had used CTRL + v to trigger their own macro (in
> > Excel!).
> > e) have you documented the precis actions that work/don't work so we can
> > look at the problem
> >
> > Thank you for your time
>
> 1) When these problems bite I do NOT have time to debug them, create a
> fix, or even send a message to bugfart that there is a problem. I have
> my OWN problem to fix.
Can I ask what you do when Windows crashes
or one of Microsoft's applications doesn't work the way you think it
should?
Windows crashes? Could fool me. Do you still run that pseudo-windows
called SE?
> 2) The problem with the program and X-Windows should not exist in
the
> first place.
>
I agree that problems shouldn't exist, but as far as I know only Buddha
has reached Nirvana.
I think you will find more problems elsewhere, with fewer people willing
to listen, do something about it or suggest an alternative.
> > Laurence
> >
> > p.s. and we are not kids, so PLEASE lets not get into name calling and
> > play nice!
>
> 3) This is a Fedora Core mailinglist. What's this play nice and no name
> calling nonsense? (Of course, for an average "ix-ish" mailing list
> this one is modestly polite.)
End of the day, no-one is saying you have to use Fedora, if you prefer
other offerings, go use them, stop whining, be constructive.
That was humor, although I expect the humor impaired not to notice.
{^_-} (I will note that the old Amigas had nicer cut and paste and
clipboard behavior than I find in X applications.)
12:55 p.m.
On 6/1/06, jdow <jdow(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
1) When these problems bite I do NOT have time to debug them, create a
fix, or even send a message to bugfart that there is a problem. I have
my OWN problem to fix.
We can't help much with YOUR problems, which is all you've seemed
to mention so far.
2) The problem with the program and X-Windows should not exist in
the
first place.
Perhaps you are running character based apps inside xterm windows. I
do that so much that I take the quirks for granted but I can see how it
would be confusing if you don't realize that the terninal window provides
cut/paste, but the app knows nothing about it and the paste operation
gets pushed through the keyboard input. That is, before you paste you
have to get the app cursor positioned appropriately and in a mode to
accept the input.
The only other quirk I ever see is that once in a while the primary selection
disappears when bringing the target window to the front but I think it is from
double-clicking or some other mouse action that I've done accidentally. It
never happens with the right-mouse/copy method.
Other than that, if there is a bug it isn't going to get fixed unless someone
reports the specific details.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
11:09 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Tim wrote:
I find the Linux way of doing it a right pain in the bum. Two
typical scenarios:
We have different usage patterns, and I can see how the copy/paste
behavior would rightfully drive you batty. I'll secretly hope that
any fix for your use patterns don't break mine. :)
First
-----
Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I
*have* to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement,
paste it into the document.
For me, this would be done in vim with a search and replace.
:%s/old/new/g
Done. All occurrences of old word are replaced with new word. And I
can use a regex on the match and parts of the match for the
replacement.
I'd use perl to do this to multiple documents at a time like so:
$ perl -pi -e 's/old/new/g' /path/to/docs/*
And I could replace /path/to/docs/ with something like:
$(grep -rl 'old' /path)
which will search recursively for all files containing the old word
and feed them to perl to be replaced.
Second:
Linux: I've highlighted some details from an e-mail that I want to
put into the email configuration. I open up the configuration, and
the first editable data in it is already highlighted by the
application. It's now in the copy buffer, and I can't paste what
*I* had previously copied.
Yeah, I've had this one happen to me occasionally. When dealing with
things like that I do a real copy (ctrl-c) instead of just selecting
the text. That way the new text that's selected won't wipe out what I
want to past over it. In this case, I'm still no worse off than I'd
have been if I used windows, as far as I'm concerned.
I also don't ever have this issue with email, since I can edit my mutt
config with good old vim. :-)
There is no doubt room for improvement, mostly in making things
consistent and fixing badly designed user interfaces. Hopefully folks
that run into those problems will file bugs at the right places and
get those things fixed.
But I do understand where you're coming from Tim. It took me some
getting used to after leaving windows, but now when I get stuck in
front of a windows box I'm cursing like jdow at the copy/paste
behavior because I always forget that I have to do more than just
select the text.
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
I believe in the noble, aristocratic art of doing absolutely nothing.
And someday, I hope to be in a position where I can do even less.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkR+aGkmGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1p1bQCfcDKrZDXtf1EByV64RacOD9r6zZ0AoO1UcBN1
ItmJh6cw/bqrPRckteeR
=4Fvq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
1:49 a.m.
Tim:
> Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace.
I
> *have* to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement,
> paste it into the document.
Todd Zullinger:
For me, this would be done in vim with a search and replace.
:%s/old/new/g
Sometimes you don't want to replace every instance, that's where copy
and paste would (otherwise) be more useful.
--
(Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
2:32 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Tim wrote:
Tim:
>> Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I
>> *have* to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement,
>> paste it into the document.
Todd Zullinger:
> For me, this would be done in vim with a search and replace.
>
> :%s/old/new/g
Sometimes you don't want to replace every instance, that's where
copy and paste would (otherwise) be more useful.
Nah, that's where a range would be useful. ;-)
Just replace old with new between lines 35 and 40:
:35,40 s/old/new/g
Or you can just replace the current line by leaving off the % (for all
lines) or the 35,40. Then hit n to get to the next occurrence of old,
and if it's one you want to skip, hit n again. It's pretty fast for
me to do this sort of thing. And as I said, you can use regex's in
there as well, which is something I simply couldn't give up.
You can even select a block of text and then apply the replacements to
just that block. I learned a good many tricks like this by using gvim
and watching what commands it ran when I used the graphical search and
replace. That was enough to make me think learning more about it was
worth my time. And for me, it's proved invaluable.
But I also do my best to not use formats like .doc or .odt. For
those, a nice search and replace in the interface is very nice. Does
copy/paste not work properly using ctrl-c/ctrl-v on linux just as it
would on windows?
It seems (from what others have said in this thread) like it is
supposed to work better than it often does in practice, but that it's
a bug in the applications when it doesn't, rather than a flaw in the
way X works. I don't test this all that often so I can't speak to
what apps work well and which don't in this respect.
I'm not trying to argue that the way I do things is the only right way
to do them. Hopefully it doesn't come out that way. ;-)
- --
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xD654075A | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
======================================================================
The people cannot delegate to government the power to do anything
which would be unlawful for them to do themselves.
-- John Locke
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.
iG0EARECAC0FAkR+mCEmGGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucG9ib3guY29tL350bXovcGdwL3Rt
ei5hc2MACgkQuv+09NZUB1oenQCfesIO8ZbGFKxjP2QvtLVqbyOpbO4AnRGXo45e
7fb1h6M3S+BxPXm7oPC6
=AdYv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
10:21 a.m.
On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 16:19 +0930, Tim wrote:
Tim:
>> Linux: I have some document with a word I'd like to replace. I
>> *have* to delete the word, find and highlight its new replacement,
>> paste it into the document.
Todd Zullinger:
> For me, this would be done in vim with a search and replace.
>
> :%s/old/new/g
Sometimes you don't want to replace every instance, that's where copy
and paste would (otherwise) be more useful.
Errr...
%s/old/new/gc
^confirm
Or for a more interactive feel:
/old<enter> <-position to 1st instance
cw <-change word
new<escape> <-type the replacement
n <-move to next instance of 'old'
. <-repeat last command
n.n.n. (etc., just skip the . if you don't want to replace)
Basically any command can be repeated with the '.' and it even
spans multiple files if you put them all on the vi command line
and move through them with :n.
Visual cut/paste is most useful in very short items where you
can easily see the relevant section. If any parts are out of
sight or take significant navigation to reach, commands that
act directly are much faster.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
1:54 p.m.
Rickey Moore wrote:
On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 13:56 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
> So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether shift-insert
> or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
> neither works properly.
Using Oracle and Netscape we had to use Abiword in-between to cut &
paste at all. Copy from Netscape, paste to Abiword, copy from Abiword,
paste to Oracle. What a royal pain. It was explained to me, but I have
forgotten the reason. Linux will never make it to Joe Lunchbucket's
computer until it becomes resolved, and this problem goes back a LONG
way. It was 6 years ago when we were doing that procedure to copy, cut &
paste. I feel your pain. :) Ric
The problem was mostly solved years ago. The biggest amount of
confusion came from the fact that KDE 2 used the wrong X selection for
copy/paste, and therefore didn't interoperate with anything non-KDE.
And here's a statement that you probably never thought you'd see: The
best explanation of this that I've seen was a slashdot comment.
http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=109755&cid=9319130
So, basically, there are two clipboards in X. If you select text with
the mouse, you can paste it with the middle button. If you use the
"copy" menu item (or ctrl+c), you can paste it with the "paste" menu
item (or ctrl+v). As long as you don't try to mix the two, like
expecting "paste" to insert something that you selected with the mouse,
you should be fine.
Ctrl+Ins and Shift+Ins aren't real consistent, though. Terminal
applications tend to insert the contents of the primary selection on
Shift+Ins, where other applications will insert the contents of the
clipboard selection.
From the original post, it's not clear where he's trying to copy from
or too. Clarification on that may help us explain why a particular
application isn't behaving the way you'd expect. However, there's
nothing wrong or broken about X or its copy mechanisms.
2:36 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 11:54 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
And here's a statement that you probably never thought you'd
see: The
best explanation of this that I've seen was a slashdot comment.
http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=109755&cid=9319130
So, basically, there are two clipboards in X. If you select text with
the mouse, you can paste it with the middle button. If you use the
"copy" menu item (or ctrl+c), you can paste it with the "paste" menu
item (or ctrl+v). As long as you don't try to mix the two, like
expecting "paste" to insert something that you selected with the mouse,
you should be fine.
That's a little confusing. Almost everywhere the keyboard versions
of copy/paste work there is also a right-mouse menu that works
the same way as the keyboard, so the distinction isn't between using
the mouse and the keyboard, it is between using the clipboard or
the selection. That is, anything selected will paste with the
middle mouse (and I disagree with the slashdot article calling
this the 'advanced' way - it is the basic X way), and things
copied to the clipboard with either the right-mouse menu copy
or the keyboard equivalent will paste with either the right-mouse
menu or the keyboard equivalent. Since many applications need
the keystrokes for something else, you'll have a lot fewer surprises
if you use the right-mouse method most places. Also, if you use
'synergy' to let a single keyboard/mouse access multiple computers
running different OS's, the right-mouse action usually work no matter
where you are.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com
2:43 p.m.
On Wed, 31 May 2006 14:36:55 -0500, Les Mikesell
<lesmikesell(a)gmail.com> opined:
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 11:54 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> And here's a statement that you probably never thought you'd see:
> The best explanation of this that I've seen was a slashdot
> comment.
> http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=109755&cid=9319130
>
> So, basically, there are two clipboards in X. If you select text
> with the mouse, you can paste it with the middle button. If you
> use the "copy" menu item (or ctrl+c), you can paste it with the
> "paste" menu item (or ctrl+v). As long as you don't try to mix
> the two, like expecting "paste" to insert something that you
> selected with the mouse, you should be fine.
That's a little confusing. Almost everywhere the keyboard versions
of copy/paste work there is also a right-mouse menu that works
the same way as the keyboard, so the distinction isn't between using
the mouse and the keyboard, it is between using the clipboard or
the selection. That is, anything selected will paste with the
middle mouse (and I disagree with the slashdot article calling
this the 'advanced' way - it is the basic X way), and things
copied to the clipboard with either the right-mouse menu copy
or the keyboard equivalent will paste with either the right-mouse
menu or the keyboard equivalent. Since many applications need
the keystrokes for something else, you'll have a lot fewer surprises
if you use the right-mouse method most places. Also, if you use
'synergy' to let a single keyboard/mouse access multiple computers
running different OS's, the right-mouse action usually work no
matter where you are.
Add to that KDE's intervention with Klipper which can be configured
to synchronize the contents of the clipboard and selection or provide
a separate clipboard and selection. Neither provides results exactly
as expected.
--
Our DNSRBL - Eliminate Spam: http://www.TQMcube.com
Multi-RBL Check: http://www.TQMcube.com/rblcheck.php
The Dirty Dozen Spammiest Ranges: http://tqmcube.com/dirty12.php
3:23 p.m.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 11:54 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
> So, basically, there are two clipboards in X. If you select text with
> the mouse, you can paste it with the middle button. If you use the
> "copy" menu item (or ctrl+c), you can paste it with the "paste"
menu
> item (or ctrl+v). As long as you don't try to mix the two, like
> expecting "paste" to insert something that you selected with the mouse,
> you should be fine.
That's a little confusing. Almost everywhere the keyboard versions
of copy/paste work there is also a right-mouse menu that works
the same way as the keyboard
That's what I said.
, so the distinction isn't between using
the mouse and the keyboard
That's not what I said.
Since many applications need
the keystrokes for something else, you'll have a lot fewer surprises
if you use the right-mouse method most places.
No, "many" applications don't use Ctrl+c/v or Ctrl/Shift+Ins for
something other than copy and paste. For the most part, only terminal
applications do that.
6:39 p.m.
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 11:54 -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
Rickey Moore wrote:
> Using Oracle and Netscape we had to use Abiword in-between to cut &
> paste at all. Copy from Netscape, paste to Abiword, copy from
Abiword,
> paste to Oracle. What a royal pain. It was explained to me, but I
have
> forgotten the reason. Linux will never make it to Joe Lunchbucket's
> computer until it becomes resolved, and this problem goes back a
LONG
> way. It was 6 years ago when we were doing that procedure to copy,
cut &
> paste. I feel your pain. :) Ric
From the original post, it's not clear where he's trying to copy
from
or too. Clarification on that may help us explain why a particular
application isn't behaving the way you'd expect. However, there's
nothing wrong or broken about X or its copy mechanisms.
The Oracle front-end used java, I think. One of the RedHat guys can tell
us what the deal was with Oracle as that was the app we had problems
with. Ahha! I remember!! The Oracle app was called CRM that we had to
use to do installation support with. I disliked it immensely. Rahul,
have they finally got the kinks out of that old hack? The only good
thing about it was that you could be at home, open an ssh session and
then init cipe to tunnel to your RedHat machine at work, and have your
CRM screen right there at home. I thought it was clunky, as my screen at
home over a 56k modem refreshed almost as quick as it did at the office.
<chuckles> It was a pantload and cursed daily while juggling Netscape to
find the answers the support users could have found, copying and pasting
to Abiword then copying and pasting to the CRM system, and looking so
knowledgable to warrent the support costs. Google was just starting up
then. Who knew? <chuckles> Ric
A: Because it's annoying to read.
Q: Why is top-posting bad?
A: Top posting.
Q: What's the most annoying thing about usenet?
http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/oar
1:25 p.m.
David Cary Hart <Fedora <at> TQMcube.com> writes:
Maybe the problem is in KDE. Sometimes ctrl-c works; sometimes it
does not. Sometimes highlight->right-click-≥copy works.
But the biggest problem is with paste. ctrl-v never works.
Shift-insert works but I never know what it will paste. Similarly,
the middle button of my mouse works but I never know what I will get
and it is different from the results of shift-insert.
So in summary after copy or cut, I am never sure whether shift-insert
or the mouse-middle-button will paste the just cut text. Frequently,
neither works properly.
Anyone else? Any suggestions? This is one of those minor annoyances
that is extremely frustrating at times.
Keep in my mind that there are two different mechanisms. The selection is the
currently highlighted text and it is pasted by the middle-mouse button. It is
lost when something else is selected or the highlighting is lost.
The clipboard is explicitly copied or cut from the selection. Ctrl-C, Ctrl-X,
and Ctrl-V are supposed to be the standard keyboard shortcuts for those. The
older shortcuts, Shift-Ins, Ctrl-Ins also work in many apps. Gnome Terminal,
for example, is different so it doesn't interfere with normal terminal
keyboards; it uses Shift-Ctrl-C, etc.
My impression is that KDE was one of the last systems to change to the standard
clipboard scheme and shortcuts. There are still a few applications which do
things differently; Emacs is the most annoying one to me.
- Ian
6532
days inactive
6538
days old
56 comments
18 participants
participants (18)
-
Cameron Simpson -
CodeHeads -
Craig White -
David Cary Hart -
Ed Greshko -
Gordon Messmer -
Ian Burrell -
jdow -
Kayvan A. Sylvan -
laurence orchard -
Les Mikesell -
Matthew Saltzman -
Ric Moore -
Roy Tischer -
Steffen Kluge -
Thomas Taylor -
Tim -
Todd Zullinger