Xfce Forum

KitchM

Member

Registered: 2009-08-15

Posts: 300

Restore Trash To New Location

How does one restore trashed files to a new location, other than the original?

Thanks.

Jerry3904

Member

Registered: 2013-11-09

Posts: 853

Re: Restore Trash To New Location

I just cut and paste them where I want them to be.

---

MX-23 (based on Debian Stable) with our flagship Xfce 4.18.

MountainDewManiac

Member

From: Where Mr. Bankruptcy is Prez

Registered: 2013-03-24

Posts: 1,115

Re: Restore Trash To New Location

I don't use the "Trash" folder (if I delete a file, it should remain deleted, lol), so I had to check this first - and it works - but you can simply drag & drop the file (from within Thunar) from the "Trash" folder to another one.

Regards,
MDM

---

Mountain Dew Maniac

How to Ask for Help <=== Click on this link

KitchM

Member

Registered: 2009-08-15

Posts: 300

Re: Restore Trash To New Location

Thanks all.

xyzdragon

Member

Registered: 2015-12-06

Posts: 17

Re: Restore Trash To New Location

Btw. The whole trash system is so bugged ...

1. Go to trash (nemo) -> Ctrl+C, go to new folder -> Ctrl+V -> Even though the folder is empty a dialog pops up "File conflict. Replace file "test.jpg"?" -> Pressing "Replace" seems like it will be restored to the original location, because the target folder is still empty. Drag&Dropping to a folder has the same problem.

2. Drag&Dropping using Thunar will create a file with the whole original path as the name (using backslashes instead of slashes): "\media\v\.Trash\1000\files\test.jpg". The same problem with copy and paste from trash. Also spaces and other special characters are replaced with %20 and so on. Have fun cleaning all that up.

3. Also see these bugs, which keeps bugging me: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=763394 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=764532 The former one seems to be marked resolved, well let's see if updating really solves it.

I just can't seem to find an explorer which actually works with everything I do as expect it to (Windows explorer worked good ...)

MountainDewManiac

Member

From: Where Mr. Bankruptcy is Prez

Registered: 2013-03-24

Posts: 1,115

Re: Restore Trash To New Location

Interesting. As I mentioned in a previous post, I don't generally use the "trash" thing. But I was curious enough to test...

1. Go to trash (nemo) -> Ctrl+C, go to new folder -> Ctrl+V -> Even though the folder is empty a dialog pops up "File conflict. Replace file "test.jpg"?" -> Pressing "Replace" seems like it will be restored to the original location, because the target folder is still empty. Drag&Dropping to a folder has the same problem.

I don't use Nemo, as I have found that the file manager that comes with Xfce, Thunar, does everything I need a file manager to do. But I tried replicating the behavior you describe, using Thunar. I was unable to do so. I highlighted a file, tapped my Delete key to cause that file to be moved to the Trash directory, then highlighted it in that directory, then pressed CTRL+C, then moved to another directory and pressed CTRL+V - the file was moved to that location (aka "untrashed," lol?). Maybe what you're describing isn't a "trash" bug but, instead, a Nemo one?

2. Drag&Dropping using Thunar will create a file with the whole original path as the name (using backslashes instead of slashes): "\media\v\.Trash\1000\files\test.jpg". The same problem with copy and paste from trash. Also spaces and other special characters are replaced with %20 and so on. Have fun cleaning all that up.

I did that with Thunar (and did so previously as well - see my prior post in the thread). This time, after I did so, I looked at the file's properties and the path information as listed in those properties corresponded with what I saw in the directory's file list. That is to say, everything worked correctly and displayed correctly. I then created a file that had some spaces in the file's name and repeated the process with it - not only did the file's path look to be what it should have been... the spaces displayed normally. And "cleaning all that up," while not especially fun, lol, only involved deleting the test files that I had created expressly for the purpose of performing these tests.

3. Also see these bugs, which keeps bugging me: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=763394 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=764532 The former one seems to be marked resolved, well let's see if updating really solves it.

I'm not even real clear on what that gvfs is, what it does, etc. so I didn't do any specific testing in that regard. But I did not notice any 50% CPU activity - I think one of those bug reports mentioned gvfs going to 50% CPU usage "and staying there," but after deleting the test files, I glanced at my CPU usage bar and it was basically at nil (well... 2%, but that was with this web browser running and a couple of dozen tabs loaded into it). And I currently have my CPU locked down to only 1.2 gHz, so I would expect any high CPU usage to show a very high percentage.

(Windows explorer worked good ...)

Personally, I used to hate that thing. I could never even get scrolling behavior (with my laptop mouse "pad's" scroll) to work as expected. Did Microsoft ever get dragged (kicking and screaming all the way, I supposed ) into the (several years) recent past by adding the ability to open separate tabs in their file manager, lol?

Whatever works for you, I suppose. The last Microsoft file manager that I thought was decent was the one that came with Windows 3.1.

I just can't seem to find an explorer which actually works with everything I do as expect it to

I suppose, if you are coming from a Microsoft OS (etc.) background and are expecting your file manager to work the way that Microsoft's does, you might always be disappointed. There have been many posts, threads, articles, and web pages written about how linux is NOT Microsoft (and why that is a good thing). However, if you treat every file manager as its own individual thing (as opposed to expecting it to behave like another one does), there might be some hope - because there are lots of file managers that run under linux. I used one called PCManFM for a short time. Although it was not for me, I was impressed by its mix of simplicity and functionality. And it had the ability to display two directories in the same window at the same time (side by side), which is one thing I remember liking about the Microsoft file manager way back in Windows 3.1. I never understood why Microsoft could create such a good feature in a file manager - and then simply do away with it in later versions. But I have never understood why any developer does this, and it seems like all to many of them do (in every OS I have used, all the way back to 1981 or so, lol).

Regards,
MDM

---

Mountain Dew Maniac

How to Ask for Help <=== Click on this link

xyzdragon

Member

Registered: 2015-12-06

Posts: 17

Re: Restore Trash To New Location

@MountainDewManiac Thanks for taking your time with me

But I tried replicating the behavior you describe, using Thunar. [...] Maybe what you're describing isn't a "trash" bug but, instead, a Nemo one?

Yes it's a nemo only bug (related to trash).

not only did the file's path look to be what it should have been... the spaces displayed normally.

In order to answer to you I tried to describe the bug better and filed it here: https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12637 I think it's related to trash not working correctly on NTFS / vfat. On extfs4 i.e. my root partition it works fine like in your tests.

But I did not notice any 50% CPU activity - I think one of those bug reports mentioned gvfs going to 50% CPU usage "and staying there," but after deleting the test files, I glanced at my CPU usage bar and it was basically at nil

As I noted the bug was supposedly solved, but it seems it is a file manager bug, so it was only solved in nautilus. I refiled the bug here for thunar https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12635
I still can reproduce the bug in all cases using this one-line:
    Thunar & sleep 2s && ( cd mktemp -d && for ((i=0;i<2000;i++)); do touch "$i.tmp"; done && trash *.tmp )
If you do this and the bug appears, just type maybe 20 times (up arrrow+enter after first time)
    pkill gvfsd-trash

I suppose, if you are coming from a Microsoft OS (etc.) background and are expecting your file manager to work the way that Microsoft's does, you might always be disappointed.

I'm using Linux for almost a year now and I still get regularly angry other stupid usability bugs. They slow me down and reporting all the bugs also slows me down. I still don't understand why I never found much wrong with Windows. Well I had my fair share of fun and anger with cygwin, ... but that is again almost Linux.

I still love the command line. And as I'm using Linux for quite some time now and invested several days, even weeks in total working around especially nasty bugs (e.g. windows not being closed, but killed, when pressing shutdown, see https://forum.xfce.org/viewtopic.php?id=9541). But whenever I do such things I wonder why I (and million of other users) have to invest many hours myself instead of one developer pushing such a feature for millions ...