.desktop filename total confusion

[André Pirard]

Short story at triager's request :

John is trying to move his (attached) file named "Mousepad" to his USB Flash disk.
(I see no way of attaching the file to this update, see in a further reply).
Ubuntu replies : There was an error copying the file into /media/D0 : Invalid filename
John does not understand why "Mousepad" is an invalid filename.
If the filename is invalid, the logical thing to do is to change it.
Right-click, rename, but the error remains whatever the new name.

John asks for help and I explain that what he renames is not the filename.
I tell him that he must use terminal, cd to the right directory and use grep and mv.
John tells me that he wonders if Ubuntu is really a friendly system. He wants to quit.
I reply that sometimes it is not, but that many people are listening to user experiences in order to improve user friendliness by fighting bugs away.

This was the short story for those who don't like details and precision.
They may jump to conclusions below.
John was also told that files already existed that were nowhere to see.
Even that the system couldn't stat Mousepad
Etc...

Here is the long analysis.
This was experienced in Ubuntu 8.04[.1].

Launcher icons display a smart name different from the filename.
This is great to allow names in different languages.
But the particular implementation of this causes many problems.

1) The user has no way to know the filename (of a launcher/shortcut).
He believes that, like for other files, the filename is the name he sees.

2) Even when knowing that a difference may exist, there is now way to tell that the name displayed is different and what the name is.
Not even a dir will tell whose filename is which smart name.
Nor even requesting the properties of the launcher.
One has to resort to editing a launcher to be sure of its filename !!!
Or do a grep <smart-name> * !!!

3) Because of that, the error messages are confusing.
Copy -> "duplicate filename" will indicate the smart-name.
And the user may see no duplicate name condition.
Or if he sees one, he renames the smart name and the message remains.

4) The user can't (easily) rename his files to remove the error condition.
What Rename does rename is the smart-name, not the cause of the error.

5) The error situations are numerous.
"duplicate filename" is one
"invalid filename" is frequent (esp. when copying files to FAT32).
I've seen the system itself mixing up the two names.
I've seen messages saying that it couldn't stat some smart name.

6) Firefox abuses this inconvenience.
It creates launchers with very pretty display names but horrible filenames.

In conclusion.

It should be obvious when the name displayed is not the filename.
There should be some mark on the icon when that happens.

If not displayed right away, the filename should be easily found.
At least the properties should mention it.
Balloon text (tip) is nice too.

It should be easy to rename the filename.
Probably, Desktop's Rename should offer to choose which name to rename.

Hoping this will help making Linux usable by really anybody.

André.

[Alexander Sack (asac)]

could you please try to rephrase your problem in short words? I think I don't understand the problem you are referring to. Thanks.

[André Pirard (a.pirard)]

On 2008-04-29 14:01, Alexander Sack wrote :
> could you please try to rephrase your problem in short words? I think I
> don't understand the problem you are referring to. Thanks.
>
Indeed. My improved understanding of Lauchers had me rephrase it all.

My general advices : don't be like Windows, don't hide the internals.
(Those filenames have to be known, even with the filetype).
And also : never hide a technical term on the ground it will frighten.
Explain it nicely beside, hyperlinks are made for that.
> ** Changed in: firefox-3.0 (Ubuntu)
> Sourcepackagename: firefox => firefox-3.0
>
Although Firefox is a most visible actor on that scene,
it's not specifically targeted. Please reassign.

Thanks again for everything on behalf of everybody.

[Adam Niedling (krychek)]

I'm sure I understand your problem either. If you wanna change Linux fundamentally, this is definitely not the place for it. Try to make this report shorter and do not set your own bug reports as confirmed!

[André Pirard (a.pirard)]

On 2008-10-28 14:52, Adam Niedling wrote :
> I'm sure I understand your problem either. If you wanna change Linux
> fundamentally, this is definitely not the place for it. Try to make
> this report shorter and do not set your own bug reports as confirmed!
>
> ** Changed in: ubuntu
> Status: Confirmed => Incomplete
>
I'm glad you say that you do understand the problem.

I don't want to change Linux fundamentally.
I want John and his friends to be able to copy their files instead of
quitting Linux.
Beside three lines, I can't remove anything without making the report
incomplete.
As to Alexander's "using shorter words" suggestion, I can't see what
that improves.
I have made a short story for those who don't understand abstraction.

This is a serious user interface problem that has to be taken seriously.

Regarding the sentence I found just by chance on the web site :
>
> This bug report will be marked for expiration in 59 days if no further
> activity occurs.
>
Don't you think that the least of decency would be to give that threat
by e-mail?
Be sure that if it ever happened without warning, I would stop
cooperating with Ubuntu immediately, as well as stimulating it.

[Adam Niedling (krychek)]

Geez, sorry. I wanted to write: I'm NOT sure I understand your problem either.
Please don't repeat everything other people say, it makes it hard to read your comment.

I also think that automatic emails should be sent to the bug reporters about these things. Don't worry all expired bugs can be set back to new anytime.

I'll try to take the time and read you report and understand it..

[xteejx (xteejx)]

Reporter seems to be asking how to go about changing fundamental differences in the Ubuntu distribution. Needs clarification that only 'converting to a question' can give.