XYplorer Beta Club

Hi all,

I've hit upon some strange behaviour in XY and I was wondering if anyone else sees it too.

I'm on Vista x64 SP1 (+ numerous hotfixes) and XY has admin rights.

I can create a new folder in "c:\program files(x86)\" by navigating to the folder and clicking the "New Folder" toolbar button. I get a folder called "New Folder". The strange behaviour comes into play when I attempt to rename it to something useful. A popup tells me that permission has been denied.

Further, clicking the "Nuke" button yields XY telling me that "nothing has been deleted because all selected items are locked or contain locked items". The "delete" button removes the folder successfully.

Furthermore, if I click the "New Folder" button, I get a new folder at the bottom of the LV selected and in rename mode. Now, if attempt to rename it I get the message about the permissions. When I cancel out of the popup and then press <esc> to finish editing the folder name, the LV does not resort (ie the new folder stays at the bottom of the LV). If I don't try the rename as part of the new folder process (ie "New Folder", then press <enter>), the LV sorts the new folder correctly.

Phew!
Can anyone else see this? I know that XY is not to blame for the permission thing because WE does the same thing. But I think that it is XY playing up with the nuke button and LV sorting.

Cheers
John

As far as resort of the List is concerned, Don's stance is unmoved: if you have "Resort immediately upon rename" ticked then only pressing "Enter" will trigger the resort operation. I don't agree with such functionality: a rename is a rename, no need for that quote from Animal Farm. Here are a couple of threads on this matter:

http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3418
http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3007

Hi John,
I am also on Vista SP1 but dont have problems with renaming the new folder in C:\Program files, or nuking it.
And the re-sorting, its a feature. If you dont like it then uncheck the option "re-sort list immediately after rename" from the General tab in Configuration. That way, your list will be resorted only on refresh (F5) and not automatically.

serendipity wrote:And the re-sorting, its a feature. If you dont like it then uncheck the option "re-sort list immediately after rename" from the General tab in Configuration. That way, your list will be resorted only on refresh (F5) and not automatically.

If I interpret what John said correctly, and he's free to correct me if I'm wrong, then he was basically puzzled at different behaviour when essentially the same operation was completed in two different ways. Several people having been advocating in favour of sweeping all rename operations under the same rug, so to speak, but to no avail. In the first thread that I've linked to in my previous post, I also exposed a weakness in Don's argument for having it the way it is currently. I also don't recall anyone else being in favour of keeping the current mechanism...

Hi all,

serendipity wrote: I am also on Vista SP1 but dont have problems with renaming the new folder in C:\Program files, or nuking it.

I don't have a problem with "c:\program files" but "c:\program files(x86)". That extra "(x86)" makes all the difference .

serendipity wrote: If I interpret what John said correctly, and he's free to correct me if I'm wrong, then he was basically puzzled at different behaviour when essentially the same operation was completed in two different ways.

Exactly. I now understand that there has been some discussion on sorting which I somehow seem to have missed... ...and I don't want to start that discussion all over again.

JohnM wrote:I don't have a problem with "c:\program files" but "c:\program files(x86)". That extra "(x86)" makes all the difference .

Oops, sorry i missed that part. I dont have 64 bit to check that.

JohnM wrote:Exactly. I now understand that there has been some discussion on sorting which I somehow seem to have missed... ...and I don't want to start that discussion all over again.

OK, i see there has been considerable debate over this, so I will leave it at that.