Page 1 of 1

Standardized Copy-File Confirmation Box

Posted: 29.12.2007, 01:52
by Tech
When I try to copy over a pre-existing file, the standard Windows confirmation box comes up rather than a FreeCommander box. In XP, this isn't too big a deal, as the default box does about what I'd want. But in Vista it's a PITA because the default box is huge and has the wrong default, and requires several keystrokes to select "Copy".

What I would like is the option of using a FreeCommander confirmation box instead (both for copying/moving to disk and to zip) and the ability to set the default. The only other Windows file manager I have recent experience with, Directory Opus, does have it's own confirmation boxes which do what I'm wanting.

Posted: 30.12.2007, 11:33
by enkryptor
FC uses built-in Windows copy routine, same as Windows Explorer :(

I think it's a simple but bad solution, 'cause threre is no advantages over Explorer in move/copy functions

Also, for the reasons given above it's unable to make an ftp client from FC yet.

Posted: 30.12.2007, 15:34
by Tech
Precisely!

In theory I could have gotten past this by using a different copy mechanism with the FileCopyPrg= ini entry, but it's both undocumented (other than in a message from Marek) and non-functional.

Posted: 01.01.2008, 21:50
by Tech
It's taken a bit of work, but I'm closer to a resolution. Using Killcopy set up as follows:
FileMovePrg=killcopy.exe |%ActivSelAsFile%|%InactivDir%| -g-m
FileCopyPrg=killcopy.exe |%ActivSelAsFile%|%InactivDir%| -g

And also acting as the drag-and-drop handler, I now can get the Killcopy confirmation consistently rather than the windows one, and can limit it to the cases I care about. It's an improvement, but unfortunately it's still a dollar short... the default is "abort". So both <enter> and <escape> result in aborting. I want <enter> to be copy and <escape> to be abort. Maybe I'll have to write my own.

Posted: 03.01.2008, 19:16
by enkryptor
Thank you, this is interesting!

Posted: 03.01.2008, 21:46
by enkryptor
the same subj.:
viewtopic.php?t=39