Written by bartong the 29 Feb 08 at 01:35.

By default a share should be accessible as Read Only by anyone on the network without a username or password (guest access). While guest access should be turned on by default, it should also be easy to turn it off, and if desired to give guests read/write access to the folder.

You should also be able to specify local users who will have read/write access, and these local users should sync with smb users invisibly (ie: the user doesn't need to know that there are two password databases being used).

The Properties window for a folder should contain a Sharing tab with all the options available to choose. I also propose a Shared Folders option in the Preferences menu should list the currently shared folders along with their settings, and provide a button to take you into the dialogue where you can set the options.

By default a share should be accessible as Read Only by anyone on the network without a username or password (guest access). While guest access should be turned on by default, it should also be easy to turn it off, and if desired to give guests read/write access to the folder. You should also be able to specify local users who will have read/write access, and these local users should sync with smb users invisibly (ie: the user doesn't need to know that there are two password databases being used). The Properties window for a folder should contain a Sharing tab with all the options available to choose. I also propose a Shared Folders option in the Preferences menu should list the currently shared folders along with their settings, and provide a button to take you into the dialogue where you can set the options.

Written by dfme the 26 Jan 09 at 12:36.

There is already an application which allows this.
If the samba package is installed on ubuntu also install this application: Samba Server Configuration Tool - A graphical interface for configuring SMB shares

There is already an application which allows this. If the samba package is installed on ubuntu also install this application: Samba Server Configuration Tool - A graphical interface for configuring SMB shares

Written by fermulator the 2 Sep 09 at 12:44.

How about: Accueil?

http://gentoo.ovibes.net/nautilus-share/mediawiki-1.4.4/index.php/Accueil

Actually ... this may have been replaced with "nautilus-share"?

How about: Accueil? http://gentoo.ovibes.net/nautilus-share/mediawiki-1.4.4/index.php/Accueil Actually ... this may have been replaced with "nautilus-share"?

Written by Agafonov the 18 Nov 09 at 21:29.

We need a simple to use step-by-step wizard which will ask some really simple questions and generate an smb.conf file based on the user's choices.
How about https://launchpad.net/sscw ? It is a working example, although right now it's using zenity. If re-written using python it would become a very handy companion to nautilus-share.
We even should not include smb.conf in the samba package: once installed, samba server will not work until the user has defined how it should behave.

We need a simple to use step-by-step wizard which will ask some really simple questions and generate an smb.conf file based on the user's choices. How about https://launchpad.net/sscw ? It is a working example, although right now it's using zenity. If re-written using python it would become a very handy companion to nautilus-share. We even should not include smb.conf in the samba package: once installed, samba server will not work until the user has defined how it should behave.

Written by Klau3 the 11 Mar 10 at 01:51.

Right now, when right clicking on a folder and selecting “Sharing Options” – for example you want to share your Music folder and create a guest access to it – Samba will only share the files within the music folder but NOT THE SUB-FOLDERS where all the music is.

When sharing a folder, most people want to give access to sub-folders. For that reason, I suggest to reverse the handling of Samba sharing, so that you would have to click on an extra box to show that you don't want Samba to share sub-folders.

<img src="http://justoneidea.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/improve-samba-sharing-e28093-sharing-sub-folders-by-default.png" /> Right now, when right clicking on a folder and selecting “Sharing Options” – for example you want to share your Music folder and create a guest access to it – Samba will only share the files within the music folder but NOT THE SUB-FOLDERS where all the music is. When sharing a folder, most people want to give access to sub-folders. For that reason, I suggest to reverse the handling of Samba sharing, so that you would have to click on an extra box to show that you don't want Samba to share sub-folders.

Written by geekgaurav the 30 Jul 10 at 17:17.

Able to handle connectivity Issues as Well As Sharing in Wizard Like Simple Interface for A New User

PS : More Ideas Can be Implemented In it

Able to handle connectivity Issues as Well As Sharing in Wizard Like Simple Interface for A New User PS : More Ideas Can be Implemented In it

Written by qwerty800 the 6 Feb 11 at 21:05.

I personally have a file depot on my network where users can drop the files they want everyone to access.
It used to be on a NTFS partition, but is now hosted on the samba network. Doing such was a fairly hard task, since NTFS doesn't save permissions for each file, and is mounted with the 700 permission, while Samba requires XX4 or superior. I had to modify my fstab config file for that, and that's definitively not what I'd call user-friendly.

I personally have a file depot on my network where users can drop the files they want everyone to access. It used to be on a NTFS partition, but is now hosted on the samba network. Doing such was a fairly hard task, since NTFS doesn't save permissions for each file, and is mounted with the 700 permission, while Samba requires XX4 or superior. I had to modify my fstab config file for that, and that's definitively not what I'd call user-friendly.

Written by komputes the 17 Aug 11 at 22:42.

The question on many user's mind is "What am I sharing (and to whom)?"

“System > Administration > Shared folders” is a feature that has been removed since 8.04. There has been no replacement for this tool since its disappearance.

Solution is to create a utility that should provide a graphical front-end to configure both samba system shares (managed in /etc/samba/smb.conf) and samba usershares (/var/lib/samba/usershares/).

Stepping a bit outside the scope of the issue (samba), this application should have a pluggable infrastructure which can also be used to show and configure other types of shares (nfs, ftp, ubuntuone).

Central administration, what a concept!

The question on many user's mind is "What am I sharing (and to whom)?" “System > Administration > Shared folders” is a feature that has been removed since 8.04. There has been no replacement for this tool since its disappearance. Solution is to create a utility that should provide a graphical front-end to configure both samba system shares (managed in /etc/samba/smb.conf) and samba usershares (/var/lib/samba/usershares/). Stepping a bit outside the scope of the issue (samba), this application should have a pluggable infrastructure which can also be used to show and configure other types of shares (nfs, ftp, ubuntuone). Central administration, what a concept!

Written by vinlos the 29 Feb 08 at 10:46.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #1242 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #1242 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Hetor the 31 Mar 09 at 12:57.

Create an option for installation disk that will install just Ubuntu's boot menu to make Ubuntu accessible after Windows installation.

Create an option for installation disk that will install just Ubuntu's boot menu to make Ubuntu accessible after Windows installation.

Written by stoffel the 31 Mar 09 at 21:39.

So, similar as the first solution, but with these differences:
* people do not understand "boot menu"
* it puts focus on the fact that the Windows installer is crap that can break the user's system, whilst at the same time pointing out Ubuntu has the tools to fix this crap

So, similar as the first solution, but with these differences: * people do not understand "boot menu" * it puts focus on the fact that the Windows installer is crap that can break the user's system, whilst at the same time pointing out Ubuntu has the tools to fix this crap

Written by cheesehead the 31 Mar 09 at 21:50.

LiveCD should check for an existing MBR or grub, and offer to reinstall grub only if the LiveCD finds an MBR or broken grub

LiveCD should check for an existing MBR or grub, and offer to reinstall grub only if the LiveCD finds an MBR or broken grub

Written by supermorph the 3 Apr 09 at 18:26.

as an option as WELL as placing grub into mbr , i would suggest Making a DUPLICATE of the mbr and place the mbr file in windows boot.ini and the vista bootmgr menu's (should windows be located in the install)

i had to re-do somebodys system, they was very dubious on linux (they had another distro and it didnt do wireless, so they over generalised and thought gnu/linux as a whole was not good) and i suggested to fix thier pc,
they left it with me, so i put thier media-centre xp first, all thier apps how they liked, installed a hidden user for me, and installed jaunty 9.04 at the end of the hdd, and made the users exactly like the xp, (both with firefox, and wine 4 ubuntu) i also took the liberty of extracting the installed mbr of ubuntu to a file "ubuntu.mbr" i called it, and placed it into thier xp partition (hidded,system applied) and added a menu "Ubuntu Linux" to thier boot.ini as the second option, i then proceeded to make a recovery image of this setup and put it to four dvd's with all of the dvd's bootable to a registered acronis 8 personal of myne, so if they restore it will ALWAYS work, and if they need whats on there they can remove the mbr and STILL use ubuntu (or put it back if they ask how to do it)

mabye this could be done, and add an option to restore this mbr file to the hdd in recovery mode on the live/alt disks?

sorry for the long post, but i think it will actually help because of the way i done things, theres no way ubuntu cannot be run in that configuration.

as an option as WELL as placing grub into mbr , i would suggest Making a DUPLICATE of the mbr and place the mbr file in windows boot.ini and the vista bootmgr menu's (should windows be located in the install) i had to re-do somebodys system, they was very dubious on linux (they had another distro and it didnt do wireless, so they over generalised and thought gnu/linux as a whole was not good) and i suggested to fix thier pc, they left it with me, so i put thier media-centre xp first, all thier apps how they liked, installed a hidden user for me, and installed jaunty 9.04 at the end of the hdd, and made the users exactly like the xp, (both with firefox, and wine 4 ubuntu) i also took the liberty of extracting the installed mbr of ubuntu to a file "ubuntu.mbr" i called it, and placed it into thier xp partition (hidded,system applied) and added a menu "Ubuntu Linux" to thier boot.ini as the second option, i then proceeded to make a recovery image of this setup and put it to four dvd's with all of the dvd's bootable to a registered acronis 8 personal of myne, so if they restore it will ALWAYS work, and if they need whats on there they can remove the mbr and STILL use ubuntu (or put it back if they ask how to do it) mabye this could be done, and add an option to restore this mbr file to the hdd in recovery mode on the live/alt disks? sorry for the long post, but i think it will actually help because of the way i done things, theres no way ubuntu cannot be run in that configuration. kind regards supermorph

Written by jamesisin the 7 Apr 09 at 06:38.

Create an ISO available to Ubuntu users (linked probably in the Help menu &c) which has been set up specifically for repairing version x.y of Ubuntu.

(Part of my "Keep the installer trim" philosophy.)

Create an ISO available to Ubuntu users (linked probably in the Help menu &c) which has been set up specifically for repairing version x.y of Ubuntu. (Part of my "Keep the installer trim" philosophy.)

Written by codeslicer the 27 Feb 09 at 20:33.

One of the options for a bootable partition in GParted would be to Reinstall Boot Manager, after which an option to install either GRUB or LILO on to the hard partition.

One of the options for a bootable partition in GParted would be to Reinstall Boot Manager, after which an option to install either GRUB or LILO on to the hard partition.

Written by TheLions the 1 Mar 09 at 20:41.

instead making repairing tool why not include a easy-to-understeand-do-it-yourself guide how to repair GRUB?

instead making repairing tool why not include a easy-to-understeand-do-it-yourself guide how to repair GRUB?

Written by josinalvo the 7 Mar 09 at 04:08.

There is a windows app called super grub disk that is able to solve the problem (The odd name comes from a live cd that does the same job)

I propose this app should be on the livecd, on that part that is acessible from windows (a.k.a. outside squashfs)

There is a windows app called super grub disk that is able to solve the problem (The odd name comes from a live cd that does the same job) I propose this app should be on the livecd, on that part that is acessible from windows (a.k.a. outside squashfs)

Written by pengo the 9 Mar 09 at 02:25.

This will probably get voted down for mentioning MICROSOFT, but as this problem is generally a problem with Windows rudely taking over from Grub, why not make a Windows application that installs or restores GRUB?

This will probably get voted down for mentioning MICROSOFT, but as this problem is generally a problem with Windows rudely taking over from Grub, why not make a Windows application that installs or restores GRUB?

Written by jekristiansen the 10 Jan 10 at 01:45.

It would be nice if there was an option to re-install boot loaders for both Ubuntu and Windows. Remove Ubuntu + Grub, and the Windows boot is missing.
Install Windows, and there's no Grub
I installed windows again because of that...

It would be nice if there was an option to re-install boot loaders for both Ubuntu and Windows. Remove Ubuntu + Grub, and the Windows boot is missing. Install Windows, and there's no Grub I installed windows again because of that...

Written by LordHawke13 the 8 Feb 10 at 04:34.

I suggest an application that will run the contents of a boot disk either to an internal guest display (as in a Virtual Machine) or to an attached external display (like a second monitor) to install an operating system for dual booting. Since it can be done from inside the host OS, it can suppress the secondary OS' process of overwriting the MBR, preserving the primary bootloader, and optionally writing entries to the bootloader's boot menu for chainloading the secondary OS. Such an app would eliminate the need of a bootable LiveCD as the bootloader will be intact and in no need of restoration.

I suggest an application that will run the contents of a boot disk either to an internal guest display (as in a Virtual Machine) or to an attached external display (like a second monitor) to install an operating system for dual booting. Since it can be done from inside the host OS, it can suppress the secondary OS' process of overwriting the MBR, preserving the primary bootloader, and optionally writing entries to the bootloader's boot menu for chainloading the secondary OS. Such an app would eliminate the need of a bootable LiveCD as the bootloader will be intact and in no need of restoration.

Written by pfelelep the 15 Feb 10 at 07:40.

25 years ago today, I was able to simply change mac os 6 boot folder by just removing or adding the Finder file. That was useable.
25 years ago today I was able to repair most non booting DOS issues by just typing SYS C: That was almost useable.

What do we have in 2010 ? A OS that breaks its own bootloader when you try to update it. And that's when you managed to install it in the first place... And if you're to fix it (I guess most debuting users will just wipe their disk and start over again from here) you have to download 3 different discs to try from (live, alt, supergrub) . That's progress I guess ?

Grub is excellent software, but its useability and reliability need to be reinforced !

What I need on the install disc is a tool that lets me :
step 1 : describe partitions in my system. no installer or tool can guess that stuff in a mildly sophisticated system. there could also be an automatic mode for simple 1 or 2 partition setups. LVM should always be natively supported.
Step 2 : choose mbr or grub partition target
Step 3 : Click Fix and reboot !

25 years ago today, I was able to simply change mac os 6 boot folder by just removing or adding the Finder file. That was useable. 25 years ago today I was able to repair most non booting DOS issues by just typing SYS C: That was almost useable. What do we have in 2010 ? A OS that breaks its own bootloader when you try to update it. And that's when you managed to install it in the first place... And if you're to fix it (I guess most debuting users will just wipe their disk and start over again from here) you have to download 3 different discs to try from (live, alt, supergrub) . That's progress I guess ? Grub is excellent software, but its useability and reliability need to be reinforced ! What I need on the install disc is a tool that lets me : step 1 : describe partitions in my system. no installer or tool can guess that stuff in a mildly sophisticated system. there could also be an automatic mode for simple 1 or 2 partition setups. LVM should always be natively supported. Step 2 : choose mbr or grub partition target Step 3 : Click Fix and reboot !

Written by leorolla the 11 Mar 10 at 17:26.

People who try Ubuntu for one day (perhaps because a friend insisted) and then decide to wipe it out, find themselves desperate when they realize that their computer is not working at all.
And they say that it's Ubuntu's fault!
And they are right!
In fact it is the installation of Ubuntu that has just broken the user's system.

If this or that OS is crap, it will be obvious from the facts. It is for the user, and only for the user, to come up with that conclusion.

What Ubuntu has to do is to be as good as it can, and other OS's won't provide equivalent tools.
As for today, they don't come even close, but who knows...

If an Ubuntu application will propose the user to "fix" the MBR, it should propose to "fix" the MBR in both directions: to replace the current MBR by Grub, or to replace it by another OS's bootloader.

No matter if it will do it at the Live CD, a Desktop application or an application to be run inside other OS's, it should offer both possibilities.

This would make Ubuntu inarguably superior.

People who try Ubuntu for one day (perhaps because a friend insisted) and then decide to wipe it out, find themselves desperate when they realize that their computer is not working at all. And they say that it's Ubuntu's fault! And they are right! In fact it is the installation of Ubuntu that has just broken the user's system. If this or that OS is crap, it will be obvious from the facts. It is for the user, and only for the user, to come up with that conclusion. What Ubuntu has to do is to be as good as it can, and other OS's won't provide equivalent tools. As for today, they don't come even close, but who knows... If an Ubuntu application will propose the user to "fix" the MBR, it should propose to "fix" the MBR in both directions: to replace the current MBR by Grub, or to replace it by another OS's bootloader. No matter if it will do it at the Live CD, a Desktop application or an application to be run inside other OS's, it should offer both possibilities. This would make Ubuntu inarguably superior. If the user chooses to fix the MBR using another OS's bootloader, and the application can still detect that some Linux partition, then it should implement an ingenious procedure to chainload Grub from the other OS (as described at Solution #5, for the case of Windows).

Written by checoimg the 1 Feb 11 at 03:06.

Auto restoring option on grub (don't tell me if it is posible or not).
Make Grub Reinstall itself until you enter Ubuntu and change that option, so after any change grub will overwrite the new loader and persist to be the used loader. Of course updating the list of OS and maybe add on Gparted a detct OS option in case of problems detecting new OS installed on same Hard Disk

Auto restoring option on grub (don't tell me if it is posible or not). Make Grub Reinstall itself until you enter Ubuntu and change that option, so after any change grub will overwrite the new loader and persist to be the used loader. Of course updating the list of OS and maybe add on Gparted a detct OS option in case of problems detecting new OS installed on same Hard Disk

Written by mikemaccana the 29 Feb 08 at 01:19.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #384 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #384 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by bukzor the 9 Apr 11 at 19:38.

@Developer: If you pick the winner of the contest, then surely you will have seen it beforehand... This can easily be done. Please reconsider. For a great reference see the recent collaborative competition hosted by TF2 and Polycount.org ( http://www.polycount.com/team-fortress-2-polycount-pack/ ). This created valuable assets for TF2, prestige for Polycount members, and great buzz for both.

@Developer: If you pick the winner of the contest, then surely you will have seen it beforehand... This can easily be done. Please reconsider. For a great reference see the recent collaborative competition hosted by TF2 and Polycount.org ( http://www.polycount.com/team-fortress-2-polycount-pack/ ). This created valuable assets for TF2, prestige for Polycount members, and great buzz for both.

Written by aysiu the 28 Feb 08 at 18:51.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #141 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #141 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Ubuwu the 5 Feb 09 at 17:24.

StartUp Manager, or SUM, is a gui tool for changing settings for Grub, Grub2, Usplash and Splashy.

http://web.telia.com/~u88005282/sum/

StartUp Manager, or SUM, is a gui tool for changing settings for Grub, Grub2, Usplash and Splashy. http://web.telia.com/~u88005282/sum/

Written by descentspb the 3 May 08 at 13:18.

For example right-click on the partition and bring up it's options, where you can change the label.

For example right-click on the partition and bring up it's options, where you can change the label.

Written by spyyder the 16 Mar 08 at 18:27.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #4848 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #4848 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Ubuwu the 28 Feb 08 at 18:37.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #129 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #129 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Kiwii the 8 Jul 11 at 17:13.

It would be handy if there were a volume control and device selection button right on an audio enabled application's top panel. So the users knows exactly where to control the volume of wich application. It could be in the top-right corner of each app that is playing or listening to sound in unity.

It would be handy if there were a volume control and device selection button right on an audio enabled application's top panel. So the users knows exactly where to control the volume of wich application. It could be in the top-right corner of each app that is playing or listening to sound in unity.

Written by kevinfishburne the 28 Apr 08 at 19:10.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #7792 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #7792 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by bukzor the 9 Apr 11 at 19:12.

There is already a system to do this: debtorrent (http://debtorrent.alioth.debian.org/)

The *main* problem with it is that there are so few users that have it installed. Making this installed and active in the default Ubuntu distribution solves this bug, as well as implementing Idea #7792 (and its 30 duplicates).

It seems fairly mature, but probably still needs some polishing for inclusion in the Ubuntu default. In particular, we need to ensure that the upload settings are very easily tweaked, both automatically and manually.

There is already a system to do this: debtorrent (http://debtorrent.alioth.debian.org/) The *main* problem with it is that there are so few users that have it installed. Making this installed and active in the default Ubuntu distribution solves this bug, as well as implementing Idea #7792 (and its 30 duplicates). It seems fairly mature, but probably still needs some polishing for inclusion in the Ubuntu default. In particular, we need to ensure that the upload settings are very easily tweaked, both automatically and manually.

Written by lengau the 25 May 11 at 20:32.

Rather than making debtorrent the default, which could be harmful to a large number of users (some ISPs block Bittorrent, as do many universities, etc.), we should allow users to choose debtorrent an option in the installer (as well as being able to enable/disable it in the software centre).

Including the debtorrent and apt-transport-debtorrent packages on the CD/DVD will add just short of 300 KiB to the disc images.

Rather than making debtorrent the default, which could be harmful to a large number of users (some ISPs block Bittorrent, as do many universities, etc.), we should allow users to choose debtorrent an option in the installer (as well as being able to enable/disable it in the software centre). Including the debtorrent and apt-transport-debtorrent packages on the CD/DVD will add just short of 300 KiB to the disc images.

Written by Lyfang the 24 Jun 11 at 08:01.

Make DebTorrent or Apt-P2P active by default and stop seeding after reaching 1:1 ratio by default.

Make DebTorrent or Apt-P2P active by default and stop seeding after reaching 1:1 ratio by default.

Written by AdlerHorst the 29 Dec 11 at 10:49.

Run Torrend and HTTP download mixed. If Torrend is slowed down, the http download stil do his job. If torrend is faster, the HTTP plays the role of one of many download streams.

Run Torrend and HTTP download mixed. If Torrend is slowed down, the http download stil do his job. If torrend is faster, the HTTP plays the role of one of many download streams.

Written by smenjas the 29 Feb 08 at 01:34.

If an application needs my attention, it's task bar button should simply pulse so I can turn my attention to it when I'm ready. Pidgin does this; why not everything else?

If an application needs my attention, it's task bar button should simply pulse so I can turn my attention to it when I'm ready. Pidgin does this; why not everything else?

Written by smenjas the 5 Feb 09 at 09:59.

On Mac OS X, Growl provides a system-wide way to notify the user that something has happened without getting in the way. I'd very much like to see Ubuntu adopt something like that.

On Mac OS X, Growl provides a system-wide way to notify the user that something has happened without getting in the way. I'd very much like to see Ubuntu adopt something like that.

Written by runesvend the 29 Mar 09 at 17:40.

I'm imagining that pressing and holding a button (Control, Alt, or some other key of choice) while clicking on a program launcher icon in the panel, would make the window of the newly launched program appear _behind_ the currently active window. That way, I can quickly and easily press Alt+Tab to get to the newly opened application window when I wish to.

I'm imagining that pressing and holding a button (Control, Alt, or some other key of choice) while clicking on a program launcher icon in the panel, would make the window of the newly launched program appear _behind_ the currently active window. That way, I can quickly and easily press Alt+Tab to get to the newly opened application window when I wish to.

Written by MathUHenry the 9 Jul 09 at 18:09.

When a program is launched, it is granted the "active window" status. I would like programs to not be able to grant themselves the "active window" status. When another program is selected, the loading program is moved to the background and should be forced to stay there (until the user selects it). When I press ctrl alt d, I want it to minimize until I select it.

In short, don't let programs bring themselves to the front (even update manager). If a program MUST notify me of something, then I think the new notification system is the coolest/most-convenient-ever way to do it.

When a program is launched, it is granted the "active window" status. I would like programs to not be able to grant themselves the "active window" status. When another program is selected, the loading program is moved to the background and should be forced to stay there (until the user selects it). When I press ctrl alt d, I want it to minimize until I select it. In short, don't let programs bring themselves to the front (even update manager). If a program MUST notify me of something, then I think the new notification system is the coolest/most-convenient-ever way to do it.

Written by pererik87 the 6 Jan 10 at 09:44.

The "preload window" should set the order position and workspace, then the program should not be able to steal focus or change workspace any more after started. If a program does not have a preload screen and uses long time to start it should be given a container or something.

In other words: programs should be locked to the order and workspace they get when someone start them unless user changer the order.

Gimp is an example of a program that takes long time to start and then steals your focus, even if you change workspace and select unlimited of other windows.

The "preload window" should set the order position and workspace, then the program should not be able to steal focus or change workspace any more after started. If a program does not have a preload screen and uses long time to start it should be given a container or something. In other words: programs should be locked to the order and workspace they get when someone start them unless user changer the order. Gimp is an example of a program that takes long time to start and then steals your focus, even if you change workspace and select unlimited of other windows.

Written by orblivion the 16 Sep 09 at 22:22.

1) More things should pop under. This could of course be annoying if you're trying to run a program and have to switch windows every time.

2) Warning periods. If things pop over, I need to have a warning. Maybe in Compiz, windows could fade in for a certain period of time (.5 to 1 seconds, user configured) without yet having focus. In Metacity, they could disable input controls for the same period. This interrupts what I'm doing, but at least I notice before I inadvertently do anything.

For notifications or dialogs, I think #1 would be just fine. I'll get to the window when I have a chance. #2 would be good for programs I deliberately open, or dialogs that really need my attention.

1) More things should pop under. This could of course be annoying if you're trying to run a program and have to switch windows every time. 2) Warning periods. If things pop over, I need to have a warning. Maybe in Compiz, windows could fade in for a certain period of time (.5 to 1 seconds, user configured) without yet having focus. In Metacity, they could disable input controls for the same period. This interrupts what I'm doing, but at least I notice before I inadvertently do anything. For notifications or dialogs, I think #1 would be just fine. I'll get to the window when I have a chance. #2 would be good for programs I deliberately open, or dialogs that really need my attention.

Written by owenduffy the 3 Oct 09 at 14:44.

Why not prevent windows from stealing focus, but have their icons on the Gnome panel (or awn, or whatever) blink or otherwise make themselves conspicuous? That way the user is aware that another window requires attention, but doesn't have to deal with it immediately, either to respond to it or close/minimise it.

Why not prevent windows from stealing focus, but have their icons on the Gnome panel (or awn, or whatever) blink or otherwise make themselves conspicuous? That way the user is aware that another window requires attention, but doesn't have to deal with it immediately, either to respond to it or close/minimise it.

Written by xubaj the 10 Nov 09 at 12:38.

while typing, no window should be allowed to steal focus until the keyboard is unused for about 2 secs. instead they should pop-under.

while typing, no window should be allowed to steal focus until the keyboard is unused for about 2 secs. instead they should pop-under.

Written by xubaj the 10 Nov 09 at 12:44.

if windows want to pop-up and steal focus, they should be displayed highlighted in background (or very glassy in foreground), so you know that a window wants to get focus. but the windows stay in background until you stop typing. when you stop typing they all appear in there original order.

if windows want to pop-up and steal focus, they should be displayed highlighted in background (or very glassy in foreground), so you know that a window wants to get focus. but the windows stay in background until you stop typing. when you stop typing they all appear in there original order.

Written by lapgoat the 13 Oct 10 at 12:09.

The window manager should watch mouse movement and keyboard usage. If there has been a keystroke in the last second or the mouse pointer has moved more than a few pixels in the last half second, assume that the user may continue typing or click. Place the new popup at the lowest Z-level to minimize risk of accidentally clicking and retain keyboard focus on the current window.

If an application is in need of input but has been denied it, flash the task switcher or add an icon to the notification area to get the user's attention. If the application urgently needs attention, send a notification to via the selected preferred method (libnotify or such).

If there hasn't been any input in the above timeframes, the new window can be granted the ability to pop up at the top Z-level, but it should be denied keyboard focus until the user interacts with it.

If the user has requested an application window to open, the expected behavior is that the new window will come to the top and be given focus. Some heuristics should be developed to maximize the probability that this expected behavior occurs, otherwise the window manager becomes difficult to use.

The window manager should watch mouse movement and keyboard usage. If there has been a keystroke in the last second or the mouse pointer has moved more than a few pixels in the last half second, assume that the user may continue typing or click. Place the new popup at the lowest Z-level to minimize risk of accidentally clicking and retain keyboard focus on the current window. If an application is in need of input but has been denied it, flash the task switcher or add an icon to the notification area to get the user's attention. If the application urgently needs attention, send a notification to via the selected preferred method (libnotify or such). If there hasn't been any input in the above timeframes, the new window can be granted the ability to pop up at the top Z-level, but it should be denied keyboard focus until the user interacts with it. If the user has requested an application window to open, the expected behavior is that the new window will come to the top and be given focus. Some heuristics should be developed to maximize the probability that this expected behavior occurs, otherwise the window manager becomes difficult to use.

Written by der_hede the 15 Oct 10 at 12:14.

There are many reasons why focus stealing is annoying. One is you have to find your old window if you do not want to use the new window directly.

The other is the group of simple popup windows asking you short questions or inform you about something.

While the first one is no problem, you still can switch to your desired window, the second one is very bad if you are writing a letter or something else.

Imagine the popup "Are you shure you want to do something [no][yes]" pops up while you are writing something and the default value you are accepting with [space] (an often pressed key in writings) is not the one you intentionally wanted to press...

For the later one there's a KISS solution: No one can react to any new windows in a certain time period. Lets say 1-2 Seconds. So there's simply no chance there is any usable input to such windows inside a 1-2 Seconds time frame from the creation of the window.

So one solution would be to simply ignore all new input to new windows for 1-2 Seconds.

This could be as simple as a default option for "Popup" Style Windows in GTK/Qt/etc.

There are many reasons why focus stealing is annoying. One is you have to find your old window if you do not want to use the new window directly. The other is the group of simple popup windows asking you short questions or inform you about something. While the first one is no problem, you still can switch to your desired window, the second one is very bad if you are writing a letter or something else. Imagine the popup "Are you shure you want to do something [no][yes]" pops up while you are writing something and the default value you are accepting with [space] (an often pressed key in writings) is not the one you intentionally wanted to press... For the later one there's a KISS solution: No one can react to any new windows in a certain time period. Lets say 1-2 Seconds. So there's simply no chance there is any usable input to such windows inside a 1-2 Seconds time frame from the creation of the window. So one solution would be to simply ignore all new input to new windows for 1-2 Seconds. This could be as simple as a default option for "Popup" Style Windows in GTK/Qt/etc.

Written by Lachu the 16 Oct 10 at 13:54.

Instead of allowing to steal focus, only suggest user to switch onto new window or window asking for focus. Solution is already implemented in KDE SC - the task item will higlights, but we needs some think more visible.

I suggest to show transparent preview of window asking for focus in top-right corner of screen. Desktop environment will display this preview only, when keyboard/mouse are inactive for long period of time. Also, it will be displayed for few second after asking for focus.

Instead of allowing to steal focus, only suggest user to switch onto new window or window asking for focus. Solution is already implemented in KDE SC - the task item will higlights, but we needs some think more visible. I suggest to show transparent preview of window asking for focus in top-right corner of screen. Desktop environment will display this preview only, when keyboard/mouse are inactive for long period of time. Also, it will be displayed for few second after asking for focus.

Written by Aielyn the 19 Oct 10 at 06:46.

It seems the problem is that you want to not lose the *focus* on the current window, but you also want to be able to quickly see and react to new windows that pop up.

Why not essentially push new windows to the top of the stack as far as display is concern, but keep the focus on the original window? Then, perhaps a time-based element could allow the system to automatically switch to the new window if no input is occurring within the set time. Another alternative would be to have it pushed to the top of the display stack, but after a set number of seconds, it would minimise (showing the minimise effect) and put a highlight on the tab for the new window.

This would be an option, of course, and the time-based element would be an option as well.

It seems the problem is that you want to not lose the *focus* on the current window, but you also want to be able to quickly see and react to new windows that pop up. Why not essentially push new windows to the top of the stack as far as display is concern, but keep the focus on the original window? Then, perhaps a time-based element could allow the system to automatically switch to the new window if no input is occurring within the set time. Another alternative would be to have it pushed to the top of the display stack, but after a set number of seconds, it would minimise (showing the minimise effect) and put a highlight on the tab for the new window. This would be an option, of course, and the time-based element would be an option as well.

Written by shadowentity the 28 Sep 11 at 09:31.

a plug-in interface to use a module that makes decisions about the z-level, focus and maybe even the workspace and/or window-size and/or orientation of the window that is about coming up.

a configurable default module should exist and be used by default to apply simple rulesets such as "never", "always", "only raise'", etc. and offer an option to eval a script function or something.

it would keep simple things simple and make complex things possible.

a plug-in interface to use a module that makes decisions about the z-level, focus and maybe even the workspace and/or window-size and/or orientation of the window that is about coming up. a configurable default module should exist and be used by default to apply simple rulesets such as "never", "always", "only raise'", etc. and offer an option to eval a script function or something. it would keep simple things simple and make complex things possible.

Written by gaxi the 21 Oct 11 at 07:27.

CompizConfig Settings Manager > General > General Options > Focus & Raise Behaviour
Focus Prevention Level = "Very High"

For me this works perfectly, new windows do not steal my focus any more when typing.
I'm using 11.04

CompizConfig Settings Manager > General > General Options > Focus & Raise Behaviour Focus Prevention Level = "Very High" For me this works perfectly, new windows do not steal my focus any more when typing. I'm using 11.04

Written by tloxscrew the 29 Feb 08 at 00:54.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #356 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #356 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by cheesehead the 8 Apr 09 at 03:22.

The 'ionice' command sets the io scheduling class and priority for a program. A user can easily downgrade the io priority of any process. ionice is included in the 'schedutils' package, already in the repositories.
It's powerful and solves a lot of disk-thrashing if used properly. Read the man page before using it!

The 'ionice' command sets the io scheduling class and priority for a program. A user can easily downgrade the io priority of any process. ionice is included in the 'schedutils' package, already in the repositories. It's powerful and solves a lot of disk-thrashing if used properly. Read the man page before using it!

Written by antiriad_ubuntu the 16 Jan 09 at 17:18.

identify kio slaves activity with same protocol + src + dst and append action to a queue. maybe it's not suitable for all protocols but on file copying would be nice.

identify kio slaves activity with same protocol + src + dst and append action to a queue. maybe it's not suitable for all protocols but on file copying would be nice.

Written by idzuna the 19 Mar 09 at 23:18.

I suggest that there be a queue for copying between the same HDD's or even one's that are busy.

Example:
Task 1: HDD1 > HDD2 10 mins of copy time
Then the user wants to copy something from HDD1 > HDD3
Task 2: HDD1 > HDD3 5 mins of copy time

If they were in a queue (perhaps a queue that the user could edit in order of importance) the overall copy time wouldn't be affected.

also, if both.
HDD1 copies to HDD2
HDD3 copies to HDD4
then they could run simultaneously as the head of the HDD's is dedicated to each task.
Note: I say copy, but this can be applied to any HDD task

I suggest that there be a queue for copying between the same HDD's or even one's that are busy. Example: Task 1: HDD1 > HDD2 10 mins of copy time Then the user wants to copy something from HDD1 > HDD3 Task 2: HDD1 > HDD3 5 mins of copy time If they were in a queue (perhaps a queue that the user could edit in order of importance) the overall copy time wouldn't be affected. also, if both. HDD1 copies to HDD2 HDD3 copies to HDD4 then they could run simultaneously as the head of the HDD's is dedicated to each task. Note: I say copy, but this can be applied to any HDD task

Written by xubaj the 27 Aug 09 at 00:01.

clicking the pause button pauses the transfer
click-dragging down reduces the transfer speed
the pause button should indicate this feature with a little slider on the left side

reducing the speed is useful if the file transfer consumes to much CPU or HD time and you can't keep on working

clicking the pause button pauses the transfer click-dragging down reduces the transfer speed the pause button should indicate this feature with a little slider on the left side reducing the speed is useful if the file transfer consumes to much CPU or HD time and you can't keep on working

Written by xubaj the 27 Aug 09 at 00:08.

sometimes you start a transfer of some big files and while still transferring, you want to copy some small documents to work with. the small files would be enqueued and you'd have to wait for the big files to complete. in this case the small files should be prioritized.

sometimes you start a transfer of some big files and while still transferring, you want to copy some small documents to work with. the small files would be enqueued and you'd have to wait for the big files to complete. in this case the small files should be prioritized.

Written by cudjoe the 28 Nov 09 at 11:04.

I read somewhere that the nautilus code would not allow easily to manage the queue, because it relies on gvfs to run the move/copy process.

I propose that nautilus should offer a hook to define an gconf entry that specifies the move/copy utility to use.

Because there are several tools already, but they don't replace the default copy/move operation.
Eg. Minicopier, Ultracopier, ...

I read somewhere that the nautilus code would not allow easily to manage the queue, because it relies on gvfs to run the move/copy process. I propose that nautilus should offer a hook to define an gconf entry that specifies the move/copy utility to use. Because there are several tools already, but they don't replace the default copy/move operation. Eg. Minicopier, Ultracopier, ...

Written by XDarkness81 the 26 Apr 10 at 21:24.

Single click high priority (Move/copy this file/folder next )

Allow simultaneous copy's on differed devices. (checkbox)
For all that matter compression, encryptions and so on should be able to be placed in that queue to...
Only on system idle checkbox (set copy/move/extract/compress ... as nice level 15 )
And let the app remember the choices you made. (idle, simcopy)
(Or better, put them in a configuration dialog) keep the file action dialog simple)

Ah and put a hide to background after 3 seconds/on large transfers to... (maybe pop back up after a large transfer) Since now it only on top or minimize, i hate that!

Thanks nice idea, it has been buggin me to for a long time..

[EDIT!]
In light of hiding the information dialog...
After the copy/move dialog has calculated its ETA if that should be longer than 1 minute disable the keepontop. if its almost finished (for all files in queue) (let's say the last 10 seconds or 30) pop it back up.. "so you know.."
[/EDIT]

Single click high priority (Move/copy this file/folder next ) Allow simultaneous copy's on differed devices. (checkbox) For all that matter compression, encryptions and so on should be able to be placed in that queue to... Only on system idle checkbox (set copy/move/extract/compress ... as nice level 15 ) And let the app remember the choices you made. (idle, simcopy) (Or better, put them in a configuration dialog) keep the file action dialog simple) Ah and put a hide to background after 3 seconds/on large transfers to... (maybe pop back up after a large transfer) Since now it only on top or minimize, i hate that! Thanks nice idea, it has been buggin me to for a long time.. [EDIT!] In light of hiding the information dialog... After the copy/move dialog has calculated its ETA if that should be longer than 1 minute disable the keepontop. if its almost finished (for all files in queue) (let's say the last 10 seconds or 30) pop it back up.. "so you know.." [/EDIT]

Written by Ypthor the 12 May 10 at 04:30.

In case I want to do somethingelse while waiting for the transfer to finish. This could be automatic (but overridable), with nautilus watching if there is user activity, and raising io priority only when the user is idle.

In case I want to do somethingelse while waiting for the transfer to finish. This could be automatic (but overridable), with nautilus watching if there is user activity, and raising io priority only when the user is idle.

Written by ways the 28 May 10 at 09:53.

I agree with lots of these solutions, I just wantet to add something.

When you have one or more transfers going (or waiting in queue), allow drag'n'drop on the queue to enqueue more files to the same destination. Example here:

http://tvboks.no-ip.org/upload/files/copy_more_files2.png

I agree with lots of these solutions, I just wantet to add something. When you have one or more transfers going (or waiting in queue), allow drag'n'drop on the queue to enqueue more files to the same destination. Example here: http://tvboks.no-ip.org/upload/files/copy_more_files2.png

Written by ghostry the 4 Jun 10 at 09:08.

In the duplication/migration document window cancels the left side adds the suspension button
This not only solves the duplication/migration/elimination priority problem, moreover may when necessary reduce hard disk's busy degree, is advantageous for us fast to complete other work.

In the duplication/migration document window cancels the left side adds the suspension button This not only solves the duplication/migration/elimination priority problem, moreover may when necessary reduce hard disk's busy degree, is advantageous for us fast to complete other work.

Written by XDarkness81 the 13 Jul 10 at 20:58.

Don't know if this feature is implemented bud the file transfer manager could also keep in mind the filesystem its copying to, if i remember correct the new ext4 filesystem can reserve a few blocks of diskspace that can eliminate fragmentation.

maybe optional as plugins to the manager (and not that we have to select them later on, just add them and load them into memory if they are usefull (if filesystem exists/target fs is...)

Don't know if this feature is implemented bud the file transfer manager could also keep in mind the filesystem its copying to, if i remember correct the new ext4 filesystem can reserve a few blocks of diskspace that can eliminate fragmentation. maybe optional as plugins to the manager (and not that we have to select them later on, just add them and load them into memory if they are usefull (if filesystem exists/target fs is...)

Written by supercheetah the 24 Oct 10 at 09:47.

This idea is mostly in response to the problem that responsiveness in Linux goes down as disk activity goes up, and that is definitely an issue, but putting in a queue to fix the problem at the heart doesn't really fix the problem. I/O (disk activity) heavy applications are still going to cause slowdowns. I just played around with ionice on a few applications I run that are pretty I/O heavy, and it went a long way in resolving this issue for me, so I have an alternate solution here.

The I/O priority of applications can be put into three categories:

Idle (3): an application will only get I/O when when the system is idle. I won't recommend this as a default, but there may be some applications/programs where this makes sense as its default I/O priority.

Best Effort (2): Just as its name implies, and it has sub-classes (0-7, zero being highest priority). Round robin is used for any applications in the same class.

Real Time (1): The application's I/O takes precedence over anything else. Definitely *not* recommended.

Most applications will have a default I/O best effort nice priority based on their cpu nice priority (cpu_nice+20/5), which means for most user applications, they will have a best effort nice priority of five. I think this is too low. The cpu nice priority doesn't need to change, but I think the default ionice priority should be best effort seven.

This idea is mostly in response to the problem that responsiveness in Linux goes down as disk activity goes up, and that is definitely an issue, but putting in a queue to fix the problem at the heart doesn't really fix the problem. I/O (disk activity) heavy applications are still going to cause slowdowns. I just played around with ionice on a few applications I run that are pretty I/O heavy, and it went a long way in resolving this issue for me, so I have an alternate solution here. The I/O priority of applications can be put into three categories: Idle (3): an application will only get I/O when when the system is idle. I won't recommend this as a default, but there may be some applications/programs where this makes sense as its default I/O priority. Best Effort (2): Just as its name implies, and it has sub-classes (0-7, zero being highest priority). Round robin is used for any applications in the same class. Real Time (1): The application's I/O takes precedence over anything else. Definitely *not* recommended. Most applications will have a default I/O best effort nice priority based on their cpu nice priority (cpu_nice+20/5), which means for most user applications, they will have a best effort nice priority of five. I think this is too low. The cpu nice priority doesn't need to change, but I think the default ionice priority should be best effort seven.