[arch-general] What are people's opinions about this?

[Francesco Nwokeka]

On Thursday 14 April 2011 08:35:28 Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:55:32 +0300
> 
> schrieb Grigorios Bouzakis <grbzks at xsmail.com>:
> > Yaro Kasear wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, April 13, 2011 20:45:32 Grigorios Bouzakis wrote:
> > >> This feature request: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/23747
> > >> 
> > >> ----
> > >> Greg
> > > 
> > > Is this some sort of configuration utility for Xorg? A little
> > > background would be nice.
> > 
> > Autocutsel is not part of the X suite. It changes the way the X
> > clipboards work.
> > http://www.nongnu.org/autocutsel
> > 
> > "X servers use two schemes to copy text between applications. The
> > first one (old and deprecated) is the cutbuffer. It is a simple
> > buffer in which any application can store text. The other scheme is
> > the selection and works differently. There may be many selections in
> > a single server. An application does not copy data in a selection, it
> > "owns" it. When another application wants to retreive the content of
> > a selection, it asks the owner.
> > 
> > Autocutsel tracks changes in the server's cutbuffer and CLIPBOARD
> > selection. When the CLIPBOARD is changed, it updates the cutbuffer.
> > When the cutbuffer is changed, it owns the CLIPBOARD selection. The
> > cutbuffer and CLIPBOARD selection are always synchronized. Since the
> > VNC client synchronizes the Windows' clipboard and the server's
> > cutbuffer, all three "clipboards" are always kept synchronized. When
> > you copy some text in Windows, the cutbuffer and the CLIPBOARD
> > selection are updated. When you copy text on the server using either
> > the cutbuffer or the CLIPBOARD selection, the Windows's clipboard is
> > always updated.
> 
> From what I read about it now, definitely not!
Quote +1

> I regularly use both standard X buffers and I need both. I need the
> Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V method as well as just pasting the selection with the
> middle mouse click. Btw., usually the clipboards of most DEs - at least
> the ones of KDE and Xfce - already let the user decide and configure
> how both buffers are handled, if they are synchronized or if they are
> separated.
> 
> So I don't think there's a need for such a tool like autocutsel and it
> definitely doesn't have to become a default, means a dependency. Users
> who want autocutsel can, of course, install it. But there shouldn't be
> any system wide config which forces the users to use it the way the
> admin wants them to use it.
And again +1. 
I absolutley don't think all users should have to follow what only a few find useful. If the users 
that need it want it, they can install it seperatly.

Francesco