Re: "Browse folder" as open (double click) action?

[Toralf Lund <toralf procaptura com>]

Tom Wesley wrote:

> On Fri, 2004-07-02 at 22:12 +0200, Toralf Lund wrote:
>  
>
> > I'm testing GNOME 2.6 for the first time, after upgrading to Fedora Core 
> > 2... One change I notice right away is that there's now a distinction 
> > between "browse folder" and normal "file view" or "file manager". And 
> > I'm not sure I like it. To a certain degree, I can see that it may be 
> > good to have a file view free from the space requirements and (possibly) 
> > confusing GUI elements introduced by the navigation buttons, location 
> > bar, side panel etc, but:
> >
> >   1. Is it really a good idea to have two separate directory viewers,
> >      if a straight-forward interface without unnecessary options is
> >      what we want? Won't the fact that there are two slightly different
> >      views into the filesystem just confuse most users?
> >   2. I absolutely detest the way the file manager will open a new
> >      window every time I enter a new folder.
> >
> > So, is there a way to get the "browse folder" functionality, or if you 
> > like, old-style Nautilus window, as default open/double-click action? 
> > (Yeah, I know it can be accessed via the context menu, but double-click 
> > is really a lot more convenient.) If not, can I get the simplified file 
> > manager view to re-use the window when entering folders + possibly 
> > present a "parent directory" icon (or "Place" entry)?
> >
> > - Toralf
> >
> >    
>
> If you use gconf editor, tick /apps/nautilus/preferences/
> always_use_browser and it will default to the old behaviour.
>  
Good. I'll try that...

> You may be interested to know that if you either hold the shift key and
> double click with the left mouse button, or use the middle mouse button
> to double-click you will only keep one window open.
>  
Ah, yes. I didn't know that, although I suspected that there would be 
such an option. One problem with this, though: It won't keep the same 
window, but open a new one *at a new location* and close the old. Farily 
annoying if you ask me; I'm getting dizzy by it all. But perhaps this 
one might be filed as a bug?

> Hope this helps,
>
>