GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 777285
Add encryption checkbox and /password field to Compress... > Create Archive dialog
Last modified: 2021-01-05 14:15:19 UTC
Created attachment 343513 [details] quick illustration of the recommended addition of password checkbox and text input field. We have file compression built into Nautilus now... though it's missing encryption / password lock options. Recommended fix: See attached graphic. Just a checkbox with "Password Lock" and a greyed out box to enter in the password if the box is checked. verification of the password could be added too, but if you're like me, I always check the password anyway by opening the archive.
Hey, thanks for the graphics! I like the idea, but I think needs a little work. For example, displaying the password entry when the password lock is selected looks confusing. I would put it in a revealer under the password lock checkbox. Also the password lock being under the "this is compatible with all OS" is slightly ugly I think. But I don't have a better proposal. Also, the password would need a second entry for making sure the password is correct, I don't think we expect the user to "decompress the file again to see if the password is correct" is a correct approach... imagine with 5gb files in a extremely compressed format :) If I remember correctly Allan had some designs for this, can you check with him?
*** Bug 779931 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Sorry for the duplicate. Can we expect a fix anytime soon? This is a functional regression impacting some work-flows, so please do not forget it.
(In reply to jc from comment #3) > Sorry for the duplicate. Can we expect a fix anytime soon? > This is a functional regression impacting some work-flows, so please do not > forget it. The file-roller extension has been brought back for now, so I think you’ll be able to compress files using it as well. The only issue with that is the two “Compress…” items, which hasn’t been addressed.
(In reply to Ernestas Kulik from comment #4) > (In reply to jc from comment #3) > > Sorry for the duplicate. Can we expect a fix anytime soon? > > This is a functional regression impacting some work-flows, so please do not > > forget it. > > The file-roller extension has been brought back for now, so I think you’ll > be able to compress files using it as well. The only issue with that is the > two “Compress…” items, which hasn’t been addressed. This was fixed in https://git.gnome.org/browse/file-roller/commit/?id=fad2372ccbbfd40013b4225002f4a737d67928bc The compress extension menu item from file-roller is not present.
(In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #5) > (In reply to Ernestas Kulik from comment #4) > > The file-roller extension has been brought back for now, so I think you’ll > > be able to compress files using it as well. The only issue with that is the > > two “Compress…” items, which hasn’t been addressed. > > This was fixed in > https://git.gnome.org/browse/file-roller/commit/ > ?id=fad2372ccbbfd40013b4225002f4a737d67928bc > > The compress extension menu item from file-roller is not present. Oh, I missed the commit. No encryption support is still an issue, then.
One thing to keep in mind is that I don't think there's a standard for .tar.xz encryption yet. I commented about that at https://bugzilla.gnome.org/770861
*** Bug 784536 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Related but not entirely the same issue is the regression on supported archive types. Many workflows expect tar.gz (gzipped tar) archives, and the version of Nautilus provided in GNOME 3.26.x no longer appears to support this archive type from the compression dialog (or many of the others which were previously supported by the file-roller extension). Why the functional regression? Can we go back to the old file-roller extension?
(In reply to Keefer Rourke from comment #9) > Related but not entirely the same issue is the regression on supported > archive types. Many workflows expect tar.gz (gzipped tar) archives, and the > version of Nautilus provided in GNOME 3.26.x no longer appears to support > this archive type from the compression dialog (or many of the others which > were previously supported by the file-roller extension). > > Why the functional regression? Can we go back to the old file-roller > extension? The version of Nautilus are for the most common cases. You can use file roller too of course.
(and this comment is off-topic to this bug report, which asks for encryption support.)
(In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #11) > (and this comment is off-topic to this bug report, which asks for encryption > support.) Apologies for the "off-topic" comment. I considered this to be a UI issue dealing with the same dialogue, and was building off the suggestion for improvement to the interface/workflow. (In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #10) > The version of Nautilus are for the most common cases. You can use file > roller too of course. Perhaps some options can be added in dconf to configure the preferred archival formats then, so as not to alienate "uncommon" use cases?
Let's close this in favor of https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/822.