4 ms·

Having two separate clipboard buffers is a feature I intentionally use.

• SkiFire13 9mo ago
  https://xkcd.com/1172/ https://xkcd.com/1172/
  • jolmg 9mo ago
    Except it's not a bug that found use. It's intentional behavior. From https://specifications.freedesktop.org/clipboard/latest/ https://specifications.freedesktop.org/clipboard/latest/: > The rationale for this behavior is mostly that [having a unified clipboard] has a lot of problems, namely: > - inconsistent with Mac/Windows > - confusingly, selecting anything overwrites the clipboard > - not efficient with a tool such as xclipboard [(tool that maintains a history of specifically CLIPBOARD; it would be messy to keep a history of all selections)] > - you should be able to select text, then paste the clipboard over it, but that doesn’t work if the selection and clipboard are the same > - the Copy menu item is useless and does nothing, which is confusing > - if you think of PRIMARY as the current selection, Cut doesn’t make any sense since the selection simultaneously disappears and becomes the current selection
    • doubled112 9mo ago
      The selection buffer is easier to understand if thought about more simply. Middle click to “put my selection here”. The actual clipboard is a separate feature in my mind.
• johnisgood 9mo ago
  You and I both.
• m132 9mo ago
  Yup, both have their uses. If you use a clipboard manager or have the clipboard synchronized between devices/remote desktops/VMs, the primary selection comes in handy for stuff you don't exactly want saved to disk, crossing VM boundaries, or transmitted over the network. I use middle-click pasting primarily for its separate buffer.