Rox and desktop files: how to display Comment[fr]
http://bkhome.org/sources/alphabetical/r/
ugh...yes a pile of patches i see... would seem like whoever builds rox for 32 bit pups needs to add my tweak perhaps...
mike
edit well since jamesbond has kindly made a patch then whoever is the maintainer bunny needs to merge it into the build... get yer swords ready.
ugh...yes a pile of patches i see... would seem like whoever builds rox for 32 bit pups needs to add my tweak perhaps...
mike
edit well since jamesbond has kindly made a patch then whoever is the maintainer bunny needs to merge it into the build... get yer swords ready.
on compiling rox-filer
By chance I was rummaging through the rox website http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/home.html and then happened upon this thread. That rox desktop Find command is nifty. Nice way to get Xara Extreme too.
I downloaded the rox-filer source by and then copied the main.c and filer.c from mikeb into src, overwriting the originals; then did and thus obtained a shiny new Rox-Filer for my DebianDog, screencap below.
The "Dnotify support... No" part does not worry me, because Inotify supersedes it. Might be a problem on distro's made prior to the switchover, say mid-2006.
Of direct relevance to musher0's problem, however, might be the "Binary compatibility... No (apsymbols.h not found)" notification.
A bit of googling turns up the fact that the "binary compatibility" being spoken of is "GTK binary compatibility" --it seems that the rox I compiled might have issues on machines running earlier versions of libgtk-x11-2.0 than the libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.2400.25 which I see in /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu on this machine, according to this webpage:
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/node/289
To plug a rox from one distro into another which uses an older version of libgtk-x11-2.0 is likely to give problems, unless rox was compiled "with gtk binary (backwards) compatibility" according to the guidelines on that webpage.
I must say, upgrading to this freshly-compiled rox 2.11 in DebianDog Jessie makes a noticeable difference in the speed with which rox does everything.
I downloaded the rox-filer source by
Code: Select all
git clone https://github.com/rox-desktop/rox-filer.git
Code: Select all
./AppRun --compile
The "Dnotify support... No" part does not worry me, because Inotify supersedes it. Might be a problem on distro's made prior to the switchover, say mid-2006.
Of direct relevance to musher0's problem, however, might be the "Binary compatibility... No (apsymbols.h not found)" notification.
A bit of googling turns up the fact that the "binary compatibility" being spoken of is "GTK binary compatibility" --it seems that the rox I compiled might have issues on machines running earlier versions of libgtk-x11-2.0 than the libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0.2400.25 which I see in /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu on this machine, according to this webpage:
http://rox.sourceforge.net/desktop/node/289
To plug a rox from one distro into another which uses an older version of libgtk-x11-2.0 is likely to give problems, unless rox was compiled "with gtk binary (backwards) compatibility" according to the guidelines on that webpage.
I must say, upgrading to this freshly-compiled rox 2.11 in DebianDog Jessie makes a noticeable difference in the speed with which rox does everything.
- Attachments
-
- 2015-04-08-024923_746x363_scrot.png
- a shiny new rox in DebianDog
- (43.58 KiB) Downloaded 561 times
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.†--Bruce Lee
Hmm yes that does seem to be about backward compatibility.
I build on Lucid with gtk 2.20 so may not have any impact in that respect with musher's problem.
There is mention of a focus patch in that bundle but without trawling through them its hard to say if anything is relevant...indeed this could be a new rox/wmx problem that has been highlighted.
Again who builds these roxes?
I have no connection with the devs here so my input is limited.
mike
I build on Lucid with gtk 2.20 so may not have any impact in that respect with musher's problem.
There is mention of a focus patch in that bundle but without trawling through them its hard to say if anything is relevant...indeed this could be a new rox/wmx problem that has been highlighted.
Again who builds these roxes?
I have no connection with the devs here so my input is limited.
mike
Ah, I see. Both jamesbond and BarryK have several patches for rox-filer.mikeb wrote:...I build on Lucid with gtk 2.20 so may not have any impact in that respect with musher's problem...There is mention of a focus patch in that bundle...
@musher: what Puppy are you running?
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.†--Bruce Lee
Really? You freed what? ... animals? ... slaves? ... prisoners? ... bytes?mikeb wrote:serious ... this is the puppy linux forum isn't it
Hmm curious..something that works better with jwm.
Well I did free that which should be freed but there may be other patches applied to the rox in puppy but otherwise cannot think of a reason offhand.
I used 2.11 ...check what version you had with ROX-filer -v
I assume the rox you had was ok with wmx?
If I find anything I will report.
mike
My previous ROX was a run-of-the-mill v. 2.11 (not your hack) running
on a Puppy Precise 5.4.3 and wmx-8 / jwm. The wm didn't matter.
You wrote:
> Hmm curious..something that works better with jwm.
Strange indeed...
It's got a nice ring to it, though. A sharp ad person could use it!
BFN.
musher0
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
freed...glib variables... they desire it... its primative stuff.
You literally allocate bytes in memory and then release again... the domain of buffer overflows... its tricky to get it to do anything meaningful let alone control your computer and any relatives that may live nearby.
Ok so the 2.11 you have...would be that which came with puppy? in other words patched in some way...
Keisha seems to have a bit of a handle on this ...
mike
You literally allocate bytes in memory and then release again... the domain of buffer overflows... its tricky to get it to do anything meaningful let alone control your computer and any relatives that may live nearby.
Ok so the 2.11 you have...would be that which came with puppy? in other words patched in some way...
Keisha seems to have a bit of a handle on this ...
mike
I'll double-check on a "virgin" Puppy Precise 5.4.3. I can't remember if I'vemikeb wrote:freed...glib variables... they desire it... its primative stuff.
You literally allocate bytes in memory and then release again... the domain of buffer overflows... its tricky to get it to do anything meaningful let alone control your computer and any relatives that may live nearby.
Ok so the 2.11 you have...would be that which came with puppy? in other words patched in some way...
Keisha seems to have a bit of a handle on this ...
mike
compiled a ROX-Filer from source at some point on this Puppy.
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
So, what is "this Puppy?" Do you mean you are using a Precise 5.4.3 which has a busy social life?musher0 wrote:I can't remember if I've compiled a ROX-Filer from source at some point on this Puppy.
“A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.†--Bruce Lee
Funny guy! Indeed, Puppy Precise 5.4.3 is quite the socialite!!!Keisha wrote:So, what is "this Puppy?" Do you mean you are using a Precise 5.4.3 which has a busy social life?musher0 wrote:I can't remember if I've compiled a ROX-Filer from source at some point on this Puppy.
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
My rig:
So, I'm using the "virgin" ROX-Filer that comes OOTB with PPrecise 5.4.3.rox -v :
ROX-Filer 2.11
...[some blabla]...
Compiled with GTK version 2.24.8
Running with GTK version 2.24.10
-- features set at compile time --
Large File Support... Yes
Inotify support... Yes
Dnotify support... No
Binary compatibility... No (apsymbols.h not found)
Extended attribute support... Yes
uname -a :
Linux puppypcABCD 3.2.29 #1 SMP Thu Sep 13 20:33:02 GMT-8 2012
i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
Ok ..I will read through those patches and see if anything looks relevant... I won't blindly apply them.
I assume no one else here uses wmx hence just your report and the rest of the silence is golden.
No mysterious puppy/rox maintainer has emerged.... sling it in woof and whoever happens to pass by it seems.
It was all going so well
First a word from our sponsor.... oh he ran off
mike
I assume no one else here uses wmx hence just your report and the rest of the silence is golden.
No mysterious puppy/rox maintainer has emerged.... sling it in woof and whoever happens to pass by it seems.
It was all going so well
First a word from our sponsor.... oh he ran off
mike
- L18L
- Posts: 3479
- Joined: Sat 19 Jun 2010, 18:56
- Location: www.eussenheim.de/
Rox and desktop files: how to display Comment
Other users of wmx might have read (and understood) the title of this thread.mikeb wrote:I assume no one else here uses wmx hence just your report and the rest of the silence is golden.
Well would be nice for some confirmation and further insight of the bug.
More clues the better really.
Also its up to the posters here to find fixes since its obviously not going to be getting general support.
Looked at the patches but they are for more column options, a send to menu focus change, change in options and a larger log.
Nothing seems relevent.
Mike
More clues the better really.
Also its up to the posters here to find fixes since its obviously not going to be getting general support.
Looked at the patches but they are for more column options, a send to menu focus change, change in options and a larger log.
Nothing seems relevent.
Mike
Re: Rox and desktop files: how to display Comment
@L18L and mikeb:L18L wrote:Other users of wmx might have read (and understood) the title of this thread.mikeb wrote:I assume no one else here uses wmx hence just your report and the rest of the silence is golden.
The sponsor had gone under some blankets to get some shut-eye in his
timezone...
Many thanks, mikeb, that's very generous of you, but don't mind my
problem if it is not reported regarding use of your edit with major wm's.
Meaning: I have to take a closer look at wmx-8, and discover how it
may conflict with the new ROX patch. Or maybe there's an actual spider
or ladybug somewhere inside this old & dusty ACER.
L18L is right: the number of non-English-speaking Puppyists using wmx
AND experiencing this bug is going to be infinitesimal.
So don't lose sleep over my little problem, please, don't let any anxiety
build up, you did a terrific job!
BFN.
musher0
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
- ASRI éducation
- Posts: 3197
- Joined: Sat 09 May 2009, 12:10
- Location: France
- Contact:
I appreciate this discussion.
Motivation, good ideas, solutions!
Thank you to all contributors.
Regards,
Motivation, good ideas, solutions!
Thank you to all contributors.
Regards,
Projet ASRI éducation => [url=http://asri-education.org/]Association[/url] | [url=http://forum.asri-education.org/]Forum[/url] | [url=http://dl01.asri-education.org/]Dépôt[/url] | [url=http://kids.asri-education.org/]Espace kids[/url]
@mikeb:
I just had a mouse freeze playing Bubbles using wmx and the OOTB
ROX-Filer. Same symptoms as described above with ROX.
So your edited ROX is not the cause. I still can't pinpoint it, but it's obviously
not your edited ROX.
The mouse came back on line in the Bubbles game after +/- 30 seconds.
BFN.
musher0
I just had a mouse freeze playing Bubbles using wmx and the OOTB
ROX-Filer. Same symptoms as described above with ROX.
So your edited ROX is not the cause. I still can't pinpoint it, but it's obviously
not your edited ROX.
The mouse came back on line in the Bubbles game after +/- 30 seconds.
BFN.
musher0
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)