antiX-23-beta1-runit-full (64bit) for testing

Forum Forums antiX-development Development antiX-23-beta1-runit-full (64bit) for testing

  • This topic has 404 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated Jul 16-4:42 am by andfree.
Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 405 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #107263
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick

      @mcpderez

      Thank you for your assistance and astute attention to the details.

      This is great stuff to see and correct prior to the release!

      --
      Brian Masinick

      #107268
      Member
      mcpderez

        @mcpderez

        Thank you for your assistance and astute attention to the details.

        This is great stuff to see and correct prior to the release!

        Details and edge cases are my specialty. 😉

        I’ve been reading the IceWM docs this morning, and it seems like there may be an option to update the preferences file, but I haven’t had a chance to test it. Anyone brave enough can try:

        $ icewm –rewrite-preferences

        Note: that is two hyphens before rewrite and one hyphen between rewrite and preferences. The forum software renders two consecutive hyphens as an ‘en’ dash and three consecutive hyphens as an ‘em’ dash.

        According to the man page at http://ice-wm.org/man/icewm.html, this should:

        “Overwrite an existing preferences file with an icewm default preferences, but preserve all modifications insofar they deviate from the defaults.”

        Happy weekend!

        • This reply was modified 11 months, 1 week ago by mcpderez.
        #107287
        Moderator
        BobC

          @mcpderez, I was going to offer to write a script to update the preferences file, but it looks like the IceWM Devs are now providing a solution. If its not included in the antiX version, let me know as I’m setup to compile and test IceWM on my system here.

          #107332
          Member
          mcpderez

            I ran the icewm –rewrite-preferences and it seems promising. There were a bunch of settings in the v1.8.2 preferences file that were deleted in the v3.3.4 preferences file, but I suspect they are all things that were set to the defaults anyway. I’ll verify later. I did run icewm -r to restart icewm and everything seemed unchanged.

            I also ran updates from the Control Centre just now (with the ‘automatic’ option) and saw that one of the updates was to /etc/skel/.icewm/preferences. At first, I thought maybe an update from my post above had been incorporated at lightning speed, but that wasn’t the case. The update only added these lines and still says at the top that it is for v1.8.2:

            $ diff preferences preferences182
            1379,1383d1378
            < 
            < KeyWinTileBottom="Super+Down"   #  Let the active window occupy the bottom half of the screen.
            < KeyWinTileTop="Super+Up"   #  Let the active window occupy the top half of the screen.
            < KeyWinTileRight="Super+Right"   #  Let the active window occupy the right half of the screen.
            < KeyWinTileLeft="Super+Left"   #  Let the active window occupy the left half of the screen.

            These additions were not made to ~/.icewm/preferences, which I believe is probably intentional so as not to overwrite the user’s files. However, maybe it would be nice if there was a mechanism to more visibly notify the user that the defaults for users had changed.

            #107348
            Member
            mcpderez

              Questions for the devs:

              With so many updates having been released since the b1 iso was created, should I be running the updater before using the installer to set up or reinstall a machine? Or do you still prefer feedback about post-install conditions just based on the iso?

              Are we any closer to getting 64-bit core or 32-bit (any flavor) isos for testing? I think at least @techore and I are eager to try them out.

              Will app-select 2.0 ship with antiX-23? I git cloned it, tried it out and have some feedback on it and not sure whether it would be preferred to leave it in this thread or open an issue on antiX-Dave’s gitlab.

              Thanks for all the hard work! I’m looking forward to a Release Candidate iso to see how these 333+ forum responses have improved an already great beta.

              #107372
              Member
              Robin

                Of the 3 apps, only app-select is still being maintained. so I very much doubt rox and zzzFM will get fixed let alone fixed urgently.

                Do other file managers exhibit this?

                What other filemanagers besides Roxfiler and zzzFM do you mean? Not sure what to check further ahead.

                Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.

                #107391
                Forum Admin
                anticapitalista

                  Of the 3 apps, only app-select is still being maintained. so I very much doubt rox and zzzFM will get fixed let alone fixed urgently.

                  Do other file managers exhibit this?

                  What other filemanagers besides Roxfiler and zzzFM do you mean? Not sure what to check further ahead.

                  Any eg pcmanfm, thunar

                  Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

                  antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

                  #107393
                  Member
                  PPC

                    @Robin:
                    File managers are probably the biggest “problem” antiX has – every other main part of the OS: kernel, window manager, terminal package manager, GUI package manager, our “app store”(Package Installer), the application launcher (app-select, Dave’s masterwork), the default GUI browser (firefox-esr) and light browser (links) are still being developed… Unfortunately, like anti states, our light GUI default File Managers (Rox and Zzz) seem to longer being developed: Most of Rox code is stuck for between 20 to 10 years, but there are some tiny recent changes to it’s GIT. ZZZfm was forked from Spacefm by the late Skidoo, so unfortunately zzzfm development is literally dead. All the recent changes to it, like default bookmarks, recent files, trash… was all achieved just by tweaking it’s config file, not by editing any of it’s code…
                    By the way, rox-term (our default Terminal) last update was from 2015…
                    Probably the File Manager that sticks closest to what antiX uses is pcmanfm. I think installed it when I started using antix, before realizing spacefm was already included, and using it instead…

                    P.

                    • This reply was modified 11 months ago by PPC.
                    • This reply was modified 11 months ago by PPC.
                    #107416
                    Moderator
                    Brian Masinick

                      @PPC you are right about file managers; most stand alone file managers are minimally maintained, if at all. There is no shortage of file managers though.

                      I don’t know how much it would “pull in” because I don’t use it ‘stand alone’; Thunar from the Xfce project is a very current file manager and it might not have as many dependencies as a Plasma based file manager. MX Linux uses Thunar with their standard environment.

                      I’m not sure if something like Midnight Commander would be any better than the others regarding the limitations or not. I occasionally use file managers but I have enough of my own custom tools and scripts that I am not highly dependent on any of them, hence one reason I rarely encounter the limitations that others describe.

                      • This reply was modified 11 months ago by Brian Masinick.

                      --
                      Brian Masinick

                      #107426
                      Forum Admin
                      anticapitalista

                        Questions for the devs:

                        With so many updates having been released since the b1 iso was created, should I be running the updater before using the installer to set up or reinstall a machine? Or do you still prefer feedback about post-install conditions just based on the iso?

                        Are we any closer to getting 64-bit core or 32-bit (any flavor) isos for testing? I think at least @techore and I are eager to try them out.

                        Will app-select 2.0 ship with antiX-23? I git cloned it, tried it out and have some feedback on it and not sure whether it would be preferred to leave it in this thread or open an issue on antiX-Dave’s gitlab.

                        Thanks for all the hard work! I’m looking forward to a Release Candidate iso to see how these 333+ forum responses have improved an already great beta.

                        I’m swamped with work so no there won’t be any new builds soon.
                        I looked at app-select2 and some of the options don’t work (yet) it seems.

                        Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

                        antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

                        #107438
                        Member
                        Wallon

                          I too have a preference for Thunar.
                          There is a good documentation, a lot of videos on Youtube, it offers a lot of configuration possibilities.
                          In MX Linux it is really well customized.

                          #107443
                          Member
                          marcelocripe

                            anticapitalista wrote:
                            Of the 3 apps, only app-select is still being maintained. so I very much doubt rox and zzzFM will get fixed let alone fixed urgently.

                            Do other file managers exhibit this?

                            Robin wrote:
                            What other filemanagers besides Roxfiler and zzzFM do you mean? Not sure what to check further ahead.

                            anticapitalista wrote:
                            Any eg pcmanfm, thunar

                            Robin, now that we understand the anticapitalista question, we can now carry out tests with other file managers. But it won’t be easy to find other lightweight file managers that are being updated.

                            The Midnight Commander file manager is very difficult to handle and is not a graphical interface operated with the cursor arrow.

                            Searching the internet I found this list of “30 Best File Managers and Explorers [GUI + CLI] for Linux“, however, half of this list are file managers that are cumbersome to handle and not similar to zzzFM or SpaceFM. I tested Xfe on TinyCore (before I got to know antiX) and it’s very fast, but it needs to go through your tests and customizations to make it more user friendly.

                            – – – – –

                            anticapitalista wrote:
                            Of the 3 apps, only app-select is still being maintained. so I very much doubt rox and zzzFM will get fixed let alone fixed urgently.

                            Do other file managers exhibit this?

                            Robin wrote:
                            What other filemanagers besides Roxfiler and zzzFM do you mean? Not sure what to check further ahead.

                            anticapitalista wrote:
                            Any eg pcmanfm, thunar

                            Robin, agora que conseguimos compreender a pergunta do anticapitalista, agora sim poderemos realizar testes com outros gerenciadores de arquivos. Mas não será fácil encontrar outros gerenciadores de arquivos leves que estejam sendo atualizados.

                            O gerenciador de arquivos Midnight Commander é muito díficil de manusear e não é uma interface gráfica operada com a seta do cursor.

                            Pesquisando na internet eu encontrei esta lista de “30 Best File Managers and Explorers [GUI + CLI] for Linux“, contudo, a metade desta lista são de gerenciadores de arquivos que são complicados de manusear e não são semelhantes ao zzzFM ou SpaceFM. Eu testei o Xfe no TinyCore (antes de conhecer o antiX) e é muito rápido, mas precisa passar pelos seus testes e por personalizações para torná-lo mais amigável.

                            #107446
                            Member
                            mcpderez

                              I asked…

                              With so many updates having been released since the b1 iso was created, should I be running the updater before using the installer to set up or reinstall a machine? Or do you still prefer feedback about post-install conditions just based on the iso?

                              Anticapitalista answered…

                              I’m swamped with work so no there won’t be any new builds soon.

                              I can relate! We don’t want you to over do it. I’ve had too much to do myself the last few months. I have a brief pause at the end of this week so I am hoping to test installs on as many different laptops as I can and check basic functions like sound, wifi, touchpad, suspend and resume, and so on. It’s recreation for me and will help me recharge.

                              Any of the other devs or testers have any thoughts on whether to pull down all the updates pre or post install? I don’t have any bandwidth concerns, unless I need to be mindful of the mirror I’ll be pulling from. I’m guessing around a dozen installs altogether.

                              #107448
                              Member
                              PPC

                                Midnight Commander file manager is very difficult to handle and is not a graphical interface operated with the cursor arrow.

                                This is a bit off topic – but on the subject of File Managers that antiX 23 users can run with ease- Midnight Commander is a Terminal User Interface that is both keyboard and mouse driven. You can use your mouse, but the “mouse pointer” is an “ugly” square. It’s a standard dual pane file manager, other than that. Use the left panel to select files, on the right panel select where you want to copy files to and select files/folders on the left pane, click the “5 copy” button on the lower line of the screen or “6 Rename Move” to Move files or rename them. You can click applications to run them, etc… It’s basically an open source version of the old “Norton Commander” from the good old DOS times… It still works well today, but just looks too “ugly” to people used to shinny buttons and animations…

                                I tested Thunar and PcManFM. Both look a lot like what zzzfm looks on antiX-23. But none is perfect for antiX: one lacks the option to see drives (I failed to realize how to do that on PcManFM – the option to show devices and also Network does not work, probably needs a plug-in?) and the other, Thunar works great, I can see devices, but can’t use Trash…it says it requires gvfs for that… I installed that package – and it made no difference, probably requires other related packages.

                                P.

                                #107449
                                Moderator
                                Brian Masinick

                                  Personally I have both antiX 22 and antiX 23 on a couple of different systems. I’m not the “model” of anything in particular these days because my use cases are highly oriented in Web browser use and at the basic user interface level I have a lot of my own tools, so things like the fine points of how one file manager versus another work have little bearing on what works or doesn’t work – they’re all fine when I use them because my use ends up being either opening up a file to edit it and insert text or modify text for a simple tool, make the file executable and then run it; all of these things can be done equally easy from a command prompt or any file manager; stuff like drag and drop, while nice when mass copying files, bears little importance in other scenarios. Besides updating a shell script or a configuration file, I download many different versions of Web browsers and test them so that the things I use nearly always work; over time I’ve sent in four or five defect reports and because of this, the tools I use work for the scenarios in which I use them.

                                  While I’m eager to see the new antiX release when it’s available, on a practical level it makes little difference which version I use; both satisfy my simple use cases; I just try to test, help others and facilitate the moderation of our forum.

                                  --
                                  Brian Masinick

                                Viewing 15 posts - 331 through 345 (of 405 total)
                                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.