Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Thu 15 Nov 2018, 00:24
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
Building a universal file viewer
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 17 of 18 [256 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 15, 16, 17, 18 Next
Author Message
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 18:34    Post subject:  

Thanks, mikeslr.

No offense intended, but here's my take on it.
Code:
.
├── mm_file_viewer-20180920
│   ├── pet.specs
│   └── usr
│       ├── bin
│       │   ├── mmview -> /usr/bin/mm_view_20180920
│       │   ├── mm_view -> /usr/bin/mm_view_20180920
│       │   └── mm_view_20180920
│       └── share
│           └── applications
│               └── mm_view.desktop
└── mmview.tree

5 directories, 6 files

I thought MochiMoppei's utility is suffficiently important to be in /usr/bin.
It should not be only a personal app.

I added a couple of symlinks: it's easier that way to produce another pet
archive when MochiMoppei will come up with a new version.

I changed the desktop file to reflect the above -- with a couple of other
edits relative to the international comments.

I strongly believe the name of an app should remain the same in all
languages; otherwise, users get confused.

Finally in my mind it is clear that mm_view is more of a file manager,
although focused on viewing files.
Quote:
[Desktop Entry]
Encoding=UTF-8
Version=1.0
Name=mm_view
Comment=File viewer
Comment[es]=Visor de archivos
Comment[fr]=Visionneuse de fichiers
Icon=/usr/local/Pup-SysInfo/icons/Pup-SysInfo48.png
Exec=mm_view
Terminal=false
Type=Application
Categories=FileManager
GenericName=File information utility


@the whole bunch of you:
Please feel free to disagree and come up with your own! Smile

BFN.

~~~~~~~~~
P.S. Pet removed as per wiak's suggestion below.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)

Last edited by musher0 on Tue 16 Oct 2018, 21:47; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mikeslr


Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Posts: 2773
Location: 500 seconds from Sol

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 20:06    Post subject:  

Hi musher0,

Having discovered mm_file_viewer, thanks to a post by perdido, I agree with you that it is an important application. On Whisker-Menu, its been added to my Favorites. I like the way you've anticipated updates. I thought of the update problem while trying to decide what to do about giving it a version number. You're solution was a couple pay-grades above my knowledge. And, yes, placing it in the File-System Category may not only be more appropriate, but locates it in a category which is, as yet, sparsely populated especially compared to “Utilities” whose display by now reminds me of a commuter train station during rush hour.

However, I like locating the binaries of pets created for Puppies in the folder specifically placed "on the Path" for such pets. AFAIK, /usr/bin does not have priority over /root/my-applications/bin. Placing the binaries of unique-to-Puppy applications there makes them easier to locate should further work be necessary.

On the other hand, locating the binary in /usr/bin may make fred's job easier if he decides to port it to “The Dogs”.

Just my 2¢.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 20:45    Post subject:  

Hi, mikeslr.

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that /root/my-applications/bin is
reserved for one's own scripts or apps; this directory is also found only in
Puppies.

If we publish something, it should be in /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin. Although
I've seen /opt/local/bin accepted as a middle ground for such apps in some
specialized forums.

AFAIK, the search priority for directories is decided by their ordering in the
PATH variable in file /etc/profile; it is not set in stone.

/usr/local/bin will be a good place for mm_view, if it never draws interest
outside Puppy circles! Wink (Which I hope it will!)

In any case, I can chirp Laughing about it all I like: MochiMoppei will have the
last word whenever he publishes the official pet for his app.

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
some1

Joined: 17 Jan 2013
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 20:54    Post subject:  

PLEASE!!!!
This is a development-thread -
not a thread for the squatting crappers!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wiak

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 995
Location: not Bulgaria

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 20:57    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:

In any case, I can chirp Laughing about it all I like: MochiMoppei will have the
last word whenever he publishes the official pet for his app.


The problem with publishing an unofficial package/pet of any program, unless it is a renamed fork that is being developed separately and thus diverging, is that only the developer is able/likely to update their program as and when required. Otherwise an annoying to developer plethora of versions can confusingly appear for download all over the place. Understandable unofficial pets being made when there is no official one, but better if the program developer would create a pet and, if wanted, a deb package for the Dogs while they are at it. Main point though is that unofficial packages, assembled differently, can cause user confusion unless renamed forks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 21:34    Post subject:  

Hi wiak.

All right, all right.

I'll remove my pet from this thread if MochiMoppei asks me to.

~~~~~~~~
Edit, 10 minutes later:
I'll even remove it now. And I apologize to MM.

I don't want to force the man into anything.

However I hope he realizes what gem he has created: if he himself does
not fill the pet archive void, someone else will.

~~~~~~~~

Have a great day.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Tue 16 Oct 2018, 21:52    Post subject:  

some1 wrote:
PLEASE!!!!
This is a development-thread -
not a thread for the squatting crappers!!!

Thanks for the compliment.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wiak

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 995
Location: not Bulgaria

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 02:24    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:
Hi wiak.

All right, all right.

I'll remove my pet from this thread if MochiMoppei asks me to.

~~~~~~~~
[i]Edit, 10 minutes later:
I'll even remove it now. And I apologize to MM.


That's up to you musher0. Fact is, suddenly there were two differently assembled dotpets for the same package - neither saying they had been encouraged or sanctioned for publication by the package's developer. It's no big deal to me (not my app) - but sooner or later such publication (unofficially but in the official app discussion thread) is going to result in some user or other installing an old version of the app (following a forum search for it, for example) when an official updated version has become available (even if not in dotpet form). I expect the app developer would prefer their own most recent code was installed instead since that is what they are developing and maintaining, but of course, maybe MochiMoppel doesn't mind and that would be up to him to say or not say - I was just hoping a third or fourth dotpet version wasn't suddenly about be added to the choices!!!... though some say choice is a good thing. However, if you were adding some new functionality that the original app developer might not want, then a renamed fork (to avoid confusion) would be the way to go - though some don't like their work forked, especially if it is still being actively developed anyway, and who can blame them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 05:33    Post subject:  

Why the sermon? Laughing

If you ever assembled a pet archive, you would know it is not a fork.
Have you?

You have to present the material in a set way in a pet archive, but it is not
a fork. Else all the rpm's and all the deb's in the Linux world would also be
forks? Wow!

Adding a symlink and a desktop file constitutes a fork?
Come on, wiak, get real!!! Wink

A fork is when you alter the code itself, not when you add "cosmetics" or
structure to a distribution archive.

Still friends? Smile

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
wiak

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 995
Location: not Bulgaria

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 06:29    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:

Adding a symlink and a desktop file constitutes a fork?
Come on, wiak, get real!!! Wink


I never suggested for a second that the dotpet you created was a fork musher0. Indeed publishing a package of someone else's Puppy-related work on this forum without it being a fork was what I suggested might be problematic (maybe not, and like I said, not a big deal really anyway). I regret my post and certainly don't want to derail the thread's main purpose so will say no more on the issue except that I would also vote for either /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin as good locations for the binary.

wiak
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
mikeslr


Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Posts: 2773
Location: 500 seconds from Sol

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 12:54    Post subject:  

@ wiak,

I was only trying to be helpful. Between my desktop and my laptop there are about a dozen versions of Puppy I can boot into. I've lost track of how many I have on USB-Sticks. With applications I expect to be as useful as mm_viewer, not having a menu entry means (a) I have to remember where the executable is located and (b) I have to file-browse to it. Not a particularly efficient method of working.

It took about 15 minutes to manually create the pet I attached. Maybe I'm slow -- part of that time was spent considering alternatives. But assume 15 minutes as the average construction time. 10 people creating their own pets = 2 1/2 hours of time expended. 100 people creating their own pets = 25 hours expended. Also not particularly efficient. Customizations and cottage industries are important when aesthetics, style and uniqueness are of value; mass-produced/ready-made when not.

As posted, the attached pet was to be use, ignored or modified. MochiMoppel has his own priorities and his own time constraints. It would take maybe 5 minutes, using the pet as a template, for him to publish "an official" version as and when he chooses to do so: 10 minutes of his time saved for matters more important to him and for which he is more uniquely qualified.

Is there any Puppy user who doesn't know to uninstall one version when it's been superseded?

Nor do I think the dialog between musher0 and myself was a waste of time and space. Creators of applications like yourself and MochiMoppel concentrate of resolving technical issues, perhaps with little thought given to matters which make no functional distinction. But to an application user it does matter where a binary is located when attempting to resolve a problem; and especially where on a menu the application will appear when one just wants to start the application. I just counted the number of applications which appear on the Utility Category of the Puppy I'm posting from: 40; on the filesystem Category: 10.

There isn't any Section devoted to the packaging issues of overall system design and user friendliness. And if there were, the chances are that those solely interested in programming wouldn't read them. If the dialog between musher0 and I alerted "programmers" to those concerns, it also has served a useful purpose.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
greengeek


Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 5275
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 15:00    Post subject:  

stemsee wrote:
I used svg images to provide graphic image chooser for wifi APs and Network intefaces in Wifi-TrayNet. So it is very easy to do that
I am fascinated by the fact that mmview now displays "thumbnails" in the chooser list - but only after I followed Mochi's direction about rightclicking the eye icon in ROX-Filer.

I find this very helpful. If i find some way to increase the line height (to make the thumbnail slightly bigger) I will be rapt!
Thumbnails_in_chooser.jpg
 Description   
 Filesize   114.88 KB
 Viewed   178 Time(s)

Thumbnails_in_chooser.jpg

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 15:25    Post subject:  

Hi g/g.

To make the line higher, increase the size of your font like so:
type in console
Code:
gtk_chtheme_wrapper
or click on corresponding item in your menu;
then
-> -> click "Font" button at bottom left;
then
-> -> -> in next panel, highlight &
double-click a higher number in the size column at the right.

~~~~~~~~

The thumbnails themselves have three sizes, controlled by the = and - keys
in ROX (as MM mentioned a couple of posts above) :
very small (single line height)
small
medium.

IHTH

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
musher0

Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 12964
Location: Gatineau (Qc), Canada

PostPosted: Wed 17 Oct 2018, 15:45    Post subject:  

Hello mikeslr.

I completely agree with your post above.

BFN.

_________________
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
Je suis né pour aimer et non pas pour haïr. (Sophocle) /
I was born to love and not to hate. (Sophocles)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
greengeek


Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 5275
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

PostPosted: Thu 18 Oct 2018, 14:04    Post subject:  

musher0 wrote:
Hi g/g.

To make the line higher, increase the size of your font like so:
type in console
Code:
gtk_chtheme_wrapper
or click on corresponding item in your menu;
then
-> -> click "Font" button at bottom left;
then
-> -> -> in next panel, highlight &
double-click a higher number in the size column at the right.
Thanks musher0 - unfortunately i must be doing something wrong here. I make the font size change but mm_view does not change. Maybe the following errors give a clue:

Code:
# gtk_chtheme_wrapper

** (gtk-chtheme:12440): WARNING **: Invalid borders specified for theme pixmap:
        /usr/share/themes/ShallowThought/gtk-2.0/radio5.png,
borders don't fit within the image

** (gtk-chtheme:12440): WARNING **: Invalid borders specified for theme pixmap:
        /usr/share/themes/ShallowThought/gtk-2.0/radio4.png,
borders don't fit within the image

** (gtk-chtheme:12440): WARNING **: Invalid borders specified for theme pixmap:
        /usr/share/themes/ShallowThought/gtk-2.0/radio5.png,
borders don't fit within the image
#
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 17 of 18 [256 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 15, 16, 17, 18 Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1093s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0462s) ][ GZIP on ]