How to entirely replace Rox with a different File-Manager?

[mikeslr]

Hi All,

I got tired of suggesting what others should do, and decided to do some real work. Easier said then done.(redface.gif --emoticons not working). Having suggested a couple of times that we should be considering substituting either pacman or spacefm for Rox, and having read some posts recently of someone who was making such change and received advice as to what files had to be edited, I decided to install spacefm, edits files, test it out, and then do a remaster removing rox. Naturally, I can't find the thread on which the advice was given.
I am using Open-box with lxpanel, so I think most of the things Rox does beyond just file-management are already covered. But that's a guess. I know that there's what I believe iguleder referred to as a "sloppy hack" in the Guydog thread. But that's not what I want to use.
So I'd appreciate receiving advice regarding what changes need to be made to entirely replace Rox as File-manager.
Thanks in advance,

mikesLr

[sunburnt]

HI mikeslr; Replacing it doesn`t seem so important as just having another one.
Who cares if it`s still there? I don`t like the Rox-Filer, but it is good for doing some things.

I have a SFS file of Xfe, it`s probably the most feature packed filer of the bunch.

Also... Rox runs the desktop in most Puppy variants.
So any replacement won`t interact with the desktop the way Rox`s desktop and filer do.
.

[peebee]

So I'd appreciate receiving advice regarding what changes need to be made to entirely replace Rox as File-manager.
Thanks in advance,mikesLr

Hi mikesLr

I agree with sunburnt - you don't want to get rid of rox completely - just ensure that your new fm is the default for all user interactions.

If you want to see how I did it for LxPup (pcmanfm replaces rox) then look inside one of the lxpupsetup pets - e.g. lxpupsetup-s.5.6.041.pet
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 981#728981

They probably count as sloppy hacks!! But the technique used is to have both rox and Rox where rox=pcmanfm and Rox=old rox then do a relatively small number of edits to replace rox by Rox in key places.

Remember to look for hidden .xxx files....

Cheers
peebee

[mikeb]

Yes its very rox centered.... lots of scripts call it.

Desktop mainly...there are some nice binary drive icons around here ...work so much better and do away with puppy_frontend_d so that helps and also gives drive shortcuts in most filemanagers too which is very convenient.
Also lobbing rox tends to mean a different window manager eg xfce4 and thunar ...that also takes care of menus, mimetypes and desktop icons....such things as fixmenus can be scrapped (enjoy fast package handling ) and jwm in that case.
One thing your alternative file manager might not have is a -d like parameter to close any browser windows when an unmount is performed but then only rox seems to want to hang onto folders anyway...eg I cannot unmount NFS shares without rox being closed first.

Some tray/taskbar applets may need alternative handling though your chosen WM may already have nice alternatives.

A link or miniscript to handle rox calls probably fine for most scripts if not all.

Suck it and see how it behaves without rox to tidy up loose ends.
Enjoy the isolation of being different.
Then your model T Ford with have Porsch bodywork

then do a tap dance while wearing a tutu
mike

[cimarron]

It can be done; I'm glad to be rid of rox (and using SpaceFM instead, with Openbox and tint2 in Iguleder's excellent GuyDog). But it may not be worth it to most people. One big loss is the desktop pinboard. Unless you provide a replacement, you won't be able to put any icons on the desktop. (SpaceFM can apparently provide a pinboard if compiled to do so, but I have not tried it.) Also, the drive icons on the desktop use the rox pinboard, I believe. I'm sure you know all this, but others might need the warning. Personally, I'm happy with a clean desktop.

Several basic puppy functions use rox, so removing rox would require editing the code of those functions to provide a replacement. Ones I know of are pmount (which opens a file manager when mounting drives) and filemnt (which opens sfs files in a file manager). I also use edit-sfs, which opens a file manager to edit sfs files. There are probably others.

In some cases, you can just search the code for "rox" and replace it with "spacefm" (or whatever file manager you use). But it isn't always that simple. What I had trouble with is the places where rox options are used that SpaceFM doesn't use, like -d and -D. The -d, for opening a directory in rox, could just be removed (it is unneeded, and does something different in SpaceFM). -D in rox closes a directory (when unmounting, for example), and that was trickier. I eventually found that this would work (for example):

Code: Select all

#rox -D $MNTPT
 pkill -f $MNTPT #kills spacefm for mounted device

That closes the SpaceFM tab with the unmounted directory, or closes SpaceFM completely if it had opened automatically when mounting the directory (such as plugging in a flash drive). Now everything works for me, and I don't need rox at all.

That's what I remember off the top of my head. If you run into problems, I'll try to check for changes or code edits that I might have forgotten about.

[sunburnt]

mikeb; Isn`t Puppy`s WM handled by JWM ( it is a window manager ).
I think the WM and task-bar are JWM, and desktop is Rox.
But maybe there`s more interaction going on that JWM relies on to do it`s work.

I don`t care for Rox or JWM very much, and that goes for the HotPup drive mount system too.
.

[mikeb]

Well if rox goes then JWM would be left high and dry in terms of the desktop...so might as well dump the ugly unstable thing. Other window managers/desktop enviroments tesnd to do the lot an no more menu hacks and bodges.

mike

[mikeslr]

Thanks sunburnt, peebee, mikeb and cimarron,

Occasionally cars will pull over and their drivers will ask for directions. I'll take a moment to carefully study their eyes for signs of utter exhaustion or madness before (with a straight face ) responding, "You can't get there from here." As soon as I notice incredulity appearing, I'll smile and continue, "Well, actually you can if you...". There had been no “Well, actually

[mikeb]

3) Is a Pup only a Pup if it (a) is built using woof; (b) uses ppm; and (c) employs the jwm-rox combo?
I don't think so. By that definition, every Pup prior to Series 5 wasn't a Pup.

well I think that statement out of your very long post stands out the most and does indeed raise some very interesting questions about how we the users are considered in all of this. Since by this definition a large chunk of us are not puppy users where should our loyalties lie? Hard to know as this basically says 'you are on your own unless you comply' and does explain the conformal nature and gradual loss of real inspirational development as time has passed.

It deserves a thread of its own

mike

[greengeek]

[quote="mikeslr"]Apparently, Barry K didn't consider Archpup a “pup

[cimarron]

Whether the techniques cimarron employed on Guydog 5.0.1 are equally amenable to employment in other Pups, or by reason of its peculiarities was Guydog unique?

I had previously effectively scrubbed rox from my Lupu 5.1 install using the same techniques. All except for the pinboard, which I chose to keep then (mostly for the desktop drive icons, though I edited the drive_all code so the drive directories opened in SpaceFM not rox). I never saw rox.

If you don't like rox, you can make it effectively invisible and still keep the pinboard and drive icons. Or you can drop those (or use alternatives) and get rid of rox completely.

I'd go step by step, weeding out rox where it annoys you (and always keep a backup savefile). I can help; some of the code that needs to be edited is hard to find. I could even post my edits to give examples.

[vicmz]

Remove ROX and put PCManFM? If you want your Puppy alive you don't want to remove ROX. BUT you can set PCManFM as default:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=90560

[mikeb]

If you want your Puppy alive you don't ... emove ROX.
microsoft said the same thing about Internet Explorer and Windows

mike

[vicmz]

If you want your Puppy alive you don't ... emove ROX.
microsoft said the same thing about Internet Explorer and Windows

mike

Of course, those who really are more experienced can fully replace ROX-Filer by another file manager -- in an ISO file for a Puppy derivative. This is so complex it's just not worth doing into a savefile, for you'd have to save a new session if anything goes wrong, starting from scratch. Even in derivatives, I think it's better to have ROX and to not need it, than to not have it and to need it.

And Puppy Linux is not Windows.

[mikeb]

Just checking .... want to be sure we still have the freedom to do what we like

mike

[amigo]

"a metamorphosis that produces even more competent distros" That's a refreshing lyric! What's the name of the band?

[greengeek]

What's the name of the band?

Dunno. Must be Snoop Dog

[sunburnt]

There`s a number of WMs in the software section, OpenBox, BlackBox, RatPoison. etc.
It would be nice if someone could outline the advantages and differences for the rest of us.
I`m not a fan of wBar, but many folks are. I prefer slide-out panels and a clean desktop.
Xfce is along these lines, small but cpu intensive is what I understand about it.
.

[mikeslr]

Hi All,

Thanks everyone. And special thanks to cimarron for clarifying both the potential and drawbacks of the technique. And to vicmz for the link. I guess I can live with rox as other than the default file-manager for now.

mikesLr

[mcewanw]

Just noticed this thread. I suggest fake rox script here:

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 680#741680