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 Wed 23 Oct 2019, 19:27
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Programming
Non-functioning Menu entry.... (SOLVED)
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 2 [22 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 13:08    Post subject:  Non-functioning Menu entry.... (SOLVED)
Subject description: ...where am I going wrong?
 

Afternoon, all.

Well, this is embarrassing.

After the success I had with my PepperFlash .pets,

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=106409

....I've decided to turn my hand to the 64-bit version of SlimJet; a browser which, for me, has pretty well replaced Chrome (and I've been a Chrome user since it was in beta, back in 2008).

After making the release announcement here, I've had to withdraw them temporarily, upon discovery that they won't actually start from the MenuEntry..! Embarassed

32-bit SlimJet normally resides in /usr/lib; I've located these in /opt (a nice 'catch-all' directory), which quite neatly sidesteps the problem with the rather non-standard implementation of the way the lib32 & lib64 directories are linked in 64-bit Pups. Some link in one direction, some the other, and some don't link at all. Plus, Tahr64 has 32-bit compatability libraries, whereas others, such as Slacko64 and Lighthouse64, don't appear to have anything resembling these.

I've been using trio's 'Pet-Maker' package, which is a really useful .pet. Initially, I used it for the SFS packages as well as the .pet ones, although recently I've been experimenting with the 'mksquashfs' command, which seems to work just as successfully.....I suspect the dir2pet script within trio's package probably makes use of this, as well as others. Remember, I'm still quite a 'noob' when it comes to this side of things, so be gentle with me..!

They will all start quite happily from

a) The SlimJet wrapper-script itself
b) The symbolic link to the above, in /usr/bin, and
c) The .desktop file. BUT:

I cannot, for some reason, get them to start from the Menu entry. What I'm wondering is this:-

Does the .pet/SFS need to include an entry for /root/.jwmrc? (Since this appears to be where the Menu entries are generated, although I'm not at all certain of the mechanism...)

I understood that the .desktop file would somehow generate the Menu entry during the installation process; if I'm wrong here (and I suspect I am), I'm more than willing to learn the correct way of doing this.

My .desktop file for these SlimJet packages is as follows:-

Code:
[Desktop Entry]
Encoding=UTF-8
Name=SlimJet
Icon=/usr/share/pixmaps/Slimjet.png
Comment=SlimJet web browser
Exec=flashpeak-slimjet
Terminal=false
Type=Application
Categories=X-Internet-browser
GenericName=SlimJet web browser


I've included the 'Terminal=false' entry as, after studying many other .pet & SFS packages, they all seem to use this.....but what does it actually do?

Any advice on this will, as always, be very much appreciated.


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES


Last edited by Mike Walsh on Thu 16 Jun 2016, 08:17; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nic007


Joined: 13 Nov 2011
Posts: 3079
Location: Cradle of Humankind

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 15:24    Post subject:  

Have you run fixmenus yet?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 16:21    Post subject:  

Hi, Nic.

No, I'll be honest with you; I'd forgotten about that. I mean, the entry shows up in the Menu.....but it doesn't actually do anything, despite showing the correct application path in /root/.jwmrc.

As I understand it, fixmenus is used to make 'reluctant' menu entries show up in the first place.....or have I got the wrong end of the stick? I mean, it's annoying to not have every part of an application working as it should.....but aside from that, it's unprofessional to release something for general consumption in that condition. It gives the impression that you couldn't care about doing the job properly.....and it doesn't give Puppy very good publicity, either.

Hence why I've withdrawn them until I can get them fixed. Every part functions as it should.....apart from the Menu entry. Despite the fact that those of us familiar with Puppy know there's lots of different ways to launch something, that's the one method the majority of people will wish to use.

I'll give 'fixmenus' a try, but I'm not hopeful..... I'll let you know what happens.


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 16:35    Post subject:  

Hi again, Nic.

Nope. Didn't do a thing. It's not that the menu entry isn't showing up ( it does).....the entry, as far as I can tell, is correct in /root/.jwmrc. too (application path and everything); but it simply won't execute.

My usual method, since I prefer to work from desktop icons, is to drag an app's .desktop entry onto the desktop, edit and tart-up as necessary, and to use that.....but for some people, even that's too much like hard work!

But the point is, the Menu entry should work. That's the primary method employed by most people to launch something.....and it isn't doing its job. So; where have I gone wrong with it?

Anyway, thanks for the suggestion; it was appreciated, even if it wasn't the 'magic bullet'!


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES


Last edited by Mike Walsh on Wed 15 Jun 2016, 16:41; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 16:38    Post subject:  

A question.

In my .desktop file above, does the 'Exec' entry refer to the /usr/bin executable? Do I have that part correct?

Edit:- Y'know, thinking about it, I wonder if some of the problem might be down to my spelling & syntax (once again!) I.e., 'Slimjet' instead of 'SlimJet'.....or maybe all lower case, right the way through..?

I know how fussy Linux is about dotting the i's, and crossing the t's... Laughing


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

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


Joined: 16 Jul 2013
Posts: 967
Location: Mid-mitten

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 17:13    Post subject:  

Weird one! Opening from the .desktop file directly, but not the menu entry (which should reflect that same, exact .desktop file).

I'm no expert, but wonder if there's a conflicting .desktop file floating around the system somewhere (/usr/local/** ??) with an older, improper "Exec=" entry, that's taking menu priority over the /usr/share/applications .desktop file... Question Pfind would likely uncover it's location, if so.

FWIW,

Bob
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 17:33    Post subject:  

Hallo, Bob.

Actually, now you mention it.....

There's a SlimJet /usr/lib/entry keeps popping up, every time I install a SlimJet package for testing purposes. I made up a version of 10.0.0.0., a little while back, which was located in /usr/lib/slimjet. Now, although every trace of it has been wiped from the system (there's definitely nowt in /usr/lib any longer).....and I've edited /root/.jwmrc, and /root/.jwmrc-previous, and done a re-boot to ensure the alterations got saved.....it keeps on popping up from somewhere. And I can't for the life of me figure out where it's coming from.....

Are there any other .jwmrc-related files, elsewhere in the system, that I'm not aware of? 'Cos it's the only thing I can think of that's interfering with the normal launch process.....

Any ideas, mate?

Edit:- Screenie below of what pFind has thrown up.



There's not one item there that I haven't put there myself.....so where the hell is usr/lib/slimjet coming from?

Here's the extraneous internet entry:-



Wait a minute...!. I've just discovered another 'dead' entry , under 'Networking'...



.....and pFind doesn't throw this up at all. Here's the /root/.jwmrc entry for it, highlighted (if you can read it):-



So where's it coming from? (*scratches head*) Is there by any chance some kind of log in the system that hangs onto stuff, long after it's been deleted?


Mike. Confused

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Sailor Enceladus

Joined: 22 Feb 2016
Posts: 1565

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 18:49    Post subject:  

Mike Walsh wrote:
So where's it coming from? (*scratches head*)

I noticed that it looks in both /usr/share/applications and /usr/local/share/applications for menu entries.

Last edited by Sailor Enceladus on Wed 15 Jun 2016, 18:54; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 18:50    Post subject:  

Hi again, Bob.

Just had a thought. You take a gander at both of the extraneous 'FlashPeak SlimJet' entries in .jwmrc; both of them have a '%U' at the very end of the exec phrase. Nothing else in .jwmrc is showing this.....yet pFind doesn't 'find' them.

I was just considering what you meant by improper 'Exec' entries... What d'you think?

(This is in Slacko64 6.3.0 at the moment, BTW.)


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES


Last edited by Mike Walsh on Wed 15 Jun 2016, 18:57; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 18:55    Post subject:  

Sailor Enceladus wrote:
Mike Walsh wrote:
So where's it coming from? (*scratches head*)

I noticed that looks in both /usr/share/applications and /usr/local/share/applications for desktop entries.


Hiya, Sailor.

Good catch..! It does seem to, doesn't it? But the only things I've got in /usr/local/share/applications are...



.....the Libre Office .desktop entries. So where do I go from here? Any ideas, anyone?


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

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


Joined: 16 Jul 2013
Posts: 967
Location: Mid-mitten

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 19:27    Post subject:  

Mike -

1) Click the "eye" on Rox's toolbar, to uncover any hidden files and make sure your not missing anything in /usr/share/applications and /usr/local/share/applications.

2) Hmmm... I believe the text displayed in the menu entry (as "FlashPeak Slimjet" in your screenshot) is defined in the .desktop file's "Name=" line... since your screenshot's menu entry displays differently from what you posted earlier as the actual .desktop file's "Name=SlimJet" entry (and there is no "FlashPeak Slimjet" entry to be found in said above .desktop file) - this still makes me suspect there's a stray, old .desktop file being used by JWM to build the menu, instead. Maybe look further up the .desktop directory list (after making sure Rox is showing all/hidden files), for something alphabetically beginning earlier with, say, "Flashpeak" instead of "Slimjet" - or whatnot.

3) I also believe the "%U" has something to do with allowing a browser to open an external link directly (from, say, your email client) - so it will open the browser directly to the link, and not just open as usual to your default home page. I think that's what that's for, anyway...!?! Shocked

4) Remember, you can test any of the (questionable) exec lines by running 'em in a terminal, and see what happens (errors, nothing opens, etc.).

In the past I've noticed that some updated application's binaries require a different/updated exec command to fire - and therefore a new/updated .desktop file to go with it (possibly even with a different name). And sometimes the old, now-broken ones get left behind - muckin' things up a bit.

Hopefully some of that might be of help, but like I said - I'm no expert at these things! (Where's Semme when ya' need him?! Smile )

Bob
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
perdido


Joined: 09 Dec 2013
Posts: 1376
Location: ¿Altair IV , Just north of Eeyore Junction.?

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 19:46    Post subject:  

Look in the file /opt/slimjet/flashpeak-slimjet

Seems to generate its own desktop file when run.

_________________
Giving with an expectation for return brings misery.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nic007


Joined: 13 Nov 2011
Posts: 3079
Location: Cradle of Humankind

PostPosted: Wed 15 Jun 2016, 20:30    Post subject:  

The U% in the name of the executable is definitely incorrect. This is what I would do: delete that entry in .jwmrc > specify the full path of the correct executable in the desktop entry > do fixmenus > restart JMW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 5493
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Thu 16 Jun 2016, 06:13    Post subject:  

perdido wrote:
Look in the file /opt/slimjet/flashpeak-slimjet

Seems to generate its own desktop file when run.


Hi, perdido.

Thanks for spotting that one. Definitely a 'good catch'! TBH, although I've been looking at this script a lot the last few days, I've been concentrating on the last few lines. That's where the switches for disabling the sandbox, and specifying the user-data-directory, get added on to enable it to run with Puppy's root model.

It would certainly explain where the superfluous Menu entries are coming from.

nic007 wrote:
The U% in the name of the executable is definitely incorrect. This is what I would do: delete that entry in .jwmrc > specify the full path of the correct executable in the desktop entry > do fixmenus > restart JMW


I think what I shall do is to re-edit the SlimJet wrapper-script, and remove the entire section to do with checking for, and generating a .desktop file. I can't see that it's necessary at all, due to the way we generate .desktop entries in .pets. I'll then re-package, and test again.....after employing Nic's suggestion, and getting shot of those extra, unwanted Menu entries once and for all.

If you look at the 'google-chrome' wrapper-script in any recent Chrome, they don't include half of this extra stuff that FlashPeak have added into their version.....so I can't really see it's serving any purpose.

Thanks for the advice and 'spotting', guys. I'll let y'all know how it pans out. Watch this space.....


Mike. Wink

_________________
MY 'PUPPY' PACKAGES

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
B.K. Johnson

Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Thu 16 Jun 2016, 07:17    Post subject:  

Mike
Just a thought from one who knows nothing!
/opt is not in your path. You may need to link to /usr/bin which is.

_________________
B.K. Johnson
tahrpup-6.0.5 PAE (upgraded from 6.0 =>6.0.2=>6.0.3=>6.0.5 via quickpet/PPM=Not installed); slacko-5.7 occasionally. Frugal install, pupsave file, multi OS flashdrive, FAT32 , SYSLINUX boot, CPU-Dual E2140, 4GB RAM

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 2 [22 Posts]   Goto page: 1, 2 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: 0.0709s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0162s) ][ GZIP on ]