A True File Manager?

nikolardo · 2011-11-30 13:49:02

There seems to me to be a lack of a true file MANAGER anywhere. I don't mean a file browser - I mean a manager, in the manner that a Music Manager has a lot more power than a file browser.
Basically, I want to be able to access all my files in the same way I access music in Clementine. (http://www.clementine-player.org/)
By artist, title, copyright, or any other tag I can think of to add.
By playlist (or filelist) - groupings of files not limited to the directories is which they live.
Smart playlists (filelists) - groupings of files based on their tags.
The ability to have this program sort my files as I tell it to, like many music managers.

I'm looking into modifying the Clementine source in order to do this, but I'm not a programmer and it's not very well documented.
Is there anything out there in this day and age that allows me to really manage my files, not just put them in directory trees?

mreschke · 2011-11-30 15:01:44

Dolphin would be the most feature packed file manager out there, I believe you can even tag files. If dolphin can't do what you want, then I would say no, not without coding something specific to your searching/filtering needs.

Last edited by mreschke (2011-11-30 15:01:58)

SanskritFritz · 2011-11-30 15:41:09

Tagging is done by Nepomuk, which is used by Dolphin. The tags are stored in the external nepomuk database, files won't carry them when copied outside of Dolphin or when Nepomuk is not running. So, you basically need KDE4 which boasts of semantic desktop. It sports virtual filelists which are basically persistent search results. If you don't like the interface of Dolphin, you can try Krusader as well, it takes advantage of many KDE4 features.

nikolardo · 2011-11-30 18:04:36

I use Dolphin and Konqueror. I've toyed with Nepomuk in the past a little bit, but I do want something that really manages files differently, instead of just allowing me to tag them. I'll give it another go, though, until I can learn enough python to make what I want.

Army · 2011-11-30 18:15:56

If you want to do it in python, wanna use ranger as a starting point and add features to it? Ranger is amazing!

SanskritFritz · 2011-11-30 21:28:10

nikolardo wrote:

I use Dolphin and Konqueror. I've toyed with Nepomuk in the past a little bit, but I do want something that really manages files differently, instead of just allowing me to tag them. I'll give it another go, though, until I can learn enough python to make what I want.

Nepomuk allows to *just* tag your files, so you can handle them *differently* in Dolphin. Seriously, you described what you want in your first post, and Dolphin does more or less exactly what you wrote, and then you complain that you want to manage files differently
I'm actually looking forward to that python file manager you plan to write. Ambitious projects like that deserve attention. I hope you find something really original!

alphaniner · 2011-11-30 21:47:27

It sounds like you want the BeOS file system and its associated tools. From what I understand the fs itself had extensive meta-data capabilities.

ANOKNUSA · 2011-12-01 04:14:19

If what you're looking for is "One Program to Rule Them All," you're unlikely to find it in the *nix world. Konqueror comes close, but really just uses extra plugins for extra tasks. The advantage of the basic filebrowsers is that they don't convolute your perception of the filesystem by showing your files tagged as, say, "Music," but instead just shows the contents of the folder labeled "Music." Frankly, I've always felt that a physically organized file tree was objectively better than sticking metaphysical post-it notes on all my files.

/dev/zero · 2011-12-01 04:21:40

You could use simlinks to group files of a particular kind into directories created for that purpose.

oldpond · 2011-12-01 04:23:35

PCManFM seems to be pretty feature rich.

ratcheer · 2011-12-01 12:47:09

alphaniner wrote:

It sounds like you want the BeOS file system and its associated tools. From what I understand the fs itself had extensive meta-data capabilities.

+1

BeOS had the best filesystem (from a user standpoint) I have ever worked with.

Tim

Last edited by ratcheer (2011-12-01 12:47:41)

nikolardo · 2011-12-01 12:50:13

ANOKNUSA: A file browser certainly gives a more realistic view of the filesystem - but I don't want to have to deal with my filesystem. If I want to listen to a song, I don't browse to it in the filesystem, I search by artist, album, title, or playlist. I'd like to be able to do that with files too - not just have them tagged, but find the same file in multiple directories.

/dev/zero: This program I'm going to make is going to do that for me, eventually, so that I can use this "virtual(?)" filesystem (really just a differently organized file database) when opening files in other programs. But I don't want to have to symlink things by hand, and I don't want things to break if I, say, change a file name - those are things this program is going to handle. It'll just be a while before I get it up and running.

jiyuu · 2011-12-01 17:51:22

Have you seen this ?
It seems to do what you want but it isn't updated anymore and works only within the command line.

nikolardo · 2011-12-01 23:13:27

jiyuu - that looks pretty neat. I don't think I'll try to get it working for me - "isn't updated anymore and works only within the command line" is a little bit of a dealbreaker. I'll just be patient and get what I want up and running at some point in the future.

/dev/zero · 2011-12-01 23:20:54

nikolardo wrote:

But I don't want to have to symlink things by hand, and I don't want things to break if I, say, change a file name - those are things this program is going to handle. It'll just be a while before I get it up and running.

Well, do it how you want, it just occurs to me that you wouldn't necessarily have to manage them all by hand. A (python? bash?) script or two, combined with nautilus-actions or equivalent, would do the trick. This solution would then transport easily to any unix-like OS.

alphaniner · 2011-12-02 20:49:37

Did you check out the Wikipedia entry on Semantic File Systems? There's some links there about a bunch of projects that seem more interesting than LFS. The WinFS page is worth a read, and there's a Linux project called Tagsistant which is still in active development.

tomk · 2011-12-02 21:21:01

And of course, tagsistant is in the AUR.

alphaniner · 2011-12-02 21:27:50

But out-of-date, unmaintained, and apparently broken, unfortunately.

tomk · 2011-12-02 21:46:30

Trying the 0.2.20110922 tarball now, out of sheer curiosity.

ANOKNUSA · 2011-12-02 22:27:12

nikolardo wrote:

ANOKNUSA: A file browser certainly gives a more realistic view of the filesystem - but I don't want to have to deal with my filesystem. If I want to listen to a song, I don't browse to it in the filesystem, I search by artist, album, title, or playlist. I'd like to be able to do that with files too - not just have them tagged, but find the same file in multiple directories.

Your music browser simply takes what's in your physical filesystem and shows it to you in a different way--one which could well be akin to how your filesystem is organized if you choose to make it so, e.g.:

==[ READY FOR INPUT ]== 

>>> tree -L 2 ~/Audio/Music/Amebix
/home/anoknusa/Audio/Music/Amebix
├── 1985 - Arise
│   ├── 01 - The Moor.mp3
│   ├── 02 - Axeman.mp3
│   ├── 03 - Fear Of God.mp3
│   ├── 04 - Largactyl.mp3
│   ├── 05 - Drink And Be Merry.mp3
│   ├── 06 - Spoils Of Victory.mp3
│   ├── 07 - Arise.mp3
│   ├── 08 - Slave.mp3
│   ├── 09 - The Darkest Hour.mp3
│   └── Folder.jpg
├── 1987 - Monolith
│   ├── 01 - Monlolith.mp3
│   ├── 02 - Nobody's Driving.mp3
│   ├── 03 - The Power Remains.mp3
│   ├── 04 - Time Bomb.mp3
│   ├── 05 - Last Will and Testament.mp3
│   ├── 06 - ICBM.mp3
│   ├── 07 - Chain Reaction.mp3
│   ├── 08 - Fallen From Grace.mp3
│   ├── 09 - Coming Home.mp3
│   └── folder.jpg
└── 2011 - Redux
    ├── 01 - Arise.mp3
    ├── 02 - Winter.mp3
    ├── 03 - Chain Reaction.mp3
    └── folder.jpg

3 directories, 24 files

It takes time, but as long as you have a plan and make backups, you only need to do it once.

I suppose what's really missing here is some potential test case. So far you've only mentioned music, which is what music players/managers/taggers are for. Many media file formats readily allow tags to be written into the files themselves, while "semantic desktop organizers" such as Zeitgeist and Nepomuk create centralized databases. The former are pretty easy to deal with as the individual programs are specialized, while the latter seems intended to place a veneer of organization over an initially disorganized filesystem. Also, this sort of thing makes sense in a music player because there might conceivably be a time at which you want to listen to, say, everything song in your library written in 1977. But in what other cases might you that information be necessary?

Now, if the sort of app you're looking for were to resemble EasyTag, I might be interested, as EasyTag allows one to write basic information to a file and simultaneously change the file's name to match. This helps ensure that the metadata written to the file and filesystem (probably) match. But yeah, I might just be totally missing your point.

nikolardo · 2011-12-03 00:01:13

Tagsistant looks pretty cool - I'll try to get it running on my computer.
From the FAQ: "Why did I write a filesystem instead of writing a desktop application? Pretty simple question to answer. Because it's not the niche I want to fit in."
I think I want to fit in the niche of desktop application, and that's what I'm going to try to write - but maybe I'll just write something that takes good advantage of tagsistant, if I can get it going? As described, it has the basic functionality I want as a starting point.

nikolardo · 2011-12-03 00:40:08

...Unfortunately, I run into errors making the version in the AUR, making the "stable" .2 version, and making the unstable .4 version. Oh well.

SanskritFritz · 2011-12-03 22:18:17

The 0.2 version as of in the AUR compiles and works here. Nice stuff!

alphaniner · 2011-12-05 20:43:56

ANOKNUSA wrote:

Also, this sort of thing makes sense in a music player because there might conceivably be a time at which you want to listen to, say, everything song in your library written in 1977. But in what other cases might you that information be necessary?

One example from personal experience is mods for Bethesda games. There are dozens of categories to which a mod could belong. A mod that just provides new weapon can be dropped into the Weapons folder. Or maybe melee and ranged weapons should be separated. But what about a mod that provides both? Or a weapon and an armor item? And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

There are a lot of methods of organizing such a collection within a hierarchical framework. Ranging from simple and useless to convoluted and marginally useful, they all suck. The framework itself is a carryover of a solution to a physical problem. How do we keep numerous similar but different items compact, organized, and accessible? We use containers. A toolbox full of trays full of compartments full of hardware. A filing cabinet full of drawers full of folders full of [paper clips and staples full of] papers. Containers full of containers full of containers...

But this is a solution to a physical problem, and what we've really done is carry over limitations. Plus it's no less 'metaphysical' than tags or metadata in any case. The filesystem heirarchy as we perceive it is just an abstraction, an extra layer for our [presumed] benefit. And it's ill suited for the volume and types (You can't grep dead trees .svgs) of data people regularly deal with these days. That's why there are music managers and mod managers and photo managers and package managers. It's why the OP is searching for a file manager. Problem is, music managers/browsers don't "simply take what's in your physical filesystem and show it to you in a different way". They rely on tags which contain a lot more information than could ever be contained in a heirarchical path. Even trying to mimic a fraction of that potential as in your example seems to me like an argument against heirarchy. What an awful lot of work for such a fragile and static product.

nikolardo · 2011-12-06 00:17:40

Precisely, alphaniner. Another use, one I especially want, is based on creating things - image sequences should appear in "image sequences" and in the project folder. Also, I should be able to search ALL FILE TYPES based on the license they're released under - cc-by, cc-by-nc, wtfpl, etc, so I can see what I can use in what projects. Then, when I finish a project, I should be able to export a file containing all the credits I need to - license, website, author name. There are lots of reasons.

Arch Linux

#1 2011-11-30 13:49:02

A True File Manager?

#2 2011-11-30 15:01:44

Re: A True File Manager?

#3 2011-11-30 15:41:09

Re: A True File Manager?

#4 2011-11-30 18:04:36

Re: A True File Manager?

#5 2011-11-30 18:15:56

Re: A True File Manager?

#6 2011-11-30 21:28:10

Re: A True File Manager?

#7 2011-11-30 21:47:27

Re: A True File Manager?

#8 2011-12-01 04:14:19

Re: A True File Manager?

#9 2011-12-01 04:21:40

Re: A True File Manager?

#10 2011-12-01 04:23:35

Re: A True File Manager?

#11 2011-12-01 12:47:09

Re: A True File Manager?

#12 2011-12-01 12:50:13

Re: A True File Manager?

#13 2011-12-01 17:51:22

Re: A True File Manager?

#14 2011-12-01 23:13:27

Re: A True File Manager?

#15 2011-12-01 23:20:54

Re: A True File Manager?

#16 2011-12-02 20:49:37

Re: A True File Manager?

#17 2011-12-02 21:21:01

Re: A True File Manager?

#18 2011-12-02 21:27:50

Re: A True File Manager?

#19 2011-12-02 21:46:30

Re: A True File Manager?

#20 2011-12-02 22:27:12

Re: A True File Manager?

#21 2011-12-03 00:01:13

Re: A True File Manager?

#22 2011-12-03 00:40:08

Re: A True File Manager?

#23 2011-12-03 22:18:17

Re: A True File Manager?

#24 2011-12-05 20:43:56

Re: A True File Manager?

#25 2011-12-06 00:17:40

Re: A True File Manager?

Board footer