localepurge and xfe

limpio · 2006-01-07 13:34:51

When is 'xfe' gonna come out of the AUR, and be incorporated in the regular repos?

How about incorporating 'localepurge', all those locales not used by the user are dead weight on small and large hds, lean and mean is the purpose of the distro. Thanks.

tomk · 2006-01-07 18:24:42

limpio wrote:

When is 'xfe' gonna come out of the AUR, and be incorporated in the regular repos?

When it gets enough votes, just like any other package.

limpio wrote:

How about incorporating 'localepurge', all those locales not used by the user are dead weight on small and large hds, lean and mean is the purpose of the distro. Thanks.

If this is an optional feature of xfe, contact the maintainer and see if he'd like to build it in. Or build your own local version with the locale thing turned on.

limpio · 2006-01-08 00:26:52

tomk wrote:
"When it gets enough votes, just like any other package."

The thing is, what percentage of the users know how to install apps outta the AUR? Only a small amount, thus the votes are a true measure of the app's use.

"If this is an optional feature of xfe, contact the maintainer and see if he'd like to build it in. Or build your own local version with the locale thing turned on."

xfe and localepurge are 2 different apps, the first one is a file manager, very light and very fast,the second one, eliminates locales not used. A regular user uses 2-3 locales at the most, the other twenty + are dead weight. For a KISS and lean distro, this is a handicap.
In my case, with Debian on hda with exact the same apps, i'm using 722 MB of space, while with Arch on my hdd, i'm using 1.3 GB, capisci?

limpio · 2006-01-08 00:28:47

Correction: it should read

thus the votes are NOT a true measure of the app's use.

Snowman · 2006-01-08 04:09:48

I would say that most users are aware of the AUR and that they know how to use it. It's explained in the docs. If xfe would be very popular with users not knowing about AUR, there would be a lot of posts asking how to obtain xfe. The voting system of the AUR is the best way to know which package is popular. If package A has 5 votes and package B has 45 votes, then there is little doubt that package B is the most popular.

If you want localepurge to be in the official repo, submit a PKGBUILD to the AUR. If it gets enough votes, it will be included in a repo. That's the idea behind the AUR. It's based on user contribution.

tomk · 2006-01-08 09:15:28

limpio wrote:

the votes are NOT a true measure of the app's use.

How would you suggest we measure this then?

limpio · 2006-01-08 11:48:13

Snowman wrote:
"I would say that most users are aware of the AUR and that they know how to use it."

Aware yes, but knowing how to use it, no, IMO.
I've re-read it a few times and can't make heads or tails of it.

I think it's part of the mystique that exults making something unnecesarily difficult is better because only a few can do it, and if you're one of those then, you're a geek.

Why not make it simple, incorporate those apps and anything else instead 'voting'?

Small apps like xfe, gliv, artwiz-cursor, localepurge should be incorporated without voting, they should be easy to maintain and obviously the more apps, the better.

stavrosg · 2006-01-08 12:15:06

limpio wrote:

Snowman wrote:
"I would say that most users are aware of the AUR and that they know how to use it."
Aware yes, but knowing how to use it, no, IMO.
I've re-read it a few times and can't make heads or tails of it.
I think it's part of the mystique that exults making something unnecesarily difficult is better because only a few can do it, and if you're one of those then, you're a geek.

That's why helper scripts like aurbuild came into existence.
After all, if a package is submitted to aur, it is supposedly a matter of untarring a tarball and issuing 'makepkg' in the resulting directory. If this doesn't work, you should really bug the package'svmaintaner.

Why not make it simple, incorporate those apps and anything else instead 'voting'?
Small apps like xfe, gliv, artwiz-cursor, localepurge should be incorporated without voting, they should be easy to maintain and obviously the more apps, the better.

Are you awayre of a thing called 'Real life' ? Well.. developers and TUs have a bit of that, too

tomk · 2006-01-08 12:28:50

limpio wrote:

Aware yes, but knowing how to use it, no, IMO.
I've re-read it a few times and can't make heads or tails of it.

Have you asked for help?

limpio wrote:

I think it's part of the mystique that exults making something unnecesarily difficult is better because only a few can do it, and if you're one of those then, you're a geek.

- there's no answer to that.

Everyone has their own fave apps that they'd like to see in the repos. You like yours, I like mine. The AUR addresses this by allowing users to build their fave aps and submit them, or alternatively, ask someone to do it for them - there's a forum for such requests here. You can use aurbuild to compile and install any app without detailed knowledge of ABS - although, personally I would recommend knowing the basics first.

Finally, if you can suggest a fairer way for determining which apps are promoted to the [community] repo and/or official repos, I'm sure many of us here would like to hear it. If one of the devs likes an AUR app, or reckons it should be in the official repos for some reason, then that's what will happen - one of the perks of being a dev. Short of that, the AUR may have it's faults, but I think it's an excellent way of handling things.

tomk · 2006-01-08 12:32:24

I'll have a look at artwiz-cursor and localepurge for you - xfe and gliv are in the AUR, as you probably know.

If it makes it easier for you, I can provide compiled packages if you like - just this once, though.

limpio · 2006-01-08 16:36:27

tomk wrote:
"I'll have a look at artwiz-cursor and localepurge for you - xfe and gliv are in the AUR, as you probably know.

If it makes it easier for you, I can provide compiled packages if you like - just this once, though."
*******************************

First of all, let me thank you for it. Don't do it for me, do it for ALL of us (including the ones who are afraid of disagreeing) and obviously, for Arch Linux. Does this mean it will be in the current/extra repos (pacman -S localepurge)? or downloaded and then (pacman -A)?? Thanks again.

There are priorities and then again there are PRIORITIES (installation, configuration, basic apps, etc). As a user and in my personal opinion nothing should change in the installation and configuration, the udev thing was a good move.
The installation and configuration of AL, is a thing of beauty, but because it lacks the likes of 'localepurge' it ends up being bloated. The incorporation of OOo2 sucks, might as well leave the previous version until OOo2 is ready.

I like Arch very much and what i'm saying i do it as a user and with the best of intentions.

Thanks again.

tomk · 2006-01-08 19:34:48

limpio wrote:

First of all, let me thank you for it.

Hang on - I haven't done anything yet.

limpio wrote:

Don't do it for me, do it for ALL of us (including the ones who are afraid of disagreeing) and obviously, for Arch Linux.

Could you ease up on this stuff? I'll be doing it for you, because you requested the apps - if someone else enjoys them too, fine.

limpio wrote:

Does this mean it will be in the current/extra repos (pacman -S localepurge)?

No - like I said, that's dev-only territory.

limpio wrote:

or downloaded and then (pacman -A)?

Yeah, that's it.

limpio wrote:

The installation and configuration of AL, is a thing of beauty, but because it lacks the likes of 'localepurge' it ends up being bloated.

I can't believe that after coming from Debian, you think Arch is bloated because it has some unused locales!

limpio wrote:

The incorporation of OOo2 sucks, might as well leave the previous version until OOo2 is ready.

Everyone has an opinion - for me, OpenOffice 2 works just fine.

shadowhand · 2006-01-08 23:00:37

I've been ghosting this thread and I thought I'd toss a couple of comments.

localepurge is a very nice tool, which I had all but forgotten about, that would be very useful in Current (maybe even part of base). Xfe... meh. I'm not terribly fond of it, but each to their own.

limpio wrote:

I think it's part of the mystique that exults making something unnecesarily difficult is better because only a few can do it, and if you're one of those then, you're a geek.

Only a few can do it?! That's too funny. First of all, if you are using Arch, you can figure out how to use the ABS/AUR. Look at the wiki page, the commands could be understood by a child.

Oh, and how do you get off with calling anyone on a Linux forum a "geek"? I mean... DUH!

limpio wrote:

the votes are NOT a true measure of the app's use.

I agree. If people would actually vote for things, it would be useful, but people just download and ignore the vote button, or want to make sure the package works before they vote and forget. Personally, I think that measuring a package by the number of unique downloads (and not recalculating downloads when the version changes) would be much better way of measuring. The problem with measuring by download is that it's popularity without consideration to quality. There's no simple way to do it is basically what I'm saying. I don't think the current system works, and I don't think my idea would work either. Maybe a quality (1-5) rating + the number of downloads would work....

tomk · 2006-01-09 00:01:38

I've seen comments by various TUs to the effect that you should vote for the app, not for the quality of the submitter's PKGBUILD. If the app is popular enough to get to [community], the TU that adopts it will ensure the quality of the compiled package.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has felt the need to 'enhance' an AUR PKGBUILD after downloading it - didn't stop me voting for it, though.

shadowhand · 2006-01-09 03:54:24

In that case then, I think that the popularity should be measured by counting downloads. If I have some extra time, I'll write a bit of PHP that can be used to do it. 8)

tomk · 2006-01-09 09:55:30

OK, limpio, here's your first instalment:

xfe 0.84-1
gliv 1.9.4-1

Enjoy.

limpio · 2006-01-09 12:51:14

thank you.

tomk · 2006-01-09 18:22:24

And if you want artwiz-cursor, just install artwiz-fonts and make sure artwiz-fonts is listed before misc in your xorg.conf.

Took me a while to find that out........

tomk · 2006-01-09 20:11:29

And finally - after doing the research, I've decided not to attempt localepurge on Arch, but that's just me. Post a request here, and someone else may take it up.

Re earlier stuff, if you have questions about ABS and the AUR, please ask - everyone who comes over to Arch starts where you are, and people here are generally helpful.

gunnix · 2006-01-10 10:03:59

Limpio:
arch also uses more space on the harddrive then debian because it in debian the packages are split in two. You have the files needed to run the program and then the -dev files (to compile). In arch that's not the case and you always install the files needed to compile, even if you never need it.

limpio · 2006-01-12 15:13:11

tomk wrote:
"OK, limpio, here's your first instalment:

xfe 0.84-1
gliv 1.9.4-1
***************************
Thanks again, is there a special location where i download these files before installation? /home?

tomk · 2006-01-12 16:44:20

Download them wherever you want - there is no special location. You can even do

pacman -A <URL_for_package>

and pacman will download and install it with one command.

limpio · 2006-01-12 22:11:48

tomk: close but no cigar:

[luigi@archie ~]$ sudo pacman -A http://www.tomkutv.utvinternet.com/Arch … pkg.tar.gz
xfe-0.84-1 [################] 100% 796K 48.1K/s 00:00:16
loading package data... done.
error: unsatisfied dependencies:
xfe: requires fox>=1.4

[luigi@archie ~]$ sudo pacman -A http://www.tomkutv.utvinternet.com/Arch … pkg.tar.gz
gliv-1.9.4-1 [################] 100% 171K 40.8K/s 00:00:04
loading package data... done.
error: unsatisfied dependencies:
gliv: requires gtkglext

[luigi@archie ~]$

tomk · 2006-01-12 22:16:47

pacman -A does not automatically install dependencies - only pacman -S does that. Install fox and gtkglext in the usual way, then do xfe and gliv again.

limpio · 2006-01-13 00:46:10

Success! thx

Arch Linux

#1 2006-01-07 13:34:51

localepurge and xfe

#2 2006-01-07 18:24:42

Re: localepurge and xfe

#3 2006-01-08 00:26:52

Re: localepurge and xfe

#4 2006-01-08 00:28:47

Re: localepurge and xfe

#5 2006-01-08 04:09:48

Re: localepurge and xfe

#6 2006-01-08 09:15:28

Re: localepurge and xfe

#7 2006-01-08 11:48:13

Re: localepurge and xfe

#8 2006-01-08 12:15:06

Re: localepurge and xfe

#9 2006-01-08 12:28:50

Re: localepurge and xfe

#10 2006-01-08 12:32:24

Re: localepurge and xfe

#11 2006-01-08 16:36:27

Re: localepurge and xfe

#12 2006-01-08 19:34:48

Re: localepurge and xfe

#13 2006-01-08 23:00:37

Re: localepurge and xfe

#14 2006-01-09 00:01:38

Re: localepurge and xfe

#15 2006-01-09 03:54:24

Re: localepurge and xfe

#16 2006-01-09 09:55:30

Re: localepurge and xfe

#17 2006-01-09 12:51:14

Re: localepurge and xfe

#18 2006-01-09 18:22:24

Re: localepurge and xfe

#19 2006-01-09 20:11:29

Re: localepurge and xfe

#20 2006-01-10 10:03:59

Re: localepurge and xfe

#21 2006-01-12 15:13:11

Re: localepurge and xfe

#22 2006-01-12 16:44:20

Re: localepurge and xfe

#23 2006-01-12 22:11:48

Re: localepurge and xfe

#24 2006-01-12 22:16:47

Re: localepurge and xfe

#25 2006-01-13 00:46:10

Re: localepurge and xfe

Board footer