Arch Linux

NullRoute

Member

Registered: 2018-05-26

Posts: 22

[REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Can you please add "fman" package to AUR so we can use it with something like "yay"? Its a dual-panel file manager, looks very similar to SublimeText v3 even has similar "CTRL+SHIFT+P" for quick panel access with many commands. It's not completely free, but works kind of like Sublime Text license with option to upgrade to full options at https://fman.io/buy with popup reminder (similar to ST again) on startup.

Package Description:
* FileName: fman
* Version: 1.7.3-1
* Summary: A modern file manager for power users. Beautiful, fast and extensible.

Official Links:
* Website: https://fman.io/
* Blog: https://fman.io/blog/
* Manual: https://fman.io/docs
* GitHub: https://github.com/fman-users

AUR Search: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=fman

They have official Arch repo right now at https://fman.io/updates/arch

 Here's how to install fman on Arch:

Install fman's GPG key:
sudo pacman-key --keyserver hkp://keyserver.ubuntu.com:80 -r 9CFAF7EB
sudo pacman-key --lsign-key 9CFAF7EB

Add fman's repository:
echo -e '\n[fman]\nServer = https://fman.io/updates/arch' | sudo tee -a /etc/pacman.conf

Install fman:
sudo pacman -Syu fman

Thank you!

SimonJ

Member

Registered: 2021-05-11

Posts: 184

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Never mind :-(

Last edited by SimonJ (2021-10-04 06:24:16)

---

Rlu: 222126

0b100100

Member

Registered: 2021-09-04

Posts: 9

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Back in the AUR for now

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/fman/

I am open for any feedback.

HalosGhost

Forum Moderator

From: Twin Cities, MN

Registered: 2012-06-22

Posts: 2,095

Website

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

If they have an official repo, why do you want it in the AUR? (the point of the AUR is to make it easy for you to build the packages yourself, but if they have a repo, then there's usually not much point.)

Also, it looks like 0b100100 added it. Please remember to mark your threads [Solved].

All the best,

-HG

---

Code of Conduct

0b100100

Member

Registered: 2021-09-04

Posts: 9

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

The PKGBUILD will probably get deleted (again).
To repackage an existing Arch package is probably unwanted in the AUR, as a pending deletion request justifies :-|

Unofficial repositories like that one by fman are therefore superior to the AUR as I understand by now.
So nothing more to do here.

Learning from failure ;-)

Last edited by 0b100100 (2021-10-22 22:49:37)

Ammako

Member

Registered: 2021-07-16

Posts: 267

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

"Repackage an existing arch package" means repackaging something which is already available in the Arch repos. Something being available in a third-party repo doesn't forbid it from being available on the AUR (otherwise chaotic-aur would imply having to delete the near entirety of the aur ;p)

Last edited by Ammako (2021-10-22 22:55:27)

0b100100

Member

Registered: 2021-09-04

Posts: 9

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Thanks for your explanation Ammako.
Let's see how the TUs decide.

Didn't know about chaotic-aur, looks like an exciting repo

progandy

Member

Registered: 2012-05-17

Posts: 5,269

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

"Repackage an existing arch package" means repackaging something which is already available in the Arch repos. Something being available in a third-party repo doesn't forbid it from being available on the AUR (otherwise chaotic-aur would imply having to delete the near entirety of the aur ;p)

The difference here is the AUR allows PKGBUILDS that  build from source / a binary package for another OS. chaotic-aur does not change the type of package that is being built here.
Having a PKGBUILD that uses an existing arch package as its source, extracts it and repackages it again is objectionable, though.
Maybe someone should start an "arch third-party repository list" to list packages in unofficial/third-party binary repositories (maybe even password protected with license sales) in a searchable manner. (The result might be something similar to those software listings with external links for windows. You could add a tool to easily add the third-party repos to the pacman config.)

Last edited by progandy (2021-10-23 07:33:36)

---

| alias CUTF='LANG=en_XX.UTF-8@POSIX ' |

Alad

Wiki Admin/IRC Op

From: Bagelstan

Registered: 2014-05-04

Posts: 2,418

Website

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Having a PKGBUILD that uses an existing arch package as its source, extracts it and repackages it again is objectionable, though.

Indeed. For a related discussion, see https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/a … 36581.html

Maybe someone should start an "arch third-party repository list" to list packages in unofficial/third-party binary repositories (maybe even password protected with license sales) in a searchable manner.

pkgs.org includes third-party repositories. Not all of those are created equal though. E.g. chaotic-aur can magically transform your Arch into Garuda if you use it.

Last edited by Alad (2021-10-23 07:36:47)

---

Mods are just community members who have the occasionally necessary option to move threads around and edit posts. -- Trilby

Ammako

Member

Registered: 2021-07-16

Posts: 267

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Having a PKGBUILD that uses an existing arch package as its source, extracts it and repackages it again is objectionable, though.

Huh, didn't realize that was what that AUR package was doing. Yeah, in that case it probably shouldn't be on there.

And unfortunately, the thing is closed-source, so you can't exactly just build it from source.

*Maybe* the Ubuntu package could be used as the source instead, and extracted + repackaged into an arch package. Loopholes!
I wouldn't guarantee compatibility though, if the Ubuntu package expects lower versions of libraries and such.

Also, @0b100100: as far as the AUR is concerned, a package like this must have the -bin suffix, because it is redistributing pre-compiled binaries rather than compiling from source.

Last edited by Ammako (2021-10-23 14:21:59)

0b100100

Member

Registered: 2021-09-04

Posts: 9

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

@progandy @Alad
Thanks for all the explanations and the reference to the mailing list.
Now it makes sense to me such repacking is unwanted.

*Maybe* the Ubuntu package could be used as the source instead, and extracted + repackaged into an arch package. Loopholes!

Would thereby be compliant to the rules, but for me this doesn't feel right to do.

Also, @0b100100: as far as the AUR is concerned, a package like this must have the -bin suffix, because it is redistributing pre-compiled binaries rather than compiling from source.

As I understand the Rules of submission this only applies to prebuilt packages when the sources are available.
Because fman is closed-source this suffix can be omitted.

Ammako

Member

Registered: 2021-07-16

Posts: 267

Re: [REQUEST] FMan - File Manager

Seems I need to read guidelines better before saying anything.

Either way though, it looks like in this particular case, it's probably better to just stick with the official repository, yeah. As much as I (personally) hate having to add external repositories to pacman.