Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Everything about X, Gnome, KDE, ... and everything running on it

Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby stevepusser » 2018-04-11 18:19

https://github.com/teejee2008/polo/wiki

I had a devil of a time packaging it for MX 17 until I backported and used the valac from Buster to compile it, but the deb they provide for download in the github release section also works fine in Stretch.

I'm still trying to explore all the features---I found a good home page for it yesterday, but seem to have lost it now. :(

Wait, here it is: https://teejee2008.github.io/polo/
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: Notepadqq 1.2.0, Pale Moon 27.8.3, KeePassXC 2.3.1, Calligra 3.1, VLC 3.0.1, Firefox 59.0.2, Shotwell 28.2
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 9443
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby Segfault » 2018-04-11 18:53

Not that I'm against paid software ... but closed source plugin?
Segfault
 
Posts: 664
Joined: 2005-09-24 12:24

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby stevepusser » 2018-04-11 18:57

Segfault wrote:Not that I'm against paid software ... but closed source plugin?


Yeah, we just are using the open version. I want to see if my Google Drive works with Stretch's rclone...got a lot to do today first, though.

What, are we going to send RMS to rough him up for trying to support himself? :D
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: Notepadqq 1.2.0, Pale Moon 27.8.3, KeePassXC 2.3.1, Calligra 3.1, VLC 3.0.1, Firefox 59.0.2, Shotwell 28.2
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 9443
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby Segfault » 2018-04-11 19:24

Wait a minute ... can't find the source to build it. The whole thing is closed source?
Segfault
 
Posts: 664
Joined: 2005-09-24 12:24

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby stevepusser » 2018-04-11 19:46

Segfault wrote:Wait a minute ... can't find the source to build it. The whole thing is closed source?


No, it's on github: https://github.com/teejee2008/polo

I got the release tarball from the releases: https://github.com/teejee2008/polo/releases

The source has a debian folder in it to ease packaging, but it needs some updating, and it also lists dependencies manually that dh_shlibs actually automatically adds. I fixed those for the MX 17 build, but did not bump up the minimum version of valac. I'll do that for the next 18.4 release, which is supposed to be soon.

http://mxrepo.com/mx/testrepo/pool/test ... e-manager/

I should probably open an issue on github to make the debian folder more "professional".
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: Notepadqq 1.2.0, Pale Moon 27.8.3, KeePassXC 2.3.1, Calligra 3.1, VLC 3.0.1, Firefox 59.0.2, Shotwell 28.2
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 9443
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby stevepusser » 2018-04-11 20:01

Are you using upstream Debian? I also think I found a minor packaging bug in Homebank when I backported it for MX, in that it no longer need libgtk2.0-dev as a build-depend since it's GTK 3 now, but reportbug doesn't like MX. :roll:
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: Notepadqq 1.2.0, Pale Moon 27.8.3, KeePassXC 2.3.1, Calligra 3.1, VLC 3.0.1, Firefox 59.0.2, Shotwell 28.2
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 9443
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby Segfault » 2018-04-11 20:03

I see, thanks. Requires vala compiler ... I'm not about to install it now.
Segfault
 
Posts: 664
Joined: 2005-09-24 12:24

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby stevepusser » 2018-04-11 21:20

Theirs or the MX debs will install and run on plain Stretch or Buster, if you don't want to install valac--which really isn't that big anyway.
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: Notepadqq 1.2.0, Pale Moon 27.8.3, KeePassXC 2.3.1, Calligra 3.1, VLC 3.0.1, Firefox 59.0.2, Shotwell 28.2
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 9443
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby Innovate » 2018-04-13 13:58

Long ago since 2017 on 17.10 version.
Even I was the first guy that discovered Timeshift & build them since debian 8.8 era.
Even before Mint was discover Timeshift.

To build raw on debian 9 you need to build gee, vte & valac before able to build the latest version.
But there's a hit miss from build package I don't know why. Sometimes it success sometimes it failed & still
report error glib deprecated. even already build latest gee, vte & valac dependency versions it's still hit & miss.

It looks luxurious like split image of dolphin in GTK perfect Thunar replacement for Xfce
however but it's still lack of some trivial feature(I can't remember but critical) opposite from Thunar have.
You're thought about planning polo for your default Xfce fm for MX distro
& surprise other Xfce distro competitors don't you?
Innovate
 
Posts: 158
Joined: 2015-12-27 01:28
Location: /dev/urandom

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby stevepusser » 2018-04-13 19:30

Innovate wrote:Long ago since 2017 on 17.10 version.
Even I was the first guy that discovered Timeshift & build them since debian 8.8 era.
Even before Mint was discover Timeshift.

To build raw on debian 9 you need to build gee, vte & valac before able to build the latest version.
But there's a hit miss from build package I don't know why. Sometimes it success sometimes it failed & still
report error glib deprecated. even already build latest gee, vte & valac dependency versions it's still hit & miss.

It looks luxurious like split image of dolphin in GTK perfect Thunar replacement for Xfce
however but it's still lack of some trivial feature(I can't remember but critical) opposite from Thunar have.
You're thought about planning polo for your default Xfce fm for MX distro
& surprise other Xfce distro competitors don't you?


It builds fine with the Stretch gee and vte build-depends, and that is reproducible in pbuilder, but MX testers are reporting it can crash X back to the login screen if the Properties are closed or something like that. It may be a bug in the program or it might need newer versions of those, but I'll ask the testers to see if the deb from github does the same thing.

I'm not the dictator of MX, Jerry3904 is actually the project head. If Polo gets to the top on its merits, the developers will vote to use it over Thunar. Its extra features require a lot of extra dependencies. I'm too used to using Dolphin, myself...

Hey, though the rankings might have no meaning at all, MX has risen to #10 for the last six months at Distrowatch! Maybe we'll start getting some recognition on the Linux blogs, podcasts, and magazines instead of Ubuntu Ubuntu Mint Mint Solus Solus Elementary Elementary and so on. I was busy this AM trying a lot of package builds of Handbrake 1.1.0 for MX until I finally succeeded...no fair letting the build download stuff during the build from the Net like it wants to do, that's not kosher for Debian packages, so I adapted the deb-multimedia package so it wouldn't do it. :lol:

I already updated to the latest Selene in the MX test repo, and am going to tackle the current TimeShift next.
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: Notepadqq 1.2.0, Pale Moon 27.8.3, KeePassXC 2.3.1, Calligra 3.1, VLC 3.0.1, Firefox 59.0.2, Shotwell 28.2
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 9443
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby oswaldkelso » 2018-04-13 19:42

I looked at building a Dragora package, but to much work for me to just take a look.

I was also confused by the two different licenses. The COPYING file states " GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007" but the licence.md file states "GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 3, 29 June 2007"

I guess I get to choose :lol:
Ash init durbatulûk, ash init gimbatul,
Ash init thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
User avatar
oswaldkelso
 
Posts: 1115
Joined: 2005-07-26 23:20
Location: UK

Re: Has anyone tried Polo File Manager?

Postby Innovate » 2018-04-14 04:36

stevepusser wrote:It builds fine with the Stretch gee and vte build-depends, and that is reproducible in pbuilder, but MX testers are reporting it can crash X back to the login screen if the Properties are closed or something like that. It may be a bug in the program or it might need newer versions of those, but I'll ask the testers to see if the deb from github does the same thing.

I'm not the dictator of MX, Jerry3904 is actually the project head. If Polo gets to the top on its merits, the developers will vote to use it over Thunar. Its extra features require a lot of extra dependencies. I'm too used to using Dolphin, myself...

Hey, though the rankings might have no meaning at all, MX has risen to #10 for the last six months at Distrowatch! Maybe we'll start getting some recognition on the Linux blogs, podcasts, and magazines instead of Ubuntu Ubuntu Mint Mint Solus Solus Elementary Elementary and so on. I was busy this AM trying a lot of package builds of Handbrake 1.1.0 for MX until I finally succeeded...no fair letting the build download stuff during the build from the Net like it wants to do, that's not kosher for Debian packages, so I adapted the deb-multimedia package so it wouldn't do it. :lol:

I already updated to the latest Selene in the MX test repo, and am going to tackle the current TimeShift next.

Currently we've 3 or us on obs. You, me & Sunderland that active debian 9 packaging resources mostly.
I think I'll join share my research packaging with MX soon later for gratitude.
Since you've teach about using obs repo I owe your obs tutorials.

Btw, prepare to build "meson" it's need for build future GTK 3.27-4.0, future gnome & modern apps.
Many new gnome, gtk apps & modern apps they start to remove cmake, configure, autogen & shift to meson build
Which trouble us packagers on stretch. I stuck can't build new gnome apps yet because of meson build.
For example: gnome-disk-utility, file-roller, 3.26.0-3.28.0 they start to shift to meson
The Other one, you might need to upgrade is Wxwidgets 3.0.4 it's require for current latest build filezilla.
Innovate
 
Posts: 158
Joined: 2015-12-27 01:28
Location: /dev/urandom


Return to Desktop & Multimedia

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

fashionable