[SOLVED] Fluxbox 1.3.7

Message

Nili · #1 Post by **Nili** » 2019-08-25 10:26

Hello! Any particular reason why Fluxbox 1.3.7 didn't make to the current Debian version?

Latest Fluxbox have been released around 2015 aparently this version is stuck on Experimental for quite long time. Not sure why is still on experimental, also how long will stay there? I think Debian 10 must approched on current release.

I have no problem getting the latest version, I just wanted to know what happened to this package on Debian repo. Anyone have more clue?

Regards!

Wheelerof4te · #2 Post by **Wheelerof4te** » 2019-08-25 13:42

You can contact the maintainer if you have any questions. As to why there's no latest version, I don't know. Maybe there's a lack of interest?
Lot's of people use i3wm and openbox. Fluxbox doesn't get much love.

Nili · #3 Post by **Nili** » 2019-08-26 05:41

Contacting the maintainers seems like a good idea, I can see there are two in charge, perhaps one of them can review it and move it to stable.
About i3 yeah, I know it's very populated ones notably r/unixporn, but when it comes to stacks Openbox/Fluxbox for some matters.

Fluxbox doesn't have Openbox fame, as i get the impression it's not recognized enough (at least in today's generation) or because tile looks more interesting on too many, While Openbox have a lot of distro supports which comes installed on a few popular distros.

While in my position both stacks are an integral part of my system.

Thanks for your suggestion Wheelerof4te

Nili

None1975 · #4 Post by **None1975** » 2019-08-26 11:19

Hello, Nili! I think you should fill bug report to maintainer of fluxbox package. Also, you can do it by using the reportbug program.

Nili · #5 Post by **Nili** » 2019-08-28 13:14

Hello None1975! Sorry for the delay, but have been too much busy and didn't even had time to write emails on maintainer. Once i got the free time I'll try to get in touch with any of them and see what I can do to let them know.

Thanks for your recommendation of reportbug. I'ts been a while i haven't touched that "reportbug" snippet, if i haven't removed yeat i'll drop them a report aswell.

Best regards!
Nili

Nili · #6 Post by **Nili** » 2020-07-09 12:22

To update this topic somewhat which is getting ready for a year, how fast time flies.

I only contacted both maintainers via their email ---@debian.org provided by Debian packages manager two months ago. I did not receive any response in this way.
Maybe I should have tried via IRC or reportbug tool, but already too late for me as i am not using Debian or Debian-based currently.

I only wish now since i opened this topic to bring it on attention to any one interested of updating Fluxbox. Or if it is possible to let maintainers known in a more efficient way of contact.

This master page of fluxbox shown 3 newer pages of updates compared with experimental debian-changelog (1.3.7-1~exp1) that corresponds to date Wed, 18 Feb 2015.

It would be wise to give it a life Fluxbox at least on exp/sid/testing otherwise what do these repo mean?
Perhaps fluxbox isn't used like should be on Debian, but it is used a lot of on other Debian-based from what i have observed.

Well, thanks for your attention and advices.

Regards!

Head_on_a_Stick · #7 Post by **Head_on_a_Stick** » 2020-07-09 18:35

I've just installed the experimental package in my stable system:

Code: Select all

~# aptitude search '?narrow(?installed, ?archive(experimental))'
i   fluxbox     - Highly configurable and low resource X11 Window manager               
~#

Packages from experimental have a pin value of 1 (one) by default so the repositories can be added as long as careful attention is paid when installing stuff from there.

cuckooflew · #8 Post by **cuckooflew** » 2020-07-09 19:54

by Nili » 2019-08-25 >>---snip---I have no problem getting the latest version, I just wanted to know what happened to this package on Debian repo. Anyone have more clue?

I like Fluxbox, that is what I use, I don't know for sure why the Debian side is not up-to-date, or current, all though with Debian that is a normal thing, to use outdated versions of the software they package,

Nili: >>Fluxbox doesn't have Openbox fame, as i get the impression it's not recognized enough (at least in today's generation) or because tile looks more interesting on too many, While Openbox have a lot of distro supports which comes installed on a few popular distros.

I could give my guesses, but that would be sort of like gossip,...any way, I think the priority now a days with the Debain developers, packagers , is keep the new EX MSwindows users happy, and most windows users would not be interested in Fluxbox, and you know how the "sheep" are, they allways follow the crowd, mindlessly pursuing the"most popular" so there you go, just my opinion, any way at least the package is available,

'man fluxbox' ---snip---ONLINE DOCUMENTATION
The Official fluxbox website: http://www.fluxbox.org

The Official fluxbox wiki: http://www.fluxbox-wiki.org

Many compatible themes: http://tenr.de

BUGS
If you find any bugs, please visit the #fluxbox irc channel on
irc.freenode.net or submit them to the bug tracker at
http://sf.net/projects/fluxbox . Or you may subscribe to one of the
mailinglists. More information can be found on the official website.

SEE ALSO
fluxbox-apps(5) fluxbox-keys(5) fluxbox-style(5) fluxbox-menu(5)
fluxbox-remote(1) fbsetroot(1) fbsetbg(1) fbrun(1) startfluxbox(1)

AUTHOR
Henrik Kinnunen <fluxgen@fluxbox.org>
Author.

Main website: http://www.fluxbox.org/
OpenBsd 6.7 does use the current version, and it is well maintained

Code: Select all

parrot$ fluxbox -v
Fluxbox 1.3.7 : (c) 2001-2015 Fluxbox Team 

parrot$

,

I only contacted both maintainers via their email ---@debian.org provided by Debian packages manager two months ago. I did not receive any response in this way.

This is a common thing with various Debian developers, most seem to be to busy or something, and just ignore e-mails, some do respond on the mail lists though, and a very,very few, will actually take the time to reply to a e-mail, just saying,,,, after all said and done, it is a "free meal" any way, so I am grateful Debian is available.

stevepusser · #9 Post by **stevepusser** » 2020-07-10 04:47

The standard MX Linux 19.2 xfce ISO also now comes with MX-Fluxbox, featuring the 1.3.7 version backported to Buster. Seems to work just fine! It shouldn't be a tough backport if you want to do it yourself, or on the openSUSE Build Service.

Nili · #10 Post by **Nili** » 2020-07-10 11:01

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:I've just installed the experimental package in my stable system:
Code: Select all
~# aptitude search '?narrow(?installed, ?archive(experimental))'
i   fluxbox     - Highly configurable and low resource X11 Window manager               
~#
Packages from experimental have a pin value of 1 (one) by default so the repositories can be added as long as careful attention is paid when installing stuff from there.

I even used exp, but mostly i compiled. I wanted to say even the experimental is outdated about 5 years in comparison with Fluxbox-master, see the fb-master-links above or below to see new changes/fixed that do not reflect on experimental. Exp(repo) i think must updated more frequently.

cuckooflew wrote: I like Fluxbox, that is what I use, I don't know for sure why the Debian side is not up-to-date, or current, all though with Debian that is a normal thing, to use outdated versions of the software they package,
Nili: >>Fluxbox doesn't have Openbox fame, as i get the impression it's not recognized enough (at least in today's generation) or because tile looks more interesting on too many, While Openbox have a lot of distro supports which comes installed on a few popular distros.
I could give my guesses, but that would be sort of like gossip,...any way, I think the priority now a days with the Debain developers, packagers , is keep the new EX MSwindows users happy, and most windows users would not be interested in Fluxbox, and you know how the "sheep" are, they allways follow the crowd, mindlessly pursuing the"most popular" so there you go, just my opinion, any way at least the package is available,
'man fluxbox' ---snip---ONLINE DOCUMENTATION
The Official fluxbox website: http://www.fluxbox.org

The Official fluxbox wiki: http://www.fluxbox-wiki.org

Many compatible themes: http://tenr.de

BUGS
If you find any bugs, please visit the #fluxbox irc channel on
irc.freenode.net or submit them to the bug tracker at
http://sf.net/projects/fluxbox . Or you may subscribe to one of the
mailinglists. More information can be found on the official website.

SEE ALSO
fluxbox-apps(5) fluxbox-keys(5) fluxbox-style(5) fluxbox-menu(5)
fluxbox-remote(1) fbsetroot(1) fbsetbg(1) fbrun(1) startfluxbox(1)

AUTHOR
Henrik Kinnunen <fluxgen@fluxbox.org>
Author.
Main website: http://www.fluxbox.org/
OpenBsd 6.7 does use the current version, and it is well maintained
Code: Select all
parrot$ fluxbox -v
Fluxbox 1.3.7 : (c) 2001-2015 Fluxbox Team 

parrot$ 
,

cuckooflew wrote:This is a common thing with various Debian developers, most seem to be to busy or something, and just ignore e-mails, some do respond on the mail lists though, and a very,very few, will actually take the time to reply to a e-mail, just saying,,,, after all said and done, it is a "free meal" any way, so I am grateful Debian is available.

You have made a sufficient description of the status of Fluxbox versus Openbox, I am more or less aware as a long-time user of both WM's. I also agree with the trend of nowdays usage and the choice of measures. It is a awesome there are alternatives and choices, there is enough room for everyone. I don't want to give Fluxbox more value versus others.

V1.3.7 it is the official releases of Fluxbox, which must correspond Debian 10 (buster-stable), Everything is fine here. Meanwhile, testing, sid and especially experimental had to create opportunities to try newest commits. It's only 2 months older
http://git.fluxbox.org/fluxbox.git/log/

stevepusser wrote:The standard MX Linux 19.2 xfce ISO also now comes with MX-Fluxbox, featuring the 1.3.7 version backported to Buster. Seems to work just fine! It shouldn't be a tough backport if you want to do it yourself, or on the openSUSE Build Service.

I am a regular visitor of both MX & AntiX forum, I often follow the announcements especially when spoken about MX-FB. If MX-FB comes with latest Fluxbox releases from masters for me that is enough.
http://git.fluxbox.org/fluxbox.git

Indeed it works great, i used 1.3.7 for almost a year, very stable, satisfactory enough with features. I did compiled many times which i was very up to date.
I opened this topic more than for myself to bring it to attention, I understand that Mainteiners do not stay here to read, I thought they could hear from other sources, Mod or Admin or you might accidentally notice it.

Anyway, thanks again for your intervention and suggestions.

Head_on_a_Stick · #11 Post by **Head_on_a_Stick** » 2020-07-10 22:24

Nili wrote:even the experimental is outdated about 5 years in comparison with Fluxbox-master, see the fb-master-links above or below to see new changes/fixed that do not reflect on experimental. Exp(repo) i think must updated more frequently

1.3.7 is the last stable release. There's no way Debian would package from HEAD, even in experimental.

stevepusser · #12 Post by **stevepusser** » 2020-07-11 02:07

The MX version is just backported from Experimental, not the git master.

I remember there are quite a few packages in Debian built from a git pull, though...https://packages.debian.org/sid/x11/xse ... ideo-intel

Nili · #13 Post by **Nili** » 2020-07-11 05:34

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:1.3.7 is the last stable release. There's no way Debian would package from HEAD, even in experimental.

I did not know this, I thought sid or exp repo feeds from master/git. This is to say the cause for the long delay. No to master, so they stick to stable. The answer I wanted, THANKS!

stevepusser wrote:The MX version is just backported from Experimental, not the git master.
I remember there are quite a few packages in Debian built from a git pull, though...https://packages.debian.org/sid/x11/xse ... ideo-intel

Thanks stevepusser for the explanation of this part, if the latter is true, I would like to have more packages in experimental from masters, so the testing from users will be more frequent.

Both the answers you gave me were enough to arouse my curiosity.
Thanks guys!

oswaldkelso · #14 Post by **oswaldkelso** » 2020-07-11 09:00

Fluxbox has one killer feature Inherited from PWM that is missing from most other window managers TABS

http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net/docbook/ ... -tabs.html

Head_on_a_Stick · #15 Post by **Head_on_a_Stick** » 2020-07-11 10:20

stevepusser wrote:I remember there are quite a few packages in Debian built from a git pull, though...https://packages.debian.org/sid/x11/xse ... ideo-intel

The xserver-xorg-video-intel package is the exception that proves the rule, Intel haven't made a stable release for five years: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugrepo ... =%23748753

stevepusser · #16 Post by **stevepusser** » 2020-07-12 06:23

There are some others, but Debian packagers (and sometimes I too) often just cherry-pick commits from upstream master and make them into patches for the repo version if they fix some issue. That would probably be the way to go for 1.3.7 if you can identify the commits you want or need.

Debian User Forums

[SOLVED] Fluxbox 1.3.7

[SOLVED] Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: [SOLVED] Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: Fluxbox 1.3.7

Re: [SOLVED] Fluxbox 1.3.7