Jump to content
saturnian

menumaker?

Recommended Posts

abarbarian
1 hour ago, saturnian said:

Has anyone here used MenuMaker for Fluxbox (http://menumaker.sourceforge.net/)?

 

I see that Arch has a menumaker package (https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/menumaker/) but I don't see one in the Debian repos.

 

Yes.

 

This allows you to see if any new programs have been added to the pc without altering the menu.

 

$ mmaker -t Xterm -vic WMaker

 

Change WMaker to your own WM/DE in the above. If you like what you see in the terminal you can do

 

$ mmaker -t Xterm -vf WMaker
* scanning
  desktop... 83 apps found
  legacy... 11 apps found
  debian... 129 apps found
* merging... 78 coincidings detected
* generating
  using Xterm as terminal emulator
* writing to ~/GNUstep/Defaults/WMRootMenu
* done

to populate your menu. Or you can copy and paste the terminal output and fiddle around with it to suit.

 

When I ran it it gave me some duplicate entries and missed some programs, mainly terminal starting ones. Easily rectified in Window Maker though its excellent Window Maker Preferences gui.

 

😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian

Thanks, found it: https://forums.scotsnewsletter.com/index.php?/topic/96603-window-manager-or-desktop-environment/page/2/&tab=comments#comment-464990

 

Ugh:

 

$ xdgmenumaker -f fluxbox > ~/.fluxbox/xdg_menu
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/local/bin/xdgmenumaker", line 11, in <module>
    import xdg.DesktopEntry as dentry
ImportError: No module named xdg.DesktopEntry

I have no idea what that's all about!

 

I'll try menumaker in Arch but I do want to see if I can also use xdgmenumaker in Debian.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon James
9 hours ago, saturnian said:

Thanks, found it: https://forums.scotsnewsletter.com/index.php?/topic/96603-window-manager-or-desktop-environment/page/2/&tab=comments#comment-464990

 

Ugh:

 


$ xdgmenumaker -f fluxbox > ~/.fluxbox/xdg_menu
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/local/bin/xdgmenumaker", line 11, in <module>
    import xdg.DesktopEntry as dentry
ImportError: No module named xdg.DesktopEntry

I have no idea what that's all about!

 

I'll try menumaker in Arch but I do want to see if I can also use xdgmenumaker in Debian.

 

 

yes, that's it.  but I've not experienced that error.  Are you on Debian on Arch?  And if on Debian, did you install from a DEB or compile yourself, or download from here:

https://github.com/gapan/xdgmenumaker

If on Arch, I'd probably use the version in AUR.

 

On the surface, it looks like whatever you installed (however you installed it) is missing a dependency, or a recommended package.

 

EDIT:  a quick google seems to suggest you are missing package python-xdg.  install that package from your distro and see if that doesn't work for ya?!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian

Thanks! My web searching skills failed me and I didn't find that info. Yeah, I downloaded the zip file from https://github.com/gapan/xdgmenumaker. The list under "xdgmenumaker requires:" was bugging me, wasn't sure what dependencies I might have been missing. Yep, I'm doing this in Buster. (I was thinking that in Arch I'll try the menumaker package from Community instead of xdgmenumaker from AUR.) Anyway:

 

sudo apt install python-xdg

 

Here's the section I added to the ~/.fluxbox/menu file:

 

   [submenu] (xdg menu)
      [include] (~/.fluxbox/xdg_menu)
      [exec] (update menu) {xdgmenumaker -f fluxbox > ~/.fluxbox/xdg_menu}
   [end]

 

The [begin] operand that you noted in the other thread doesn't seem to be needed here.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon James

If it's working for ya, who am I to argue?  Glad you got it working!

 

For me, xdgmenumaker is the holy ingredient that makes those root menus work.  Can you imagine making all those entries manually?  If it provided formatting for Open box menus, it'd be perfect!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian
Posted (edited)

I've always done my own menus for Fluxbox. Saving copies of old ones to use as a starting point has been very helpful. This is the first time I've tried adding a dynamic or semi-dynamic menu. I have 3 Fluxbox installations, and I went with three different (but kinda similar) approaches.

 

For Buster, I used xdgmenumaker. For Kubuntu, I used menumaker. And for Arch, I went with the archlinux-xdg-menu package (see: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Xdg-menu) (nice documentation there!).

 

I like the last approach best because I didn't have to go outside of the main repos for it.

Edited by saturnian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon James

Nice!  I note that Arch's xdg-menu provides the option for Openbox formatting, while the "mother" package xdgmenumaker does not.  Maybe they're not really related, but just have coincidentally similar names?  I wish xdgmenumaker had that functionality.  For me, it's another instance of choosing a software package that is the best fit for me, but still less than ideal.  I use xdgmenumaker for Flux & Pek, but have to use obmenu-generator to generate my Flux/Pek menu format in identical fashion for Openbox.  It's a PITA, but necessary for my OCD nature.  Would be nice to use ONE package to do the same thing for all 3 WMs.

 

And I agree with the software in the main repos comment.  I really prefer distro-packaged repo software over all others; but I've installed PPA and Deb packages, or compiled from source into a DEB myself, in that order of preference.  But moving from the 'Buntus to Debian, I've made a conscious effort to not create a FrankenDebian and have shunned PPAs.  I really like Arch's concept of user-contributed packages to AUR.  Seems to me that Debian could implement something similar, if they wanted to.  I understand that AUR exists because Arch is dynamic & rolling, while Debian is static & fixed.  But I think the AUR concept could be applied to Debian for any packages that Debian cannot/will not provide due to their strict policies regarding licensing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
Posted (edited)

 

2 hours ago, Hedon James said:

I understand that AUR exists because Arch is dynamic & rolling

 

My understanding is that with so many different applications and programs in the penguin world the Arch developers have decided to include or maintain a set of official applications. These applications are updated and tested by said developers. They are kept in official repositories and are guaranteed to work. This allows the rolling nature of Arch to maintain a reliable and stable os.

The AUR contains applications and programs that Arch users have created packages for that they need or want that are not in the official repos.They are maintained or not by the person who made the package.The reliability or security of these packages is an openended issue.You can just use them as is but best practice is to use them as a template and create the package yourself.

I think the above is fairly accurate.

 

As to archlinux-xdg-menu this is an official package and is maintained by Arch developers so is a reliable and secure program. For some strange reason someone has made a AUR package called xdgmenumaker and this is not guaranteed to be either stable or secure. Why anyone would make this package is anyones guess as it uses the same base as the official package from here,

 

https://github.com/gapan/xdgmenumaker

 

an why anyone would even want to use the AUR offering is beyond me.

 

😎

 

P.S. why not make a Deb package from the archlinux-xdg-menu and install it locally ?

Edited by abarbarian
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
10 hours ago, Hedon James said:

Nice!  I note that Arch's xdg-menu provides the option for Openbox formatting, while the "mother" package xdgmenumaker does not.  Maybe they're not really related, but just have coincidentally similar names?  I wish xdgmenumaker had that functionality.  For me, it's another instance of choosing a software package that is the best fit for me, but still less than ideal.  I use xdgmenumaker for Flux & Pek, but have to use obmenu-generator to generate my Flux/Pek menu format in identical fashion for Openbox.  It's a PITA, but necessary for my OCD nature.  Would be nice to use ONE package to do the same thing for all 3 WMs.

 

And I agree with the software in the main repos comment.  I really prefer distro-packaged repo software over all others; but I've installed PPA and Deb packages, or compiled from source into a DEB myself, in that order of preference.  But moving from the 'Buntus to Debian, I've made a conscious effort to not create a FrankenDebian and have shunned PPAs.  I really like Arch's concept of user-contributed packages to AUR.  Seems to me that Debian could implement something similar, if they wanted to.  I understand that AUR exists because Arch is dynamic & rolling, while Debian is static & fixed.  But I think the AUR concept could be applied to Debian for any packages that Debian cannot/will not provide due to their strict policies regarding licensing.

 

The AUR is kind of like PPAs but with more control. They both allow you to add software that are not in the official repos but they are also very different.

 

Quote

Main advantages of the AUR over PPA's, in my opinion, are:

  • It's centralized - with PPA's, you need to add a PPA for pretty much every piece of software. With the AUR, it's all in the same place.
    This also means if you need a dependency from another PPA in Ubuntu, the install just fails and " I need to add another PPA". With Arch, once you have the AUR it's all there.

  • If you're aware of how AUR packaging works, you can take over when the original maintainer starts running behind.

  • It's encouraged to open .PKGBUILD files and install scripts so you know exactly what they're doing on your system, whereas PPA installs are often a bit of an opaque box.
    Heck, even if you use an AUR helper it'll most likely still ask whether you want to open these files.

Recompiling certain packages isn't even that big of a deal to me, personally.

A lot more discussion on the differences can be found here: 

What's the advantage of the AUR over Ubuntu's PPAs?
 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon James

I understand all that.  I was coming at it from the viewpoint that if AUR works for a rolling release model, it should work very well for fixed point releases.  Debian is so overzealous about not including open source software in repos.  But if the point of Linux is freedom of choice, some of us choose software that doesn't meet Debian's lofty standards.  Wouldn't it be nice if we had a Debian User Repository (DUR....sounds about right?!) for those offerings that Debian does not, and will never support.

 

A good example....nVidia drivers.  If someone compiled a proprietary nVidia package for Debian, wouldn't it be nice if less technically inclined users could install also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
1 hour ago, Hedon James said:

I understand all that.  I was coming at it from the viewpoint that if AUR works for a rolling release model, it should work very well for fixed point releases.  Debian is so overzealous about not including open source software in repos.  But if the point of Linux is freedom of choice, some of us choose software that doesn't meet Debian's lofty standards.  Wouldn't it be nice if we had a Debian User Repository (DUR....sounds about right?!) for those offerings that Debian does not, and will never support.

 

A good example....nVidia drivers.  If someone compiled a proprietary nVidia package for Debian, wouldn't it be nice if less technically inclined users could install also?

 

Well there are plenty of debian based derivatives that provide those packages already but I do not think you will ever see Debian itself offering proprietary packages in it's main repos.That said, there is already plenty of pre-compiled nvidia packages provided by debian: https://wiki.debian.org/NvidiaGraphicsDrivers

 

You can also add "contrib" and "non-free"options to /etc/apt/sources.list

 

Quote

# Debian 10 "Buster"

deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ buster main contrib non-free

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon James

I've done all that.  And maybe nVidia wasn't a good example.  Maybe VirtualBox is a better example.  Not supported in Buster, and they say it never will be...use Virt-Manager.

 

VB was a perfectly working software package for me, that I wasn't looking to replace or improve upon.  Nevertheless, at Debian's prodding, I have gone through great lengths to adopt Virt-Manager as a VB replacement.  But it would've been nice if I had the choice.  I guess technically, I do, as I'm seeing others install VB Deb packages, or using a VB PPA meant for Ubuntu, but drawn from a Debian-compatible version.  As long as it works, everyone's happy.  But when it doesn't, they're gonna hear they created a FrankenDebian and they're on their own.  Good luck finding a friendly face willing to help with that in Debian community.

 

I'm simply saying that I think AUR is a great idea, and well implemented.  An idea worth stealing, or copying, or integrating into other distros.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

Well Oracle offers Virtualbox downloads for Buster https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Linux_Downloads but I wouldn't try anything from oracle anyway. There is a good reason that the entire openoffice core team left and created libreoffice the day that Oracle acquired openoffice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

After acquiring Sun Microsystems in January 2010, Oracle Corporation continued developing OpenOffice.org and StarOffice, which it renamed Oracle Open Office. In September 2010, the majority of outside OpenOffice.org developers left the project due to concerns over Sun's, and then Oracle's, management of the project, to form The Document Foundation (TDF). TDF released the fork LibreOffice in January 2011. which most Linux distributions soon moved to,including Oracle Linux in 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice#History

https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@native-lang.openoffice.org/msg04865.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...