superfile - A pretty fancy and modern terminal file manager


The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please go to the original post.

github.com/MHNightCat/superfil…
in reply to mbirth

I haven't used any of the 3, but from a look over them superfile looks a lot more user friendly and has a nicer overall look.

Edit; the install process is rough though, complains about missing glibc but searching for that package in apt doesn't show anything promising. It also seems to require some kind of third party font that isn't included? I gave up lol that's too much for me to deal with.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)
in reply to MangoPenguin

Yeah I hear that. I will say aptitude made my life a lot easier in terms of installing things with its recommended fixes. Also good software documentation should have a "Getting Started" section that gives you step by step instructions for each OS/Distro of how to install it. If it doesn't... Well maybe that software isn't worth installing anyway 🤷‍♂️
This entry was edited (1 year ago)
in reply to moog

I mean there's that, but it's a lot of work for a dev too.

I would rather Linux just be able to detect what's missing and install it for me. In the case of a lot of missing components, what it says is missing will be named completely different from the package you need to install which makes it really hard.

It was always nice with windows installers because they would come with the needed components, or windows would just prompt to install them automatically.

I guess that's essentially what Flatpak solves!

This entry was edited (1 year ago)
in reply to MangoPenguin

This entry was edited (1 year ago)
in reply to MangoPenguin

There are two specific problems I see here for the mentioned binaries.
1. The software is packaged as a generic archive, no format like rpm or deb the system package manager could/does handle. Thus, the package manager of your system does neither know that you've installed this binary nor what it depends on. The developer could have at least mentioned on which exact system the Linux binaries are supposed to work, e.g. Ubuntu 22.04, so that the user knows, that they might have issues running it on a different system.
2. The developer could have built and packed it in a way that it can be installed by the package manager of a specific distribution. Launchpad or OBS are made for this purpose. The other option, wrapping it as a flatpak, works too, but may bloat the system of the user as different versions of the same libraries are installed (system generic + flatpak version).

Nonetheless, as a Linux user, you are encouraged to build directly from source.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)
Unknown parent

lemmy - Link to source

dino

Uhm both displaying copy/move process and having shortcuts for "favourite" dirs is quite possible with nnn. Although for the later I mostly use -S argument for persistent session.

The only drawback of nnn in my book is the kind of weird/cumbersome way to configure it eith ENV variables. And the non-existent preview image display under wayland.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)