Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 17th Nov 2004 22:36 UTC
GTK+ We are very happy to announce that our little side project, GnomeFiles.org has reached as of this moment 535 application entries, 100,000 downloads and an average of ~19,000 pageviews per day, all in about 5 months since its first publication. We would like to thank our readers and the GTK+/GTK-binding developers who supported the project so far. Update: Search Plugin for Firefox/Mozilla now available (get it from the bottom of the GnomeFiles page).
Order by: Score:
good work..
by IC on Wed 17th Nov 2004 22:43 UTC

Is it me or does "wired" look an awful lot like Hydrogen??

...
by Thom Holwerda on Wed 17th Nov 2004 22:43 UTC

Congratulations ;) . I never downloaded an application directly from GnomeFiles, but I do use it to search for applications for my Ubuntu install. I then check the Debian-Sarge and Ubuntu repositories if the application is available, and install it via Synaptic.

Keep up the good work!

RE: ...
by Wrawrat on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:10 UTC

Yeah, same thing here. I never compile directly from the source (well, Portage do, but I don't ./configure; make; make install; manually) but it's quite useful to find GTK applications that can suit my needs.

Congratulations!
by Jefferson "JReZIN" Ietto Novo on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:11 UTC

Congratulations!
It's a very usefull, funcional and clean website... =]

To Thom
by Tudy on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:17 UTC

Do you know any repositories for things like gtweakui? couldn't find them in universe..

RE: ...
by theorz on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:29 UTC

Same here, it is more of something to find out about applications than it is to install them. Installing by file is so 90's. It is a maintenance nightmare having to manually redownload new versions of programs.

Some software like monkey bubble does have a repository listed, but it is in the comments section making it had to notice. It would be nice if gnomefiles included a specific section to list repositories like it does for files. It would be a nice way to encourage developers to distribute software as repositories instead of files.

What would be even nice is if there was a gnomefiles repository so users could just add it and have access to everything listed on gnomefiles in one click.

v Don't miss gnome-look.org , kde-apps.org
by asdex on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:31 UTC
RE: theorz
by Eugenia on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:37 UTC

Developers are free to link to their compiled binaries for specific distributions. Many of them do anwyay.

However, having random users listing binary packages for distros is not realistic. Even on Slackware where packagers are extra dependency-aware and careful (simply because the packaging system doesn't support deps) there are plenty of packages on LinuxPackages.net that are listed there and they don't have all the deps required listed for download. Extrapolating the situation on the broad scope of Gnomefiles where packages of many different distros can be linked from, it would just be a nightmare for all. It wouldn't be realistic. It's the reality of Unix/Linux to be the way it is.

Instead, autopackages or any other *truly cross-distro* packaging system, or statically linked binaries (static to a logical level of course, not linking everything), is welcome to be discussed for inclusion.

Good news
by LiNuCe on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:41 UTC

GnomeFiles is a very usefull site. I use GNOME/GTK+2 applications on my main computer and I'm really happy to check only one site to discover new GNOME/GTK+ applications. For my low end test computer (with only 64Mb of RAM), I discovered Endeavour (a full featured file browser) and GTK see (a image viewer) : with XFCE3 and Sylpheed, I can have a light, minimal GTK+1 environment for this test computer which runs very slowly with most modern GTK+2 applications.

[1] Endeavour : http://www.gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=457
[2] GTK See : http://www.gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=489

v RE: Don't miss gnome-look.org , kde-apps.org
by Eugenia on Wed 17th Nov 2004 23:42 UTC
Search plugin?
by Julian on Thu 18th Nov 2004 00:18 UTC

GnomeFiles is really helpful. I would love to see a Mozilla/Firefox search plugin for it.

RE: Search plugin?
by Eugenia on Thu 18th Nov 2004 00:20 UTC

How do I create one? Any pointers? I might create it for fun. ;)

Thank you Eugenia
by Chris Dunphy on Thu 18th Nov 2004 00:49 UTC

This is a real asset to the GNOME user community! I am also quite certain that the developers love to have an opportunity to showcase their applications.

Keep up the great work!
--Chris

@eugenia
by Anonymous on Thu 18th Nov 2004 00:58 UTC

"http://mycroft.mozdev.org/"

i am pretty sure bugging these guys will get you what you want to do. i heard it was pretty simple to do

another thing
by Anonymous on Thu 18th Nov 2004 01:01 UTC
@Thom
by choulth on Thu 18th Nov 2004 01:02 UTC

Same with me: Acrivate Ubuntu Universe and Multiverse, check GnomeFiles and... go ;)

@Julian
by wowtip on Thu 18th Nov 2004 02:02 UTC

If you can't wait for search extension, make a quick search keyword:

Manage bookmarks -> New bookmark

Name: Gnomefiles search
Location: http://www.gnomefiles.org/search.php?search=%s
Keyword: gf

When completed press ctrl+t, then type "gf moho" + enter to search for moho on gnomefiles.

(Just in case you didn't know allready)

RE: Search plugin?
by Eugenia on Thu 18th Nov 2004 02:32 UTC

I started working on it, but my internet connection is seriously busted in my area, so I will be finishing it up late tonight or tomorrow.

OT: On a similar note
by Ronald on Thu 18th Nov 2004 03:25 UTC

I'd love to see a site that deals with CSharp apps and games for Windows and *NIX.

Just a thought...

The gnome community, in terms of web presense is really fragmented. It is great that volunteers have produced all these fantastic sites but some of them are impossible to find unless you just stumble across them!

All gnome sites should

a) have similar domain names so they can easily be found:
- files.gnome.org
- art.gnome.org
- news.gnome.org
- help.gnome.org
- etc

b) have an identical header like the one on gnome.org that has links to all the main gnome areas.

Compared to the cohesiveness of the kde sites, gnome sites are really weak. Which is unfortunate because the sites themselves are really great

absolutely, I vote for that. it would be great to have like a gnome superwebsite...all with the same header and styles.. and by the way.. am I missing some gnome sites ? at the moment I visit frequently:

gnomefiles,footnotes,planetgnome,gnome itself and every now and then art.gnome....

so.. am I missing something ? ;)

Dan


Awesome! ^_^
by Hawke on Thu 18th Nov 2004 04:30 UTC

I love GnomeFiles. It's a great site. Good Job!

^_^

...
by Anonymous on Thu 18th Nov 2004 05:11 UTC

Congratulations for such great web page.

Autopackage
by Spark on Thu 18th Nov 2004 06:24 UTC

Instead, autopackages or any other *truly cross-distro* packaging system, or statically linked binaries (static to a logical level of course, not linking everything), is welcome to be discussed for inclusion.

Actually, I had this thought the other day. If gnomefiles would offer autopackage for the listed programs (no libraries, etc of course), this would be a HUGE feature for the website. At the same time it would promote the autopackage project and it would also go very well with future plans like the browser embedding. It just seems like a very natural combination. =)
Of course it would be a lot of work, but even a few autopackages for a selected set of quality applications (which are rare to find in distributions maybe) would already add great additional value to the website.

RE: Autopackage
by foo on Thu 18th Nov 2004 07:18 UTC

I was thinking something similar. gnomefiles should have very strict and well documented set of submission guidelines for apps that are going to get "special" support.

"special" support on gnomefiles.org means that apps can be built for several targets using scripts and then delievered by gnomefiles. I was actually thinking apt and yum and deb but autopackage would be another great target. Dependencies would also be included in the requirements so at least you would have to document them and the scripts could figure out what was needed for building or if something could be built at all.

That would be really cool because then developers could focus on getting the app working with a specific set of deps and then their packaging demands would be reduced to getting things ready for submission in this "special" status.

Of course this depends heavily on a common system for installations like LSB or maybe supporting the most popular also like LSB, autopackage, debian, Redhat/Fedora, etc.

So a developer would submit one package and after some crunching, gnomefiles would deliver a package for each package type and "distro" (LSB, autopackage, deb, fedora, etc).

It might take a server for each "distro" to build for that distro but damn would that be cool. Once the system was debugged and stable it could be expanded for many more apps until you had enough mindshare where every developer used this system.

RE: Autopackage
by clausi on Thu 18th Nov 2004 08:14 UTC

Why not combining the existing repositories with a simple file embedded in the projects webpages? These may be simple XML files listing the repository name of a package (for each distribution), and maybe a download link to a autopackage binary for people looking for more recent versions.

This way, users don't need to scan web pages for nice apps, then start searching in their repository for the correct name, and then install them. They should just click a link, download the description file, and let the software install the package from the repository.

Search engines?
by rehdon on Thu 18th Nov 2004 09:16 UTC

Good job Eugenia, and thanks from a GNOME users.

About binary packages: of course it would be a nightmare trying to keep track of every version for every distro, but I think a link to installable packages would help a lot. Perhaps you could include a link to an rpmseek search, or some other search engine, for the apps that don't offer a binary download?

rehdon

RE: Search plugin?
by Eugenia on Thu 18th Nov 2004 09:17 UTC

ok guys, the search plugin for mozilla/firefox is up and it works, but the first time it runs, it crashes the browser. No idea what's wrong. Any help is appreciated.

RE: Search plugin?
by Eugenia on Thu 18th Nov 2004 09:40 UTC

ok, I figured it out. It requires that the image filename and the plugin name to be the same. Otherwise, it crashes. ;)

Installation idea
by Anonymous on Thu 18th Nov 2004 10:07 UTC

Maybe it would be nice, if every software title on the gnomefiles site, would have a "install-pkg://<name-of-software>/<version-of-software>" link.

A gnome program could then register install-pkg:// uris, so it will launch if you click on such a link. The gnome program could check on which distribution it is running, and install the software and its dependencies with the native system of the distribution (apt-get, yum, yast,..) or autopackage if the distribution doesn't have it..

RE: Installation idea
by clausi on Thu 18th Nov 2004 10:40 UTC

Such a system does exist. See here: http://klik.berlios.de/

It's written for Knoppix, and installs programms in a application directory similar to the MacSystem or 0Install. However, that shouldn't be to hard too change.

One of the problems with the approach is to register the install-pkg:// uris with your browser - see the howto for ed2k:// uris on http://www.amule.org/wiki/index.php/Ed2k_links_handling

Another problem might be different names for the same package in different distributions.

Repository
by Bram! on Thu 18th Nov 2004 11:29 UTC

If now only there would be an up-to-date slackware (swaret/slapt-get) repository for all of gnomefiles ;)

RE: Installation idea
by rehdon on Thu 18th Nov 2004 11:58 UTC

Another problem might be different names for the same package in different distributions.

And the fact that distros have different packaging habits, Mandrakelinux for instance has libs split in a different package for every app.

rehdon

Re: Search plugin
by Julian on Thu 18th Nov 2004 12:11 UTC

Heh, cool, that was fast. Thanks Eugenia!

v Gnome is crap.
by Anonymous on Thu 18th Nov 2004 13:21 UTC
Gnomefiles site layout
by AndrewG on Thu 18th Nov 2004 13:27 UTC

Question for Eugenia.

I was wondering what the reason for choosing a fixed width layout was? Seems like the site is not really a site with a need for pixel perfect graphics. Why not just make it a 100% width site and those people with very high res screens can just size the window to meet their needs?

RE: Gnome is crap.
by Julian on Thu 18th Nov 2004 13:29 UTC

Just a shame that Gnome sucks.

Yeah, you're right, it's too bad that it sucks. Because if Gnome didn't suck you could abandon Windows 98 and switch...
Oh and did I forget to say how much Gnome sucks?

v WTF does this have to do with OS-NEWS?!
by Bryan on Thu 18th Nov 2004 15:24 UTC
re: good work...
by Andrewg on Thu 18th Nov 2004 16:39 UTC

Its you ;)

GTK apps for non-Gnome users?
by Walt_H on Thu 18th Nov 2004 17:10 UTC

Since the site is called GnomeFiles, how many of these apps can be used by non-Gnome users? I have an older computer and no desire to use Gnome (no Gnome libraries currently installed), but I do like the look of many GTK apps.

There is (was?) a GTK application repository, but it does not seem to work these days. (I get an Internal Server Error every time I try to access it.) So, a site where I can find GTK (but not Gnome-dependent) applications is welcome.

information incomplete
by Walt_H on Thu 18th Nov 2004 18:14 UTC

Looking at the listing of apps on GnomeFiles.org, I noticed incomplete information regarding some applications. For example, the entry for GTKtalog simply states that it requires GTK+ 1.2.x. But looking at the same application through Synpatic indicates that it also requires a large number of additional, mostly Gnome-related libraries.

It seems to me this information should also be included for those of us looking for applications that have the GTK look but do not require Gnome or its assorted libraries. (I know they exist - Endeavour2 is an example - but they are hard to find.)

RE:  GTK apps for non-Gnome users?
by Eugenia on Thu 18th Nov 2004 19:05 UTC

>Since the site is called GnomeFiles, how many of these apps can be used by non-Gnome users?

GnomeFiles is NOT for Gnome users only. It's a GTK repository primarily, NOT a Gnome one. We chose the name Gnomefiles because it's a name more recognizable by people, than the word GTK.

>But looking at the same application through Synpatic indicates that it also requires a large number of additional, mostly Gnome-related libraries.

That's because Gnome libs are expected to be installed on people that use GnomeFiles, as it's standard on most distros, even if users might not be using gnome.

RE: GTK apps for non-Gnome users?
by clausi on Thu 18th Nov 2004 19:10 UTC

So, a site where I can find GTK (but not Gnome-dependent) applications is welcome.

While your wish is really acceptable from a certain point of view, there's probably nobody who would do the work to seperate apps according to your demand.

See it this way:
* It was already said that GTK+ will get functionality from some GNOME libs (libgnomeui, etc.) in the next month or years.
* Some libs are already used rather widely by GTK+ apps, for example GnomeVFS, gstreamer, etc.
* Other libs must be implemented by GTK+ apps anyway, a config functionality, for example. Using something else means you will end having several different implementations, probably.
* Other libs like Bonobo are used by nearly no other projects except some real core GNOME apps because nobody seems to like the CORBA/Bonobo model anyway.

The distinction between GNOME and GTK-only gets smaller every week. You may continue to keep GNOME libs from your computer but I guess you're in a minority. ;)

RE: GTK apps for non-Gnome users?
by Walt_H on Fri 19th Nov 2004 06:29 UTC

Running a smaller (in size) distribution as I do (Feather Linux), I have no Gnome libraries (or KDE libraries, for that matter) installed on my machine. In fact, that was one of the reasons I chose it. My machine is older and simply bogs down under Gnome and KDE. And, since I didn't plan to run them, I saw no reason to have all the libraries installed if I could avoid it.

As far as being in a minority, I don't mind that, as long as there continues to exist a source (or multiple sources) for GUI applications that do not require Gnome or KDE libraries. Any suggestions?

I realize this means some of my applications may work differently from others, but I don't mind so long as I can figure out how they work.

RE: GTK apps for non-Gnome users?
by clausi on Fri 19th Nov 2004 09:32 UTC

As far as being in a minority, I don't mind that, as long as there continues to exist a source (or multiple sources) for GUI applications that do not require Gnome or KDE libraries. Any suggestions?

Not really. You either spend time to search appropriate apps for yourself, or you spend money to update your box.

Or you pick additional applications written with other toolkits (FLTK, Fox, etc.), and accept the resulting lack of conformity.

RE: GTK apps for non-Gnome users
by Walt_H on Fri 19th Nov 2004 16:40 UTC

Well, I have found some GTK apps that do not require Gnome libs (JPilot, Endeavour2), so I know they exist, as I have done some fairly extensive searching already. As I said in an earlier post, there is/was another GTK application repository at http://www.ibiblio.org/gtk/ but the database no longer seems to be accessible.

However, I would consider (and already use) applications built with other toolkits (e.g., Alicq, which is built with Tk/Tcl). Are there any central sites that either make available for download or list applications built in specific toolkits (i.e., a site for Fox based apps, another for FLTK based apps, etc.) I occasionally check out Freshmeat and Sourceforge, but it is sometimes hard to tell what other dependencies applications require; documentation is often spotty at best.

My laptop is around five years old, but I am not in a position to upgrade, so that is not an option. I know there must be more than a few people who do not run KDE or Gnome, otherwise other windowmanagers would not be popular. I am equally sure at least some of those people choose not to load KDE or Gnome libraries, at least not by default, otherwise mini distributions such as Feather or DSL would not be as popular as they are.

I was simply hoping to find other GTK apps as those libraries were part of the basic installation. Unfortunately, with the apparent demise of the GTK+ Application Repository, GnomeFiles appears to be the only central listing of GTK apps available, hence my desire that Gnome libraries be listed as dependencies when they are required.