This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!

for those who like ROX-Filer, or care about it

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on February 08, 2007 06:11 PM
Erm. It's not "daddy" by any means, and questionable "cherry" as well.

We've tried to use IceWM+ROX-Filer in one project year ago; it required additional "no-no" in training eventually.

Worst thing we've stumbled upon is that ROX keeps desktop content "virtual", all the pictograms are XML "symlinks" which rather leads to the data loss scenario: "I've put the file on the desktop from the floppy (or erased it from that folder) AND IT'S NOT THERE ANYMORE!".

On the bright side, both auto-sizing on left doubleclick on free space and bold new/updated files and directories are easy to sell (but would never compensate for lost hours of work).

Anyone to care of ROX enough to recheck against current software and file a bugreport? Frankly, I don't. XFCE/Thunar seems more viable "light" alternative, even if based on same GTK2 which is inherently broken wrt 8-bit locales (which are a must for many environments involving data migration off Windows, especially archives).

Michael Shigorin


Return to ROX Desktop provides light, quirky alternative to GNOME and KDE