- This topic has 54 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated Nov 13-7:29 am by marcelocripe.
-
Posts
-
marcelocripe
Please check the project repository for .ts files, and if not present already, ask the dev to provide them, then you can upload it to the community contributions test space at transifex for a first checkout of translatability.
I checked the repository https://github.com/zwpwjwtz/f3-qt and there is no “.qt” (editable) or “.qm” file. The last time I asked a developer to create the necessary means for the GUI to be translatable, he told me to do it myself, as if I knew how to implement the translation features in a program developed with the QT programming language.
Localizations (Translations) for Firetools and Firejail Configuration Wizard (firejail-ui.png)
Desmume .desktop filesCould someone fluent in English ask zwpwjwtz to include translation features in F3-Qt on my behalf?
So far, I haven’t been able to find a 32-bit package for F3-Qt.
Would the package “f3-qt-2.1.0-alt1.i586.rpm” be equivalent to the “i386” packages that we have in “.deb” format?
– – – – –
Please check the project repository for .ts files, and if not present already, ask the dev to provide them, then you can upload it to the community contributions test space at transifex for a first checkout of translatability.
Eu verifiquei o repositório https://github.com/zwpwjwtz/f3-qt e não tem nenhum arquivo “.qt” (editável) ou “.qm”. A última vez que pedi para um desenvolvedor criar os meios necessários para a interface gráfica poder ser traduzida, ele me disse para eu mesmo fazer isso, como se eu soubesse implementar os recursos de tradução em um programa desenvolvido com a linguagem de programação QT.
Localizations (Translations) for Firetools and Firejail Configuration Wizard (firejail-ui.png)
Desmume .desktop filesAlguém que domina o idioma inglês poderia pedir por mim ao zwpwjwtz que incluísse os recursos de tradução no F3-Qt?
Até o momento eu não consegui encontrar um pacote de 32 bits do programa F3-Qt.
O pacote “f3-qt-2.1.0-alt1.i586.rpm“, por acaso seria equivalente aos pacotes “i386” que temos no formato “.deb”?
Robin
Does not seem to be in the repos (‘apt-cache search f3|grep -i f3’), i.e. you may need to build and install it yourself, but the instructions are in the GitHub link above.
Actually it is there.
$ apt-cache policy f3 f3: Installed: (none) Candidate: 8.0-2 Version table: 8.0-2 500 500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian bookworm/main amd64 Packages $ apt-cache show f3 ... F3 (Fight Flash Fraud or Fight Fake Flash) tests the full capacity of a flash card (flash drive, flash disk, pendrive). . F3 writes to the card and then checks if can read it. It will assure you have not been bought a card with a smaller capacity than stated. Note that the main goal of F3 is not to fix your removable media. However, there are resources to mark the invalid areas. . This package provides these executables: f3write, f3read, f3brew, f3fix and f3probe. ...But this doesn’t seem to be the latest available version, which would be 9.0
So, are there special obstacles to observe when trying to build the current version 9.0 on antiX starting from the provided archive file? Is this the proper (original) source git at all (how to tell that for sure) ? And has somebody done the building successfully on antiX 23.x already?Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
Followed their complete instructions for Linux:
Compile stable software on Linux or FreeBSD
To build:
make
If you want to install f3write and f3read, run the following command:
make installSeems not to „make” for me:
$ make cc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -MMD -ggdb -c -o utils.o utils.c utils.c:11:10: fatal error: stdio.h: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden 11 | #include <stdio.h> | ^~~~~~~~~ compilation terminated. make: *** [<eingebaut>: utils.o] Fehler 1No idea what all this gibberish could mean.
________________________
EDIT:For those running into the same issue. The following will make it work:
$ sudo apt-get update ... $ sudo apt-get install build-essential ... $ make cc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -MMD -ggdb -c -o utils.o utils.c cc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -MMD -ggdb -c -o libflow.o libflow.c cc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -MMD -ggdb -c -o f3write.o f3write.c cc -o f3write utils.o libflow.o f3write.o -lm cc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -MMD -ggdb -c -o f3read.o f3read.c cc -o f3read utils.o libflow.o f3read.o -lm $ sudo make install install -d /usr/local/bin install -m755 f3write f3read /usr/local/bin install -d /usr/local/share/man/man1 install -m644 f3read.1 /usr/local/share/man/man1 ln -sf f3read.1 /usr/local/share/man/man1/f3write.1Once done, you can purge the build-essential package along with its 11 dependencies again from your system. Or wait with this, there are to be built some extras still…
- This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by Robin. Reason: EDIT: Error reason found. Missing build essentials
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
For building the “extras” (f3fix and f3brew), there are some more dependencies needed.
$ sudo apt-get install libudev1 libudev-dev libparted-dev Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Reading state information... Done Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable distribution that some required packages have not yet been created or been moved out of Incoming. The following information may help to resolve the situation: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libdevmapper1.02.1 : Depends: libeudev1 (>= 3.2.12) but it is not installable libudev-dev : Depends: libeudev-dev but it is not installable libudev1 : Depends: libeudev1 but it is not installable util-linux : PreDepends: libeudev1 (>= 246:3.2.11) but it is not installable E: Error, pkgProblemResolver::Resolve generated breaks, this may be caused by held packages. $ apt-cache policy libeudev1 libeudev1: Installed: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 Candidate: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 Version table: *** 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 500 500 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 246:3.2.9.1.0antix7 500 500 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/nosystemd amd64 Packages $ apt-cache policy util-linux util-linux: Installed: 2.38.1-5.0nosystemd1 Candidate: 2.38.1-5.0nosystemd1 Version table: *** 2.38.1-5.0nosystemd1 500 500 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/nosystemd amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 2.38.1-5+deb12u3 500 500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian bookworm/main amd64 Packages 2.38.1-5+deb12u1 500 500 http://security.debian.org bookworm-security/main amd64 PackagesI don’t get the meaning of these error messages: On the one hand it complains about util-linux and libeudev1 (>= 3.2.12) not installable, while the same time it states actually 3.2.14 is installed already which should clearly fulfil the version requirement !? What do I overlook here?
util-linux : PreDepends: libeudev1 (>= 246:3.2.11) but it is not installable util-linux: Installed: 2.38.1-5.0nosystemd1 Candidate: 2.38.1-5.0nosystemd1 libeudev1: Installed: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 Candidate: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1And then:
libudev-dev : Depends: libeudev-dev but it is not installablewhile:
$ apt-cache policy libeudev-dev libeudev-dev: Installed: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 Candidate: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 Version table: *** 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 500 500 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 246:3.2.9.1.0antix7 500 500 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/nosystemd amd64 PackagesWhat the heck !?
(System is antiX 23.1 full runit 64 bit, live, fully apt-upgraded)
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
Funny: Also libdevmapper1.02.1 is already installed.
$ apt-cache policy libdevmapper1.02.1 libdevmapper1.02.1: Installed: 2:1.02.201-1.0nosystemd1 Candidate: 2:1.02.201-1.0nosystemd1 Version table: *** 2:1.02.201-1.0nosystemd1 500 500 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/nosystemd amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status 2:1.02.185-2 500 500 http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian bookworm/main amd64 PackagesWhile the same time:
The following packages have unmet dependencies: libdevmapper1.02.1 : Depends: libeudev1 (>= 3.2.12) but it is not installableA full reinstall of libeudev1 (3.2.14) doesn’t fix it.
$ sudo apt-get --reinstall install libeudev1 Paketlisten werden gelesen… Fertig Abhängigkeitsbaum wird aufgebaut… Fertig Statusinformationen werden eingelesen… Fertig 0 aktualisiert, 0 neu installiert, 2 erneut installiert, 0 zu entfernen und 0 nicht aktualisiert. Es müssen 153 kB an Archiven heruntergeladen werden. Nach dieser Operation werden 0 B Plattenplatz zusätzlich benutzt. Möchten Sie fortfahren? [J/n] j Holen:1 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/main amd64 libeudev1 amd64 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 [72,2 kB] Holen:2 http://ftp.halifax.rwth-aachen.de/mxlinux/packages/antix/bookworm bookworm/main i386 libeudev1 i386 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 [80,7 kB] Es wurden 153 kB in 0 s geholt (558 kB/s). (Lese Datenbank ... 356271 Dateien und Verzeichnisse sind derzeit installiert.) Vorbereitung zum Entpacken von .../libeudev1_252%3a3.2.14-1.0antix1_amd64.deb ... Entpacken von libeudev1:amd64 (252:3.2.14-1.0antix1) über (252:3.2.14-1.0antix1) ... Vorbereitung zum Entpacken von .../libeudev1_252%3a3.2.14-1.0antix1_i386.deb ... Entpacken von libeudev1:i386 (252:3.2.14-1.0antix1) über (252:3.2.14-1.0antix1) ... libeudev1:amd64 (252:3.2.14-1.0antix1) wird eingerichtet ... libeudev1:i386 (252:3.2.14-1.0antix1) wird eingerichtet ... Trigger für libc-bin (2.36-9+deb12u10) werden verarbeitet ...After this, same errors while installing as before.
Are the repos broken? Is one of the packages broken?
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
I went down the long and dusty road of re-checking apt repo-config, mirror status, checking system for leftover broken installs, packages set on hold, cleaning package cache, apt re-updating and upgrading, reinstalling all involved packages. All in vain. Not a single match. Nevertheless…
Finally solved: The non-installable packages are actually not needed at all.
$ apt-cache show libudev1 ... Description: Transitional package for libeudev1 This is a transitional package to ease upgrades to the libeudev1 package. $ apt-cache policy libeudev1 libeudev1: Installiert: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1 $ apt-cache show libudev-dev ... Description: Transitional package for libeudev-dev This is a transitional package to ease upgrades to the libeudev-dev package. It can safely be removed. $ apt-cache policy libeudev-dev libeudev-dev: Installiert: 252:3.2.14-1.0antix1Since libeudev1 and libeudev-dev packages are installed already, even when libudev1 and libudev-dev fail, the build-dependencies are fulfilled nevertheless. The third package libparted-dev needs still to be installed, then make will work flawlessly.
$ sudo apt-get install libparted-dev ... $ make extra cc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -MMD -ggdb -c -o f3fix.o f3fix.c cc -o f3fix libutils.o f3fix.o -lparted $ sudo make install-extra install -d /usr/local/bin install -m755 f3probe f3brew f3fix /usr/local/binOnce done, the dev packages can be purged again finally. There is nothing more to make.
$ sudo apt-get purge build-essential libeudev-dev libparted-dev $ sudo apt-get autoremoveAnd now:
$ f3fix --version F3 Fix 9.0 $ f3probe --version F3 Probe 9.0 $ f3brew --version F3 BREW 9.0 $ f3write --version F3 Write 9.0 $ f3read --version F3 Read 9.0I guess the decried udev packages could need some cleanup in the repos simply. Seems in their current state they won’t ease the install as announced in their package info, but render it extra complicated instead 🙂
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
abc-nix
Link to Debian packages for bookworm 32 and 64 bits in this link.
Available:
– Latest f3 v9.0 backported from Debian testing to bookworm
– Latest version of f3-qt until the last commit before the qt5->qt6 migration.
– Debian config folder to be used for future builds.Notes:
– The f3-qt package includes the modified .desktop provided by marcelocripe (with long comment in pt_BR only), for anyone interested.
– Tested the amd64 package only (I just installed and launched the program. I didn’t test if it works).Corruption has two hands: the Right and the Left. Don't let them squeeze you.
melodie
Link to Debian packages for bookworm 32 and 64 bits in this link.
This is nice! I haven’t tested yet. Just a question : why is there a shebang in the fr-qt.desktop file? (#!/usr/bin/env xdg-open). This is not in the freedesktop.org specifications, and a desktop file isn’t a script?
why is there a shebang in the fr-qt.desktop file? (#!/usr/bin/env xdg-open).
I have no idea why the creator made it that way. The file hasn’t changed in 8 years, and there are no issues in the repository mentioning it. I also found it strange, but forgot to look into it.
If someone finds that this brings problems or security issues, I can repackage with the fix, as it is trivial.
EDIT: Removed the shebang and uploaded new files.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by abc-nix.
Corruption has two hands: the Right and the Left. Don't let them squeeze you.
melodie
EDIT: Removed the shebang and uploaded new files.
You are very fast! 😀
I was back here to add a pair of questions : I noticed the “Exec=” line does not contain request to start the program with admin rights, while the “Category=” line comes with “System;” (which is where I think all apps requesting an admin password should be).
Does the program need an admin password?
I noticed the “Exec=” line does not contain request to start the program with admin rights, while the “Category=” line comes with “System;” (which is where I think all apps requesting an admin password should be).
Does the program need an admin password?
🤷♀️ No idea. I just packaged it for those that need it. I would assume that, if the device was mounted by the user, the f3 write/read operations should also work for the normal user. More advanced options probably do require root.
Found this:
Normal Operation:
Fill the freespace on the mounted card using f3write and read back the contents with f3read to check for corruption and determine the actual size of the card.Advanced Operation (requires root):
The QuickTest option uses f3probe to quickly check a card by reading/writing directly to blocks.- Destructive – Speed up the test and minimize memory usage by skipping restoration of written blocks.
- Use less memory – Slower test with block restoration but requires less memory.
Note in some cases (power is lost, application is closed, drive is counterfeit) the blocks might not fully/properly restored even if the destructive option is not used
If QuickTest is unchecked, the card will be mounted and f3write/f3read will be used to verify card.
– Cached – Read *.h2w files that are already on the card. Does not write new h2w files.
Corruption has two hands: the Right and the Left. Don't let them squeeze you.
I noticed the “Exec=” line does not contain request to start the program with admin rights, while the “Category=” line comes with “System;” (which is where I think all apps requesting an admin password should be).
This is in my eyes a false assumption, @melodie. antiX doesn’t subordinate to your understanding, but in your Bento antiX spinoff you may apply this. Reasoning in antiX: There are system tasks, which need no root access, while on the other hand there are settings, which need it. This doesn’t make settings to system tasks, and also not vice versa. The categories in antiX don’t rely on a belief in a simple and bureaucratic distinction between “root access required” and “no root access required”, but on how things are actually perceived from users perspective. That makes a huge difference.
Some of the tasks in f3 need root, some others not. This won’t make the latter “settings” instead of “system” in antiX, even when not called by root.
I just packaged it for those that need it
Many thanks, @abc-nix! Had no time to test your package, but will do so as soon as possible.
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
melodie
Then you could have “Categories=System;Utilities;” and a second file, identical except for the name and the Exec line.
The name could be f3-qt-root.desktop, and the Exec line : “Exec=su-to-root -X -c f3-qt”. Both would be in the same applications menus categories, so that they’d appear together next to each other.Then f3-qt-root.desktop, based on the one on your Proton drive would have its 6 first lines as this:
[Desktop Entry] Type=Application Terminal=false Exec=su-to-root -X -c f3-qt Icon=applications-utilities Categories=System;Utilities;(I still haven’t tested it, nor looked into the Icon to see if it exists).
PS: Name lines would need modification, such as adding “(Admin)” at the end of the lines, – in Chinese, too. If you think it is a good idea, I can take care of it.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by melodie.
melodie
Reasoning in antiX: There are system tasks, which need no root access, while on the other hand there are settings, which need it. This doesn’t make settings to system tasks, and also not vice versa.
I know it is a personal way of seeing things : in other distributions it is also mostly often as in antiX on this point of view. However this is such a small detail in the mountain of possibilities that I never had the opportunity to discuss about it. My problem with that, is that I fail to see the logic.
See : the administration of the system – admin tasks – need root/admin rights. User customisations don’t. the category name “System” seems close to the idea of System Administration, while Preferences seem close to user customisations. So, why would not the menu entries follow that model? Is there a logical pattern to what is decided in the matter? Can you tell me more about ” how things are actually perceived from users perspective ” ?
- This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by melodie. Reason: typo
Is there a logical pattern to what is decided in the matter?
Not necessarily a pattern that would match any requirements of strict mathematical logic: Humans are not always logical in their thinking and expectations. For example, is it logically, that in many countries people drive on the right side in streets, while in some others they drive on the left? And which side would be logical?
Actually there is a logic, not a strictly boolean logic, but a fuzzy logic behind the sorting in antiX categories.
Can you tell me more about ” how things are actually perceived from users perspective ” ?
This is more a psychological question than a logical one. And the borders are fluent in fuzzy logic, but I’ll try to roughly explain the rules set. I would summarise it like that:
– Things that are closer to the user’s direct experience and do not necessarily require administrative expertise belong in the Settings category (or Utilities category), independent whether they need root access. Also things that have more settings (or utilities) character than system tasks character.
– All the other things, for which a user is expected to have some IT knowledge and background, as well as low level tools and tools granting direct root access for modifying the full file system down to the root folder, belong to the System category. Also tools which are not perceived by average users as “usable” (like midnight commander), while highly esteemed by specialists, belong here. And then package management, since this is expected to live here by most people rather than being a utility.
Hope this helps in understanding. Humans are not good in applying strict boolean logic like computers, but tend to think in fuzzy logic. That’s what the antiX categories try to map. Designing the UI more human, more ergonomic.
Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.