Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 8/27/07, Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. Personally, I find the find plugin of emelFM2 http://emelfm2.net very nice and attractive. Essentially, it is a GUI combining grep / find / etc. It also provides a plugin on tracker. For a find / locate frontend (not mentioning doodle, tracker, beagle, strigi and pinot), look at catfish http://software.twotoasts.de/?page=catfish . Still young, but looking promising. -- Liviu
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
just a different tool. nothing breakthrough about dse's. breakthrough is web2.0. dse has it's place (or users). but for people who know how to organize and has been on the terminal, then the old tools suffice.but as data and storage gets multiplied everyday i guess it will find its way into mainstream usage. but for me it's not a need tho. it's a luxury wasting my time and my already slow cpu cycles. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Daniel da Veiga ha scritto: As for the rest of the OP mail. Its a troll, has no question, no useful comments, no suggestions, neither a request for opinions, and he ends it like a pure troll, nonsense conclusions based on personal experience. But he must be laughing out loud that you both, felix and b.n. have completely lost it, going totally off topic and starting a private discussion that should take place between you both, and only you, and most of all, outside of this mailing list. You are absolutely right. Sorry. m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 01:50:49AM +0200, b.n. wrote: No, I don't know anything about his background: but most importantly, *I shouldn't have to know anything*. I see. Cultural monotheism, decided by you. It couldn't possibly work the other way 'round, could it, that maybe he shouldn't have to know jack about your background? No? I thought not. I answer you in private. m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 12:17:38AM -0300, Daniel da Veiga wrote: But he must be laughing out loud that you both, felix and b.n. have completely lost it, going totally off topic and starting a private discussion that should take place between you both, and only you, and most of all, outside of this mailing list. Ahh, I see, that's why you also followed up to the list. Yes. I once was blind but now I see. -- ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._. Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933 I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:54:27 +0200 (CEST) Cipher van Byte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as I'm concerned the structure of directories and links (hard or symbolic) were invented to eliminate the _need_ of having such searching engines. Using those search engines is like reinventing the wheel or programing embedded devices with java... ;) To each his own, I suppose, but I agree with you. 'find' is a better way to find than clicking on various things; locate can index the entire filesystem; and Using those search engines is like reinventing the wheel yeah, reinventing it as an octagon. of course it's slower rolling! ; ) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
2007. 08. 28, kedd keltezéssel 01.02-kor Norberto Bensa ezt írta: Quoting Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. That's the best thing about opensource!!! Code one yourself :-P For comfortable people: there are alternatives, like windows, mac :) Freedom is cool :) István -- eGroupWare, gLiveCD, gentoo és barátai http://www.osbusiness.hu „A humor a méltóság támasza, fölényünket hirdeti mindazzal szemben, amit a sors ránk mér.” (Romain Gary) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Monday 27 August 2007, Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about '[gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!': Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? 1. Unused memory is wasted. 2. 64MiB ( 512Mb) is not that much in the modern era. Or did you mean 500MiB instead of 500Mb? Memory is generally measured in bytes, and generally uses the binary SI prefixes; bandwidth is usually the opposite (bits and decimal SI). 3. http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148385 4. Have you used an application based of the Strigi indexer? That's what's going to be used for KDE 4.0, and I really haven't heard many complaints about it. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. they are called 'locate', 'find' and 'grep'. good tools, fast tools. Feel the love, people If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... alan -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 02:20:46 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: 4. Have you used an application based of the Strigi indexer? That's what's going to be used for KDE 4.0, and I really haven't heard many complaints about it. There's also Recoll, which I found to use a lot of disk space for its data but didn't slow the system down like Beagle. I then end I went back to using the tried and tested system of find/locate/grep combined with giving files sensible names. -- Neil Bothwick Conclusion: the place where you got tired of thinking. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 28 August 2007, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. they are called 'locate', 'find' and 'grep'. good tools, fast tools. Feel the love, people Yup but not so suitable for users that aren't computer freaks but want their work done. If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... Something where you can tell the computer: I want granny's photo that came in with an email from uncle George. It's about using lots of metadata for finding objects. Quite honestly, why should a secretary be concerned about the exact name and location of a file that contains a quotation of product A for customer B? She should be able to ask the computer for quotation, product A, customer B and get it. With cheap storage space available, we tend to keep more and more data on our harddisks. Last time I did a file count in my home directory, it came up with 170,000 files (including sub-directories). It's a pain to keep that amount of data organised in a hierarchical filesystem. Better let the computer do the hard work. It might not be the right tool for you and me, but there are lots of users out there for whom it is the right thing - if it doesn't use too much of system resources. KDE4 will hopefully get it right. Uwe -- Jack Nicholson: My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son of a bitch. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!': Last time I did a file count in my home directory, it came up with 170,000 files (including sub-directories). It's a pain to keep that amount of data organised in a hierarchical filesystem. Better let the computer do the hard work. $ find /home/bss | wc -l 158254 $ du -sh /home/bss 2.6T/home/bss $ du -s /home/bss 2695039198 /home/bss Desktop search would be a useless waste of resources for me. I don't spend much time organizing files, but I do think about where to put them when I create/save them. I know where all my data is already. It might not be the right tool for you and me, but there are lots of users out there for whom it is the right thing - if it doesn't use too much of system resources. KDE4 will hopefully get it right. As long as I can turn it off, I think providing a feature many users want (3 of the 4 Linux users in my house) is a good use of developer resources. Heck, I might even like it once I try it. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 28 Aug 2007, at 08:11, Alan McKinnon wrote: If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... It's like locate, except it indexes the contents of files (rather than just the names) and it does so immediately the file is saved, rather than as a cron job. Stroller. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
I have used glimpse for indexing my email archive. It works pretty well, but requires indexing runs and also the index files are quite large. Good, though. And for a bonus, it comes with agrep, if I recall correctly, a fantastic almost grep tool for somewhat fuzzy searches. Recently, on my system, glimpse was in conflict with some other package. As an emacs user, my computing experience was recently improved exponentially by the utility global-ff.el that incrementally searches for files on the entire system by reference to the indexes of locate: http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/GlobalFF. It does not search contents, but does globbing including partial directory / subdirectory names, quite niftily and speedily. I have to remember to thank that guy. Emacs also does a pretty nice grep-find that searches a tree for content of files. Alan Davis -- Alan Davis, Kagman High School, Saipan [EMAIL PROTECTED] An inviscid theory of flow renders the screw useless, but the need for one non-existent. ---Lord Raleigh (aka John William Strutt), or else his son,
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Stroller wrote: On 28 Aug 2007, at 08:11, Alan McKinnon wrote: If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... It's like locate, except it indexes the contents of files (rather than just the names) and it does so immediately the file is saved, rather than as a cron job. Seems like a lot of folks are being very helpful and want to assist me in understanding what these Beagle-esque apps do :-) I do know what they are, I just never use them - I prefer grep find locate etc. I was being slightly sarcastic with my comment, with my tongue very firmly planted in both cheeks :-) But hey, maybe some other user who would use such things now know more about them and maybe emerge them alan -- Optimists say the glass is half full, Pessimists say the glass is half empty, Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be? Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za +27 82, double three seven, one nine three five -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tuesday 28 August 2007 08:00:17 Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Stroller wrote: On 28 Aug 2007, at 08:11, Alan McKinnon wrote: If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... It's like locate, except it indexes the contents of files (rather than just the names) and it does so immediately the file is saved, rather than as a cron job. Seems like a lot of folks are being very helpful and want to assist me in understanding what these Beagle-esque apps do :-) I do know what they are, I just never use them - I prefer grep find locate etc. I was being slightly sarcastic with my comment, with my tongue very firmly planted in both cheeks :-) But hey, maybe some other user who would use such things now know more about them and maybe emerge them A place for everything and everything in its place. If you are as anally retentive about it as me you don't need a desktop search engine. I had beagle for a while but I never used it so I decided to take the space back. Also for specific types of files there are specific types of database programs. So all my music is in amarok, all my research papers (pdfs) are in tellico, as are all my videos/dvds, all my photos are in digikam. That's the majority of my files. The rest is mostly work which is in a folder called work with a sub-folder for each experiment/project. It's not hard. It's only a big job if you've got thousands of files with random file names scattered across your file system. Saludos Matt -- %%% Dr. Matthew R. Lee CASEB ECIM Departamento de Ecologia, P. Universidad Catolica de Chile, Alameda 340, Santiago. CP 6513677 CHILE [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: meiochile.matthewlee.org %%% -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 28 Aug 2007, at 13:00, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Stroller wrote: On 28 Aug 2007, at 08:11, Alan McKinnon wrote: If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... It's like locate, except it indexes the contents of files (rather than just the names) and it does so immediately the file is saved, rather than as a cron job. Seems like a lot of folks are being very helpful and want to assist me in understanding what these Beagle-esque apps do :-) I do know what they are, I just never use them - I prefer grep find locate etc. I was being slightly sarcastic with my comment, with my tongue very firmly planted in both cheeks :-) My reply was because I see no such need for such tongue-in-cheek replies (and because I thought that another explanation was longer than necessary). If you accept locate as well as find as useful then it is only one more step to accept Beagle or other desktop search utilities. Find `grep -R` find files by name content - locate indexes filenames for quicker searching and runs once per day. Desktop search indexes contents and addresses the shortcomings of updating locate's database. Each is a logical step from the next. Personally I use none of those mentioned in this thread because Spotlight is quite (in)adequate enough for me. However I'm sure that desktop search will improve much in the forseeable future and that many of us will soon wossisname to be without it. Already, when I get an empty voicemail because someone has declined to leave a message I can identify the caller by copy pasting their phone number into the search box. I felt the original poster - Shaochun Wang - to be a troll because he posted only complaints. Was it a request for help? He didn't ask can anyone suggest an alternative, better, desktop search for me? and this is not an advocacy group. He also made performance observations yet failed to state that he waited for the initial index to be built before doing so. We all know that files are not instantly indexed the moment the application is installed - perhaps he had not accounted for this? I know that when my email alone takes several hours to index - this constitutes thousands of small files totalling 3gig, but I suspect that is not an exceptional amount by the standards of those on this list. Stroller -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Alan McKinnon skrev: What is this desktop search engine thingy whereof the OP speaks? I do not know of such a thing... Desktop search engines is this centuries wheel invention. It's simply put a major breakthrough in how we work with our desktop. Now the wheel didn't start out all that nice either and so will Desktop Search Engines evolve with time, but the thread starter is just ignorant if he expects DSE systems to come with a free lunch and 3 beers, this advance in technology is costly in computer power. I use Google Desktop Search and trackerd and for what they can do it works well, the technology is young, so there is limitations and a lot of technology needs updating to support it. Like NFS with extended attributes, client/server technology as indexing your remote files is a resource hog, but even then we are at the point where the technology is useful. Beagle does seem a bit broken with Gentoo at the moment, I had to give up on using it a little while ago. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
As far as I'm concerned the structure of directories and links (hard or symbolic) were invented to eliminate the _need_ of having such searching engines. I've got every file in directory that it belongs to, and I do have tmp directory where I put files that does not belong to any category on my ~/ . Using those search engines is like reinventing the wheel or programing embedded devices with java... ;) -- Morpheus: No, what happened, happened and couldn't have happened any other way. On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Shaochun Wang wrote: Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. 1. Beagle is full of buggy. Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? On my system, this beast consumes almost all of memory and makes my swap half full. Besides, it also monopolizes CPU and makes my system unusable. When you search something, beagle gives you some hints which is not good enough. Beagle can search chm, pdf etc. files. 2. Tracker is boasting itself of consuming little system resource and quick responding speed. It's true when compared with beagle and google desktop search. It consumes about twenty five megabits on idle state and gives you something in an acceptable time. But what can be called a search engine when it returns nothing you want? In other hand, tracker can't index chm file. 3. Google desktop search is heavy like beagle. It makes my system so slow that I wonder whether it is the product of google. It is source closed and only binary distributed. But this is unimportant, and who will be interested in the source of such ugly software :-) In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. -- Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Shaochun Wang ha scritto: Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. 1. Beagle is full of buggy. Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? On my system, this beast consumes almost all of memory and makes my swap half full. Besides, it also monopolizes CPU and makes my system unusable. When you search something, beagle gives you some hints which is not good enough. Beagle can search chm, pdf etc. files. 2. Tracker is boasting itself of consuming little system resource and quick responding speed. It's true when compared with beagle and google desktop search. It consumes about twenty five megabits on idle state and gives you something in an acceptable time. But what can be called a search engine when it returns nothing you want? In other hand, tracker can't index chm file. 3. Google desktop search is heavy like beagle. It makes my system so slow that I wonder whether it is the product of google. It is source closed and only binary distributed. But this is unimportant, and who will be interested in the source of such ugly software :-) In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. Thanks for your opinion. Next time write it on your own blog instead of wasting our time. m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 28 August 2007, Cipher van Byte wrote: As far as I'm concerned the structure of directories and links (hard or symbolic) were invented to eliminate the _need_ of having such searching engines. I've got every file in directory that it belongs to, and I do have tmp directory where I put files that does not belong to any category on my ~/ . Think of secretaries who aren't interested in computers but need to use them. Think of musicians who want to use computers for composing without really under them. Think of any person who just uses computers without actually knowing what a file or a directory is. Computers aren't for geeks only. Using those search engines is like reinventing the wheel or programing embedded devices with java... ;) Or like inventing the next generation wheel. Think of people using a microwave for heating up food. They know they can do that. They don't need to know that only water, fat and sugar actually heat up in a microwave as long as they stick to food. If they start to experiment with other things ... well, they have to understand how microwaves work. Different tools are for different users. That you don't need a certain tool, doesn't mean other people don't. Desktop search engines, or the semantic desktop as some call it, might well be the way of the crisis experienced by users dealing with huge amount of data without knowing what data actually is. BTW, desktop searching is way more than just indexing. How did the data come in? Where did it came from? Who produced it. All that kind of stuff. Metadata in short. ;-) I better stop here. Uwe -- Jack Nicholson: My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son of a bitch. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 07:54:27PM +0200, Cipher van Byte wrote: As far as I'm concerned the structure of directories and links (hard or symbolic) were invented to eliminate the _need_ of having such searching engines. I've got every file in directory that it belongs to, and I do have tmp directory where I put files that does not belong to any category on my ~/ . Then there are files which have multiple uses. Suppose I get an email which has pictures from someone's vacation, including parks, famous buildings, Aunt Josephine's garden ... how do I file that? It is easy to think of any number of files which have multiple uses. I shoot black powder guns. When I try a different powder load, or different size ball, or different patch or lube or primer, and write everything up for later comparison, how do I file that data? I don't think 1861_Springfield_Goex_2f_CCI_winged_wonderlube_577_45gr even begins to cover all the bases. I suppose I could have one file named 1861_Springfield and make links to it such as Goex_2f, CCI_winged, and so on, but that assumes I know ahead of time exactly how I will want to find it later. What if I decide that the time of day was useful, or the location, or the friends I was with? The poitn is to index it by EVERYTHING in the contents so you can find things later you would never have thought of. What if I want to find every file which mentions a friend and did not create a link to him when I created the file? How many frigging links am I supposed to create anyway? What if I want to find every file which mentions Massachusetts or thunderstorms or potted petunias? I have tried several desktop search engines and been disappointed with them all. I would love to find a good one. -- ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._. Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933 I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Steen Eugen Poulsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!': Desktop search engines is this centuries wheel invention. It's simply put a major breakthrough in how we work with our desktop. LOL Wow, I've got my dose of hype for the next month (or more). -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tuesday 28 August 2007, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!': Think of secretaries who aren't interested in computers but need to use them. Think of musicians who want to use computers for composing without really under them. Think of any person who just uses computers without actually knowing what a file or a directory is. Computers aren't for geeks only. Computers are tools, and thus, have some required knowledge to use them. If you don't know what a file or (directory/folder) is, you should stay away from them -- you might hurt yourself. You don't use power tools or even cars without training for the same reason. Using those search engines is like reinventing the wheel or programing embedded devices with java... ;) Or like inventing the next generation wheel. Think of people using a microwave for heating up food. They know they can do that. They don't need to know that only water, fat and sugar actually heat up in a microwave as long as they stick to food. If they start to experiment with other things ... well, they have to understand how microwaves work. I don't expect my users to be able to write a filesystem in C, design an IC, or understand the OSI 7 layer model. I do expect them to be able to use files and folders (a.k.a. directories). Especially since most office workers, and quite a few non-office workers use files and folders to mange their paperwork every day. I'm sure DSE will be a feature many users will like and probably even become dependent on. It's NOT the next generation wheel, it's not even something I'll use, but it has it's place. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.org/ \_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 8/28/07, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shaochun Wang ha scritto: Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. 1. Beagle is full of buggy. Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? On my system, this beast consumes almost all of memory and makes my swap half full. Besides, it also monopolizes CPU and makes my system unusable. When you search something, beagle gives you some hints which is not good enough. Beagle can search chm, pdf etc. files. 2. Tracker is boasting itself of consuming little system resource and quick responding speed. It's true when compared with beagle and google desktop search. It consumes about twenty five megabits on idle state and gives you something in an acceptable time. But what can be called a search engine when it returns nothing you want? In other hand, tracker can't index chm file. 3. Google desktop search is heavy like beagle. It makes my system so slow that I wonder whether it is the product of google. It is source closed and only binary distributed. But this is unimportant, and who will be interested in the source of such ugly software :-) In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. Thanks for your opinion. Next time write it on your own blog instead of wasting our time. m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list That was a bit harsh, don't you think? Judging by his grammar and spelling errors, English doesn't look like his first language, so cut him some slack. He was trying to convey why he didn't like the current search offerings, and if someone could point him in the direction of another one. And the answer, from these posts, seems nothing will suit him. I do however, say to you, OP, both Windows and OSX have better search features. That said, it looks like the newest version of Beagle, 0.2.18, was released yesterday. Looks like there are a lot of bug fixes in this release [1]. Looks like the newest version isn't in Portage yet (not surprising), but you can always file a bug [2] to get a version bump -- although I would wait about a week or longer before you bother the maintainer. [1] Release Notes: http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/beagle/trunk/beagle/NEWS?view=markup [2] BugZilla for Gentoo: http://bugs.gentoo.org/ -- - Mark Shields
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On 8/28/07, Mark Shields [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/28/07, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shaochun Wang ha scritto: Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. 1. Beagle is full of buggy. Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? On my system, this beast consumes almost all of memory and makes my swap half full. Besides, it also monopolizes CPU and makes my system unusable. When you search something, beagle gives you some hints which is not good enough. Beagle can search chm, pdf etc. files. 2. Tracker is boasting itself of consuming little system resource and quick responding speed. It's true when compared with beagle and google desktop search. It consumes about twenty five megabits on idle state and gives you something in an acceptable time. But what can be called a search engine when it returns nothing you want? In other hand, tracker can't index chm file. 3. Google desktop search is heavy like beagle. It makes my system so slow that I wonder whether it is the product of google. It is source closed and only binary distributed. But this is unimportant, and who will be interested in the source of such ugly software :-) In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. Thanks for your opinion. Next time write it on your own blog instead of wasting our time. m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list That was a bit harsh, don't you think? Judging by his grammar and spelling errors, English doesn't look like his first language, so cut him some slack. He was trying to convey why he didn't like the current search offerings, and if someone could point him in the direction of another one. And the answer, from these posts, seems nothing will suit him. I do however, say to you, OP, both Windows and OSX have better search features. That said, it looks like the newest version of Beagle, 0.2.18, was released yesterday. Looks like there are a lot of bug fixes in this release [1]. Looks like the newest version isn't in Portage yet (not surprising), but you can always file a bug [2] to get a version bump -- although I would wait about a week or longer before you bother the maintainer. [1] Release Notes: http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/beagle/trunk/beagle/NEWS?view=markup [2] BugZilla for Gentoo: http://bugs.gentoo.org/ -- - Mark Shields Just to note, my opinion of Windows and OSX having better search features are entirely subjective and in some cases, anecdotal. There's no point in justifying such a stance, in this case, for me. -- - Mark Shields
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
There's another advantage to a desktop search engine: it can know about different file formats. Suppose you want to find everything which references New York City. If you want to use traditional find + grep + locate, you will have to throw file in the mix plus specialized grep to deal with pdfs, jpegs, mp3s, and all sorts of other files which plain text grep is no use on. That's not to say that the DSE isn't doing the same, but it's all part of one package. With the traditional tools, you have to handle all the typing yourself. -- ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._. Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933 I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
deskbar-applet serves me fine. :) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 11:39:44PM +0200, b.n. wrote: His knowledge of English grammar and vocabulary has nothing to do with the actual *contents* of his mail, it has to do with just the errors of spelling and grammar. I'm sure he would have done the same in his mother language. ... Let's end it here. No, let's not. What do you know of his native language and culture? I traveled a bit in my misspent youth, learned a bit of different languages and cultures, and was constantly amazed at how some of my most basic assumptions about language and culture were upset in different countries. It may well be that in his native language and culture, his was a well reasoned (allowing for poor grammer and spelling) opening remark in a discussion. Just because it did not come across as a proper English question does not mean it wasn't meant to start a reasonable discussion in his own language and culture. It is incredibly arrogant to think that you know all about his background just because the only thing you know you have in common is that Engish is not your native language. -- ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._. Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933 I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. skrev: LOL Wow, I've got my dose of hype for the next month (or more). Sometimes it's not that hard to see the future if you have a clue, some things is just darn good. Fire, Wheel, Internet, The Web, Desktop Search Engines. People all laughed at them, but they where all break throughs, that redefined the world ever since we got them and keeps having an impact. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 11:39:44PM +0200, b.n. wrote: His knowledge of English grammar and vocabulary has nothing to do with the actual *contents* of his mail, it has to do with just the errors of spelling and grammar. I'm sure he would have done the same in his mother language. ... Let's end it here. No, let's not. What do you know of his native language and culture? I traveled a bit in my misspent youth, learned a bit of different languages and cultures, and was constantly amazed at how some of my most basic assumptions about language and culture were upset in different countries. It may well be that in his native language and culture, his was a well reasoned (allowing for poor grammer and spelling) opening remark in a discussion. Well, it may well be and I agree with you it is a sensible possibility. But that's not my problem, it's his problem. Rude? Non-politically correct? Uncaring? Maybe -but who cares of such moral judgements (that are BTW culture-dependent too, as you of course know and I fully agree). The problem is a technical one -see later. Just because it did not come across as a proper English question does not mean it wasn't meant to start a reasonable discussion in his own language and culture. Possible. But he's addressing an English language mailing list, speaking in English, in a mailing list of -mostly- Western or Western-like culture (being it native or brought by the West throughout history, it doesn't matter). It's not that Western culture or the Western languages have something better than others by themselves, of course. But -like it or not- they are the standard here on this ML. It's up to him adopting the standard -not me using his own, otherwise the whole purpose of a (linguistic, cultural, netiquette) standard falls down. For example, I actually like top-posting sometimes (I think it has its place in netiquette if properly used). But the Gentoo ML doesn't like it because the standard is another and mixing standards would make reading the ML a mess. Well, it costs me nothing to adopt that standard, and (most importantly) it has practical reasons. So I follow it. The years I was a punk, rebeling for rebellion's sake, are gone with my adolescence (unfortunately :) I hate rules when they have no practical meaning, but when they make sense, well, they make sense. There are highly practical reasons for the do not post rants to ask for help unwritten rule: it pollutes the ML, creates useless discussions (like this one, even if I actually like it) and more often than not it doesn't help the OP (if he really wanted to be helped). I understand tolerance. It's one of my favourite words, actually. But tolerance doesn't mean bowing down (as it is sadly often understood today). Tolerance means to get along with -but sometimes this get along requires an effort on some part. So I didn't attacked him with meaningless insults: I told him exactly what should have he done (write the rant on a blog -legit and even advisable) and why should have he done it (here his post is a waste of time, pure and simple). It is incredibly arrogant to think that you know all about his background just because the only thing you know you have in common is that Engish is not your native language. No, I don't know anything about his background: but most importantly, *I shouldn't have to know anything*. I do not care about his background, nor I do want to, nor I do have to. We're on a technical mailing list that follows some conventions, and it's up to the new user of the ML understanding that. Following your line of reasoning, we're going to get along with people to post mails in Chinese or Italian or Finnish by just saying oh well, it's up to us learning Chinese/Italian/Finnish, it's their culture, poor sons. We're going to get along with spammers and trolls because it's their culture: where is the fine line between tolerance for your culture and non-tolerance of questionable behaviour? Technically if I'm a GNAA troll, it's a part of my own personal subculture. So you should deal with it patiently and with deep understanding? You remember maybe that months ago there was a fellow that posted something about an initiative about the mass killing of dolphins. I personally love dolphins and I hate when animals are killed without a reason. Still, I was among the many asking him to spam his s**t away. Why? Because if we begin to allow absurdly OT content, the whole purpose of a topical ML falls down. It's necessary for the survival and meaning of the ML tool itself. So, we have to find an algorithm to deal with it. There are a number of conventions that are better being followed, in this ML, on the Net, in life (there are also other that are IMHO better NOT being followed, or that are practically neutral, but that's another problem). He broke that in a disruptive manner. He is advised to change that or go away. That's what those things work. If
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 01:50:49AM +0200, b.n. wrote: No, I don't know anything about his background: but most importantly, *I shouldn't have to know anything*. I see. Cultural monotheism, decided by you. It couldn't possibly work the other way 'round, could it, that maybe he shouldn't have to know jack about your background? No? I thought not. Bye. Have fun with your rigidity. -- ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._. Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman rocket surgeon / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E 6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933 I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
I see only one question (the one about memory hungry Beagle) at the OP post, and the answer is: It may be loading the whole index in memory, thus allowing faster searches. Unhappy, get more memory, or change software. Oh no, but he already concluded that all DSE for linux are bad. Strange, I used Google Desktop Search and fitted me well, maybe you just have a machine that's too slow, or haven't configured it right. Isn't CHM the default Windows help file extension? This is Linux. As for the rest of the OP mail. Its a troll, has no question, no useful comments, no suggestions, neither a request for opinions, and he ends it like a pure troll, nonsense conclusions based on personal experience. But he must be laughing out loud that you both, felix and b.n. have completely lost it, going totally off topic and starting a private discussion that should take place between you both, and only you, and most of all, outside of this mailing list. Just to follow some of the replies, I also found no good substitute for old locate, find and grep. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. 1. Beagle is full of buggy. Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? On my system, this beast consumes almost all of memory and makes my swap half full. Besides, it also monopolizes CPU and makes my system unusable. When you search something, beagle gives you some hints which is not good enough. Beagle can search chm, pdf etc. files. 2. Tracker is boasting itself of consuming little system resource and quick responding speed. It's true when compared with beagle and google desktop search. It consumes about twenty five megabits on idle state and gives you something in an acceptable time. But what can be called a search engine when it returns nothing you want? In other hand, tracker can't index chm file. 3. Google desktop search is heavy like beagle. It makes my system so slow that I wonder whether it is the product of google. It is source closed and only binary distributed. But this is unimportant, and who will be interested in the source of such ugly software :-) In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. -- Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
On Dienstag, 28. August 2007, Shaochun Wang wrote: Hi guys: I wouldn't like, but i have to say that all current available linux desktop search engines are rubbish. Keep reading, and you'll know why. 1. Beagle is full of buggy. Can you imagine what makes a software consumes five hundrend Megabits of memory? On my system, this beast consumes almost all of memory and makes my swap half full. Besides, it also monopolizes CPU and makes my system unusable. When you search something, beagle gives you some hints which is not good enough. Beagle can search chm, pdf etc. files. 2. Tracker is boasting itself of consuming little system resource and quick responding speed. It's true when compared with beagle and google desktop search. It consumes about twenty five megabits on idle state and gives you something in an acceptable time. But what can be called a search engine when it returns nothing you want? In other hand, tracker can't index chm file. 3. Google desktop search is heavy like beagle. It makes my system so slow that I wonder whether it is the product of google. It is source closed and only binary distributed. But this is unimportant, and who will be interested in the source of such ugly software :-) In one word, there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. -- Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] they are called 'locate', 'find' and 'grep'. If you know how to use them, you'll have a lot of fun. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] linux desktop search engines are ugly!
Quoting Shaochun Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: there is no useable desktop search engine for linux. That's the best thing about opensource!!! Code one yourself :-P This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
