Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Why not Marlin? #2

Closed
joehillen opened this issue Aug 4, 2012 · 4 comments
Closed

Why not Marlin? #2

joehillen opened this issue Aug 4, 2012 · 4 comments

Comments

@joehillen
Copy link

https://launchpad.net/marlin

I've been using Marlin for over a year now. I was using it back when it was called Nautilus Elementry.

It really seems like a waste of effort to fork Nautilus since it has turned into a flaming pile of shit in the last few years.

Marlin isn't perfect and it needs some more features, but it's still 1000x better than Nautilus, and it needs more contributors.

Please consider it.
@eisensheng
Copy link

This is not an Nemo related issue and therefore should be discussed somewhere else IMHO

@joehillen
Copy link
Author

I know, but this is the only place I could find to bring it up. If glebihan had posted his email, I would have sent it to him directly.

@clefebvre
Copy link
Member

We're considering many options, marlin included. Thanks for suggesting it. I'm keeping the issue open until we make a call on this.

@clefebvre
Copy link
Member

The decision was made to continue developing nemo. The main reason wasn't a direct comparison of the browsers currently available (that would be more relevant to Mint than to Cinnamon), but the fact that long-term it's important for Cinnamon to extend the definition of its interface and the experience it provides to the desktop management.

I took the opportunity to review Marlin and it is indeed a very good file browser. I hope we can work with the Marlin devs, not together on the same project, but towards achieving similar goals and exchanging ideas. We'll certainly learn from what they've achieved (I can see already there's things there regarding pathbars and view selections we're interested in getting done as well) and we'll certainly have a lot to share as well (we thought about actions a lot and found many little things that needed improvement).

@michael-schaller michael-schaller mentioned this issue Nov 5, 2012
Closed
@blshkv blshkv mentioned this issue Nov 22, 2012
Closed
@leigh123linux leigh123linux mentioned this issue Dec 3, 2012
Closed
@4C3 4C3 mentioned this issue Jan 2, 2013
Closed
@mtwebster mtwebster mentioned this issue Apr 18, 2013
Closed
@daschuer daschuer mentioned this issue May 24, 2013
Closed
@daschuer daschuer mentioned this issue Jun 5, 2013
Closed
@vranki vranki mentioned this issue Nov 26, 2013
Closed
@vlatkoB vlatkoB mentioned this issue Dec 4, 2013
Closed
@simon-schneider simon-schneider mentioned this issue Nov 13, 2014
Closed
@ghost ghost mentioned this issue Dec 19, 2014
Closed
@SusisStrolch1 SusisStrolch1 mentioned this issue Jan 9, 2015
Closed
@mcatkins mcatkins mentioned this issue Feb 4, 2015
Closed
@Almin17 Almin17 mentioned this issue Apr 16, 2015
Closed
@Zerophase Zerophase mentioned this issue Jan 12, 2016
Closed
@ghost ghost mentioned this issue May 20, 2016
Closed
@pjsanfil pjsanfil mentioned this issue Jun 12, 2016
Closed
@pmts pmts mentioned this issue Jul 28, 2016
Closed
@ghost ghost mentioned this issue Mar 19, 2017
Closed
@LingMan LingMan mentioned this issue Mar 5, 2018
Closed
@dshanks01 dshanks01 mentioned this issue Dec 13, 2018
Closed
@digitalcoyote digitalcoyote mentioned this issue Jan 26, 2019
Closed
@hobbieman hobbieman mentioned this issue May 9, 2020
Closed
@emiliog50 emiliog50 mentioned this issue Mar 2, 2021
Closed
mtwebster pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 11, 2021
@jlindgren90 @mtwebster
Fix segfault when g_file_info_get_symlink_target() returns "".
9faf1c0 
With some GIO backends (observed at least with sftp),
g_file_info_get_symlink_target() returns an empty string rather
than NULL for non-symlinks. A warning and then segfault result:

    ** (nemo:8386): WARNING **: 18:34:22.807: File has symlink target, but  is not marked as symlink

    Thread 1 "nemo" received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
    0x00007ffff71beac0 in g_str_hash () from /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
    (gdb) bt
    #0  0x00007ffff71beac0 in g_str_hash () at /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
    #1  0x00007ffff71bfa2f in g_hash_table_lookup_extended () at /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
    #2  0x000055555564926e in modify_link_hash_table at ../libnemo-private/nemo-file.c:600
    #3  0x000055555564ed11 in add_to_link_hash_table at ../libnemo-private/nemo-file.c:642
    #4  update_info_internal at ../libnemo-private/nemo-file.c:2683
    #5  0x000055555564f767 in nemo_file_update_info  at ../libnemo-private/nemo-file.c:2702
    #6  0x00005555556263ec in query_info_callback at ../libnemo-private/nemo-directory-async.c:3230

Defend against this at two levels:
 - For non-symlinks, don't call g_file_info_get_symlink_target().
 - Use g_return_if_fail() to prevent NULL pointer dereference.
@kuehhe1 kuehhe1 mentioned this issue Jan 19, 2023
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@eisensheng @joehillen @clefebvre