hi
please look at the attachment. in detailed list view mode, Thunar can't show size of directories correctly. is there any solution or I must wait for Xfce4.12?

Attached Thumbnails

 

That output is perfectly normal.
The directory sizes being reported are actually the sizes of the . directories within the listed directories.
For example, /bin shows a size of 4.1K
This matches with the size of the ./ directory in the listing below. (I used grep to reduce the list).

thanks again for quick and clear answer. is there anyway to force Thunar to show actual size of a directory without using directory properties?

The number of items and total file size usage within a directory is displayed in the status line at the bottom of the Thunar screen.
The total file size usage within a directory and all sub-directories is displayed by using directory properties.

I know these. but want to know whether it is possible to show directory size in detailed list view mode? anyway I think I must try another file manager, is there any slackbuild for double commander as it is my default file manager in windows?

I don't know of any file managers that will do this automatically. I'd imagine a big reason is because of the additional I/O required any time you go into a directory to determine the size of child directories (which would take a decent chunk of time if you're in the / (root) directory). I know there was an addon you could get that would at it to Windows Explorer, but I think it no longer worked after Windows XP

I use Krusader. It is a twin-panel file manager (and it has tabs for both panels). It doesn't offer immediate viewing of folder sizes, but if you select the folders you're interested in, you can right click and select "Calculate occupied space", which will then go through and find the total folder size of those folders. It also has a disk usage utility which will show you graphical representations of your data usage based off a certain folder you specify with the ability to drill-down to child folders.

1 members found this post helpful.

already I use krusader. double commander is simpler and less feature rich than krusader. but in windows it calculate directory size automatically in detailed list view mode. I don't know whether it has same functionality in linux or not. anyway it's not a big problem for me as I enjoy using slackware these days and hope that can leave windows (at least in home) very soon.
I love this great community

It looks like there's nothing official, but back in 2011, Eric created a basic slackbuild for it (untested by him) and said it might build with two dependencies from slackbuilds.org, fpc and lazarus. The original poster reported back saying it did work. Keep in mind, this is for an older version, so you'll need to at least update the version in the slackbuild to 6.0.0. If you do run into errors, we might be able to figure out what needs to be modified/added to get it to build.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...6/#post4520878

Other forum members also suggested just repackaging the builds provided for other distros or use the portable builds.

If you do end up with a working slackbuild, it may be worth submitting it to slackbuilds.org so others can benefit from your work.

1 members found this post helpful.

Ok, I will test it tomorrow and will tell you whether it works or not. ohh, I had forgotten it has portable version too
also I know this is out of topic, but in the link you provided there are some suggestion about using Alien's slackbuild toolkit and src2pkg for creating slackbuilds and slackwre packages. are they safe and functional choice?

Both must be taken with a grain of salt since they obviously can't account for every environment or issue (without editting), but generally, they hold up pretty well. However, I tend to look for actual slackbuilds, since they've been designed to work with that particular piece of software and, if needed, have patches to fix any issues, or I'll build the slackbuilds myself after trial and error with compiling the program (although, due to the massive amounts of packages in slackbuilds.org, it isn't very often I need to generate my own).

src2pkg is likely to be quicker when it is a standard ./configure && make && make install and many other standard compiling systems. But, if you get to unsupported build systems or systems that don't follow the standard conventions, it can be quite the pain to get it working (although, if gnashley is made aware of it, he should be able to add support if it isn't a one-of-a-kind compiling process).. Slackbuilds can be a bit difficult to set up initially (although, Eric's AST simplifies it a lot), but it works better for those weird use cases. You also get the added benefit of having a Slackbuild you can use on other computers, give to friends, or submit to slackbuilds.org.

It should also be mentioned that Pat and the rest of the dev team (Eric/Alien included) use Slackbuilds for all their software compiling. It provides consistent results and are easily portable (much easier than a binary package). You can find slackbuilds for every single piece of software in Slackware under the source directory on any major mirror. If you want to check out the crazy complexities they can handle, see the slackbuild for x11 :mindblown: and I'm sure KDE is right up there.

1 members found this post helpful.

thanks a lot and sorry for taking your time.

No worries. That's what we're here to do

I must download and install 100 mb dependency for this package which is somewhat tedious in my office. anyway I found that krusader can show size of directories by selecting directories in detailed view mode via pressing space pretty well.
I will try to download and build dependency packages and report the results as soon as possible.