Cinnamon: Replace engrampa with nemo-fileroller and add cinnamon-translations

[JotaRandom]

describe the request

the installation by default use engrampa but nemo-fileroller the file-roller designed for nemo is a better alternative (and is for nemo) and is also the one used by uptream if i remember

and at the same time add cinnamon-translations if the locale isn't english.

And last why cinnamon only install xed if its mean to be used with the other x-apps too (xreader) as intended by upstream, can be added too.

[Torxed]

We don't always do what upstream does. We try to keep the profiles minimalistic to allow the user to make choices later on.

However some of the same defaults that lead to a expected working environment might need to be tweaked, do you have info/link on upstream using nemo-fileroller?

[JotaRandom]

yeah:
https://github.com/linuxmint/nemo-extensions
those are as far I underestand the official nemo extensions used in nemo, they also are meant to be integrated properly within nemo.
also noted that engrampa is from mate desktop rather than cinnamon.

if you want i can raise a question about the preffered archive-roller to get a more direct answer.

[spsf64]

@JotaRandom @Torxed

Hi, I suggested the inclusion of engrampa in the past (#2587)

IMHO, the only problem is that nemo-fileroller has a lot of gnome dependencies, including file-roller, gtk4, libadwaita, pango and many others, which will create some bloat...
Check the dependencies here:

https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/file-roller/

Maybe xarchiver is a better "neutral/agnostic" solution??

[JotaRandom]

in one side: the devs intend and even have an extension for nemo-fileroller.
from the other side: fileroller use many deps.

And looks like xarchiver is more agnostic... but the issue with xarchiver and enframpa is the integration (or at lelast the left click)..

but i found this: https://github.com/svin24/nemo-engrampa
and i found: linuxmint/nemo#2391 (last comment)

what may be better, the xarchiver files, the nemo-engrampa, or maybe ship no one and lets the user decide post instalation?

[Torxed]

I'll have to sit down and dig around a bit before I say one or the other, so the feedback is extremely helpful and welcome! :)

At the end of the day, these profiles are there for you all — the users. We're just a mediator for the overall preferences to make sure it works the best for the average group of users.

[JotaRandom]

Also to dig a little deeper, the filleroller used by the devs (Linux mint) is filleroller 43, which for what I tested (using aur fille-roller-linuxmint) lag less than engrampa and file-roller 49 on my system.

Looking in the past, it looks like there used to be a file-roller-gtk3 and maybe that's what the devs used before the file-roller 43 they have now.

We could discuss also peazip but at the end of the day without integration into Nemo any installed archiver will be useless.

Now it is late here. I will check what else I can find tomorrow.

[JotaRandom]

After some more investigation i come with this:

• Since Wayland is still experimental even with the next release (6.6.0) isn't good to ship file-roller mostly because the next version is also gonna drop X11 this will lead in a situation where we have a desktop X11 trying to run a wayland app.
  ** The other option is to add file-roller-linuxmint to arch repos (maybe under the name file-roller-nemo or mint).
• Engrampa has not seen activity on they github in more than 6 month and latest vesrion is from more than a year ago AND doen't properly integrate with nemo.
• Xarchiver while does NOW have more constant development (compared with Engrampa) its suffer the same issue of no proper integration.
• Peazip while another option and as active as Xarchiver or more is Not in the official repos AND don't have inegration (and they moved to QT).
• shipping no archiver isn't ideal, but looking at the option are either problematic in the short run (gnome file-roller), not in the oficial repos (file-roller-linuxmint, peazip), no integration (peazip, engrampa and xarchiver) a completely different toolkit (peazip) or not-very-good maintained upstream (engrampa, the moment of writting)...

Therefore may better ship no one at all and let the user install one later if needed...
Maybe in that scenario we at least could guarantee the CLI can handle archiver installing the zip unzip unrar and 7zip utilities.

And if you are FORCED to have an archiver, i go for either file-roller-linuxmint or Xarchiver.