Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Bookworm mtpaint (mtpaint_3.40-3.1+b2_amd64.deb) doesn't support webp file.

I came across this (Barry's post)
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 39#p132539
, so with a little googling, I compiled it (v3.50.10).
And that kind of 'resolved' the issue for me.

But.. - I refresh my DOGs iso often. There are few ways to tackle this update.
1. During mklive - overwrite mtpaint with my compiled one.
2. I found that Trixie is using mtpaint (mtpaint_3.50-0.1+b1_amd64.deb). So, I 'could' install the deb with trick that Fred told me (re - deadbeef). But some dependencies to resolve.
3. Beg @fredx181 to update his repo. (Hint..hint...)

Sorry - Off topic. On separate issue - custom actions (right-click).
During this 'exercise', I also found in PCManFM (ObDog, Lxqt-full) can not extract deb files, whereas Thunar (DDOG) can.
Although xarchiver is installed in those (ObDog, Lxqt-full DE). Same error with opening the deb file with xarchiver directly - so may not be FileManager issue (?).
I checked xarchiver version is same in those 3 DE. Who knows (?) - maybe I did something silly (?) like missing a package (?)

@dcung
Here's a newer mtpaint package for bookworm : edit: now v3.50-0.3 : https://github.com/doglinux/book-worm/r ... _amd64.deb
(modified the bookworm version , replaced /usr/bin/mtpaint with the one from trixie package)
I tested quickly and it seems to support .webp well.

During this 'exercise', I also found in PCManFM (ObDog, Lxqt-full) can not extract deb files, whereas Thunar (DDOG) can.

I will investigate and edit this post later.

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 8:13 am

Here's a newer mtpaint package for bookworm : https://github.com/doglinux/book-worm/r ... _amd64.deb
(modified the bookworm version , replaced /usr/bin/mtpaint with the one from trixie package)
I tested quickly and it seems to support .webp well.

I briefly tested this and it doesn't work for me on 2 laptops (fresh frugals) - version number changes but no joy for webp.

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 8:13 am

During this 'exercise', I also found in PCManFM (ObDog, Lxqt-full) can not extract deb files, whereas Thunar (DDOG) can.

I will investigate and edit this post later.

On this issue, I also found that my builds set (21 Aug 2024) works.
Later builds set (21 Sep 2024 and 10 Oct 2024) don't.
Not sure it's something I did, or something changes there (?).

dcung wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 8:39 am

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 8:13 am

Here's a newer mtpaint package for bookworm : https://github.com/doglinux/book-worm/r ... _amd64.deb
(modified the bookworm version , replaced /usr/bin/mtpaint with the one from trixie package)
I tested quickly and it seems to support .webp well.

I briefly tested this and it doesn't work for me on 2 laptops (fresh frugals) - version number changes but no joy for webp.
...

Strange, I tested with 2 different bookworm builds (one is minimal build) and works ok.
I used this webp image:

@dcung

I am not using Bookworm just Fossapup64-95.

I did compile an older build of MtPaint which does support the webp format.

Are you sure the image you are using is the correct format?

@dcung About extracting .deb, the best is to use "Open with ... Extract .deb"

You don't have that when you right-click .deb file ?
Extracting with Xarchiver is possible too, but requires ar , which is part of package binutils .
But it's not extracting full, you need to extract afterwards also e.g. data.tar.xz .

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 9:24 am

Strange, I tested with 2 different bookworm builds (one is minimal build) and works ok.
I used this webp image:

I just tested again - with fresh DDOG DE this time. And it works.
Before, I tested with Lxqt_Full on 2 laptops. Out of curiosity, I retest with fresh Lxqt (basic), Lxqt_full, and ObDog - failed.
I got a feeling my builds of those DE stuffed up...(?). I'll check again tomorrow...almost bed time now.

Not surprised if it's probably related to the other deb extract issue I am seeing...
Sorry Fred...my bad.

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 10:01 am

@dcung About extracting .deb, the best is to use "Open with ... Extract .deb"
Screenshot.png
You don't have that when you right-click .deb file ?
Extracting with Xarchiver is possible too, but requires ar , which is part of package binutils .
But it's not extracting full, you need to extract afterwards also e.g. data.tar.xz .

Yes, that's what I did. "Open with ... Extract .deb".
I have Install Deb, Extract Deb, but not Xarchiver on the drop-down right-click.

Anyway, as above, I think my builds of these 3 DE stuffed up...
Too much coincident that these 3 DE have issues and my DDOG build does not..

Jasper wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 9:48 am

Are you sure the image you are using is the correct format?

I think so.
As stated in OP, I can use my compiled mtpaint.

Now - I can use @fredx181 updated deb file in my DDOG DE.
The other DE, I think I stuffed up ...
It's kind of sorted for my DOG's need...thank you.

@dcung

Yes, that's what I did. "Open with ... Extract .deb".

FYI, The file userapp-redeb-B6808X.desktop is in the dog-boot-bookworm-20221013 archive that is extracted in every build type AFAIK.

It calls the /usr/local/bin/redeb script (also in dog-boot-bookworm-20221013) which is using dpkg for extracting .deb, no Xarchiver is involved with this.
So... I'm surprised how you could have managed things to be "stuffed up" (if so, but could be a misunderstanding too, btw, the screenshot in your first post says that you tried to use Xarchiver).

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 9:24 am

Strange, I tested with 2 different bookworm builds (one is minimal build) and works ok.
I used this webp image:
1.webp

So, there are 2 issues I'm looking into:
1. Your new mtpaint_3.50-0.2_amd64.deb - webp support
2. xarchiver can't extract deb file (edit works in DDOG, not working in Lxqt_Full, ObDog)

I have done more testing.
mtpaint_3.50-0.2_amd64.deb (I didn't test all DE variations in my DOG set, only on these - fresh frugals:)
works in my DDOG, XFCE4
not working in Lxqt, Lxqt_Full, ObDog (but if my using my compiled one - works)

So, then I build Lxqt_Full with your latest unmodified mklive-bookworm, using online conf (I took out slim and firmware-ipw2x00 only).
Installed mtpaint_3.50-0.2_amd64.deb, and just like my Lxqt, Lxqt_Full, ObDog above - it doesn't work. I tested with your 1.webp and my webp .
If it works for you - I don't know what's going on - confused.

EDIT: Wait a minute.
I up arrow to rerun the build but pick the wrong conf. Missed the -org...
Currently building again...
Will let you know shortly.

EDIT - 2:
Ok, finished and tested. Not working.
I am sure that is using correct conf (from online), as mine is modded to use single-click, and this is double-click FM.

Command line.

./mklive-bookworm -cli conf-amd64/lxqt-full-org.conf 2>&1 | tee logs/amd64-lxqt-full-org.log

dcung wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 10:14 am

fredx181 wrote: Sun Oct 13, 2024 10:01 am

@dcung About extracting .deb, the best is to use "Open with ... Extract .deb"
Screenshot.png
You don't have that when you right-click .deb file ?
Extracting with Xarchiver is possible too, but requires ar , which is part of package binutils .
But it's not extracting full, you need to extract afterwards also e.g. data.tar.xz .

Yes, that's what I did. "Open with ... Extract .deb".
I have Install Deb, Extract Deb, but not Xarchiver on the drop-down right-click.

Issue 2. This is my bad - sorry.
I was confusing "Extract .deb" with "Extract here" (which uses xarchiver).
Once I install binutils package, xarchiver (for deb extraction) is working.
So, now I will add binutils in all my local conf files for next refresh.

mtpaint_3.50-0.2_amd64.deb

I tested more DE of my sets (build using modded mklive and local conf files).
Ddog, Xfce4, Jwm - works
Lxqt, Lxqt_Full, ObDog, Tint2, Openbox - not working

Using unmodified latest mklive-bookworm with online conf
In addition to above Lxqt_Full, I build ObDog - also not working

./mklive-bookworm -cli obdog-org.conf 2>&1 | tee logs/amd64-obdog-org.log

@dcung

I have done more testing.
mtpaint_3.50-0.2_amd64.deb (I didn't test all DE variations in my DOG set, only on these - fresh frugals:)
works in my DDOG, XFCE4
not working in Lxqt, Lxqt_Full, ObDog (but if my using my compiled one - works)

I'm confused too, I will test more later today on different installs.
What I don't understand is why you attached the logs, they look ok, but showing only mtpaint 3.40-3.1+b2 to be installed.
You did install v 3.50 later as single .deb or ... how ?
Does the mtpaint title bar show the 3.50 version ?

fredx181 wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2024 7:45 am

What I don't understand is why you attached the logs, they look ok, but showing only mtpaint 3.40-3.1+b2 to be installed.

Logs from unmod mklive & unmod online conf (hence mtpaint 3.40). Just in case you need/can see some useful info. If not useful, just delete.

fredx181 wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2024 7:45 am

You did install v 3.50 later as single .deb or ... how ?

Yes. Right-click install deb.
Same way I did with DE that's working.

fredx181 wrote: Mon Oct 14, 2024 7:45 am

Does the mtpaint title bar show the 3.50 version ?

Yes. And also Help/About showed 3.50 too.

@dcung
Tested on lxqt now and yes, I can reproduce the problem.
But .. only when right-click .webp file > Open with .. Mtpaint , I got the error message .

It works well for me if I open mtpaint first and use File > Open > Select .webp .
Can you confirm that ?

EDIT: Found by experimenting that a change in /usr/share/applications/mtpaint.desktop fixes it when right-click .webp file > Open with .. Mtpaint
Removed the "%U" to just become Exec=mtpaint . (don't ask me why this change makes it work )
New deb package v3.50-0.3 with that change (hopefully works for you too now) https://github.com/doglinux/book-worm/r ... _amd64.deb
(removed mtpaint_3.50-0.2_amd64.deb)

I have 3.51 I've never been able to open webp files. Always had to use FEH ,convert them to gif or just screenshot them. Never been a real issue but I'll be watching this post .

As I have stated before, the one that I compiled myself (v3.50.10) works in any DOG DE I tested.
So, I think I will stop pursuing further and just use that.

Thanks @fredx181 for spending time.