It compiles smoothly and seems to work well. Make a symlink called zenity and it should run Linux/BSD scripts that require zenity easily.
The only question is, why write something new when Shanty does essentially the same thing? In fact, running the --help results from Boxer and Shanty through diff shows that the two are doing much the same thing. Well, they both target zenity compatibility, I suppose.
Seems to be an updated version of Shanty, using more modern Haiku API, builtin calendar view and bar pole, vector icons etc.
Regarding the renaming from Shanty to Boxer, well, maybe a symlink to keep retro compatibility with the few existing scripts that rely on shanty name, via the hpkg, could help here.
BTW, your last commit renamed “shanty” to “boxer” even in the URL of origin repository in github.com/peja/shanty, breaking links to screenshots of the differents dialogs…
I forked shanty because the original author has not responded to my pull requests for bug fixes.
I’m not sure what you mean by that. I’m not finished making changes to the app/repo and so I wasn’t planning on announcing Boxer for a while. I have a ToDo list with many code changes and still need to rewrite the user guide.
Edit: I see what you mean. That was just a quick search and replace in the old user guide. It will be rewritten eventually.
No problem. I was just trying to help, not being critical.
If it’s not in your TODO list, keep in mind to add “shanty” name backward compatibility, via a symlink calling “boxer” binary for instance, just to keep runtime compatibility for the few scripts in the wild that relies on “shanty” tool to work.
Maybe displaying a “shanty renamed to boxer, please upgrade your script to new name” before calling the boxer tool.