The Portable Freeware Collection Forums

[Mod note: the present is Keyprinha's official forum topic; https://www.portablefreeware.com/?id=2926]

Keypirinha is a semantic launcher for keyboard ninjas on Windows.

http://keypirinha.com/



Dl version 2.3 @ http://keypirinha.com/releases/keypirin ... rtable.zip

Ha! I downloaded it and was ready to test before I saw the 64-bit only bit in the subject heading. I guess we should expect to start seeing that more often going forward.

File Data

• 
  Filename: keypirinha-2.3-x64-portable.zip
  MD5: 0FEF668643245B764B0CAF03A035AD6E
  SHA1: 9F1364CC7FD0526A28A83D354261785D0A8AA527
  SHA256: 4232A8CA945F5277D3281C54DEE4D8A1CC9CFF7558B6EDB8E75110EFFCAB0A77
  VirusTotal Rating: 0/56
  VirusTotal URL: https://www.virustotal.com/file/4232a8c ... /analysis/
  

Looks good.

Compressed filesize is 8.6MB, so I haven't tested this yet because Executor still does a fine job with a smaller filesize.

Might give this a try down the road though.

Tried this out today, and looking good. This stands out immediately from the competition (even my favourite FARR) for its use of manual config files. I think that anyone with some knowledge of AHK or creating batch files will appreciate that.

Unfortunately the program doesn't (seem to) allow relative paths (under "extra_paths" within Configure Packages>Apps), which is a bummer. Maybe the dev will be kind enough to add that. Until then it can't be considered a fully portable launcher

Have you tried the workaround detailed at viewtopic.php?p=69797#p69797 and following? It turns relative paths into absolute at launch...

Midas wrote:Have you tried the workaround detailed at viewtopic.php?p=69797#p69797 and following? It turns relative paths into absolute at launch...

I was about to delete my post because after further testing it does indeed support relatives. I jumped to that conclusion because the readme made no mention of it and I didn't bother to test out simply adding \PortableApps\**\ ...

Thanks for the link to that code though; it will come in handy at some point.

Keypirinha v2.4 is available (2016-03-24)

http://keypirinha.com/changelog.html

Hi, I'm the author of Keypirinha, thanks for the nice words

shnbwmn wrote:Unfortunately the program doesn't (seem to) allow relative paths

It does allow you to use current application install path by using the ${var:APP_DIR} variable in any configuration file. The Pre-defined variables section of the documentation might be of interest to you.

@polyvertex
Welcome to the forum. I am on a x64 system but I don't get why you don't release a x32 version.

Keypirinha at version 2.6.1 (2016-06-10).

smaragdus wrote:I am on a x64 system but I don't get why you don't release a x32 version.

There's no hard technical reason per se as the code itself in its current state would not need any change. In fact, the early and unpublished versions of the project were 32bit only. Keypirinha targets recent desktop Windows (7, 8, 10) which belong to the x64 era, an x32 version would also mean more maintenance (dependencies, tests, debugging), which would imply more time: a finite resource. That being said, I haven't received any request for a x32 release so far.

polyvertex wrote:Keypirinha targets recent desktop Windows (7, 8, 10) which belong to the x64 era, an x32 version would also mean more maintenance (dependencies, tests, debugging), which would imply more time: a finite resource. That being said, I haven't received any request for a x32 release so far.

I think we're still a few years away from where you need to only distribute a 64 bit version of a program as there are still a significant number of 32 bit systems out there. Anyway, more to the point, I'm still on one of those so I can't test your program without it.

Still I understand the issue of limited time so sticking with 64-bit makes sense. Google and Apple both have stepped away from 32-bit in an increasing number of areas, so there's plenty of precedent.

webfork wrote:I think we're still a few years away from where you need to only distribute a 64 bit version of a program as there are still a significant number of 32 bit systems out there. Anyway, more to the point, I'm still on one of those so I can't test your program without it.

Still I understand the issue of limited time so sticking with 64-bit makes sense. Google and Apple both have stepped away from 32-bit in an increasing number of areas, so there's plenty of precedent.

I develop Keypirinha as a hobby so yes, I have to prioritize its development tasks more than I would like to unfortunately. Sorry that keeps you away from at least trying it. I'm currently focusing on core features which are partly based on remarks made by users.

I understand your frustration though and it is one of the reasons why I first migrated my system from x86 to x64. Some development tools I was using were not yet available (or stable) for x64 systems, and some other tools I wanted to use or to try were 64-bit only... But that was about 3 years ago IIRC, so I'm curious about the reason(s) that make you stay in the 32-bit land as it's obvious that you'll have to struggle more and more against the flow?

polyvertex wrote:But that was about 3 years ago IIRC, so I'm curious about the reason(s) that make you stay in the 32-bit land as it's obvious that you'll have to struggle more and more against the flow?

The reason I'm remaining at 32-bit is because this site is focused on portability and I need to try and represent what are probably the median group of devices people are going to run into. If you're at a library, cafe, or computer lab, it's by and large going to be Win7x32.

For those who are interested into a 32-bit release of Keypirinha, a request has been made recently and needs more votes to be pushed up in the priority list.

polyvertex wrote:For those who are interested into a 32-bit release of Keypirinha, a request has been made recently and needs more votes to be pushed up in the priority list.

Actually, I think the dev has -- in a very nice way -- said "no thanks".