Does floral-notepaper run?

Argusic could not verify that floral-notepaper runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine, hitting 0 errors on the way, and recorded the session.

How did Argusic test floral-notepaper?

On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 69a43aef87d2. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.

What did it cost to test floral-notepaper?

The run that produced this verdict cost $0.14: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.

Does floral-notepaper need a GPU?

Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.

What goes wrong when installing floral-notepaper?

Nothing did, in the recorded run: zero errors between clone and running.

Where is the evidence for floral-notepaper?

All 2 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.

floral-notepaper

花笺，轻量优雅的跨平台桌面便签工具，支持 Markdown 编辑与预览

Could not verifysource: GitHubRustMITcommit 69a43aef87d2

Rust, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: macos, markdown, note taking, react, rust, sticky notes, tauri and windows.

Argusic could not get floral-notepaper running. An Argusic agent hit no errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 20 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).

At a glance

verdict: Could not verify
Argusic Score: 20 / 100
cost of the verifying run: $0.14 (measured)
recorded runs: 2
last tested: 2026-09-30
stars: 5,340
forks: 0
open issues: 0
watchers: 0
created: -
last push: -

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.

What was measured

From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.

Cold machine to finish: 20 minutes
Errors hit and fixed: 0 hit, 0 fixed with no human help
Exact commit tested: 69a43aef87d2
Container image: sha256:cdd920bce783

What was not measured

The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.

Install time: the run did not report one
How the result was proved: runs before 2026-09-07 did not record the command used to check the result
Peak GPU memory: this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
Model tokens used: not recorded for this run
Behaviour over a long run: each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
Whether it works at all: this run verified nothing, so this page makes no claim either way

The end of the recording

The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.

 succeeded in 86ms:
103
267
Now the `.so` symlinks are in `~/tauri-libs/lib/`. I need the linker to find them. Let me use `LIBR…
exec
/bin/sh -lc 'export NVM_DIR="$HOME/.nvm" && [ -s "$NVM_DIR/nvm.sh" ] && . "$NVM_DIR/nvm.sh" && . "$…
 succeeded in 4701ms:
   Compiling floral-notepaper v1.2.0 (/work/repo/src-tauri)
    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 4.75s
exec
/bin/sh -lc 'export NVM_DIR="$HOME/.nvm" && [ -s "$NVM_DIR/nvm.sh" ] && . "$NVM_DIR/nvm.sh" && . "$…
Killed

Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.

How it was tested

One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.

Strengths and limits

Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.

What went well

Nothing broke on the way: zero errors between clone and running.
Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
Measured 2 times, so the result is not a one-off.

What did not, or is not known

An agent with no time limit did not get it running.

Also tested, in the same area

Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.

Run history

tested by	attempt	outcome	score	cost USD	when
Argusic Runner	2/3	Did not run	20.00	0.14	2026-09-30 11:35 UTC
Argusic Runner	1/3	Did not run	20.00	0.27	2026-09-30 11:14 UTC

Topics (from GitHub)

macos markdown note-taking react rust sticky-notes tauri windows

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/floral-notepaper.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/floral-notepaper)

Questions

Does floral-notepaper run?: Argusic could not verify that floral-notepaper runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine, hitting 0 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test floral-notepaper?: On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 69a43aef87d2. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test floral-notepaper?: The run that produced this verdict cost $0.14: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
Does floral-notepaper need a GPU?: Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing floral-notepaper?: Nothing did, in the recorded run: zero errors between clone and running.
Where is the evidence for floral-notepaper?: All 2 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.