xplr
A hackable, minimal, fast TUI file explorer
Runssource: GitHubhomepageRustMITcommit d96991f6b1d1
Rust, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: cli, command line, console, developer tools, file explorer, file launcher, file manager and filesystem.
xplr runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 3 minutes and hit no errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
xplr 1.1.1 TUI file explorer built from source via cargo build --locked --release; binary responds to --version and --help; all 22 tests pass
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . 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.
- Install time
- 3 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 4 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 0 hit, 0 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- cargo test: 22 passed (19 unit + 3 integration), xplr --version returned 'xplr 1.1.1'
- Model tokens used
- 62,153
- Exact commit tested
- d96991f6b1d1
- 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.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- 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
Watch the session
The whole run, from a clean machine, at the speed it actually happened. Nothing is cut and nothing is sped up.
A recording of attempt 2, run . The verdict above comes from a different attempt, so read this as one session and not as the current result. The terminal recording it was made from is the evidence, stored with a sha256 fingerprint; the video is a rendering of it. Nothing loads from the video host until you press play.
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
running 3 tests test test_no_debug_in_lib ... ok test test_cli_version ... ok test test_cli_help ... ok test result: ok. 3 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.01s Doc-tests xplr running 0 tests test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out; finished in 0.00s Everything succeeded cleanly — no errors, no mocks needed, all 22 tests passing and the binary conf… tokens used 62,153 Everything succeeded cleanly — no errors, no mocks needed, all 22 tests passing and the binary conf…
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
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 3 minutes, faster than the median of the 123 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
- Nothing broke on the way: zero errors between clone and running.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
- Measured 3 times, so the result is not a one-off.
Of the 124 cli projects Argusic has installed and timed, xplr was the 45th fastest to reach a running state, and 111 of 124 reached one at all.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 3 minutes after the clone.
- Following its own README: the documented path worked with nothing to fix.
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
Topics (from GitHub)
clicommand-lineconsoledeveloper-toolsfile-explorerfile-launcherfile-managerfilesystemlauncherproductivityraspberry-pirustterminalterminal-basedtuivim
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/xplr)Questions
- Does xplr run?
- Yes. xplr runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 3 minutes, hitting 0 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test xplr?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit d96991f6b1d1. 3 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test xplr?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.02: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does xplr take to install?
- 3 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does xplr need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing xplr?
- Nothing did, in the recorded run: zero errors between clone and running.
- How does xplr compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 124 cli projects Argusic has installed and timed, xplr was the 45th fastest to reach a running state, and 111 of 124 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for xplr?
- All 3 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.