>Developer: "One of the biggest things keeping us from porting to Linux is that there are so many different package management systems. DEBs, RPMs, you name it. It's too overwhelming. We need a better solution."
>Flatpak: "Well I'm so glad you asked. Let's talk."
Flatpak is shit. They're huge and flatpak'd apps break in stupid ways. The flatpak of vscode still has broken themes and window decorations in year of our lord 2019
Just use appimage.
Just make .deb's and fuck any retarded hipster who needs faggot .rpm
>year of our lord
um, check your privilege scumbag. that term is outdated and problematic, we call it "common era" now.
Let me translate:
>Developer: We have this shitty, hacked-together, broken-ass application. Distribution package managers want us to get our shit together before they'll package our app in their various formats, but that's just way, way too much bother. I mean, some of them even expect us to have branches that we support for more than a week, instead of just using the very latest git commit! Lets build our own packaging system to get around that nuisance.
>Windows: Just ship directx and c++ redistributables with everything. Need a different version? Ship a different version.
>Linux: hahaha windows is so stupid
>Also Linux: flatpak
Based and redpilled
lets use dynamic linking then ship everything with libraries included. worst of both worlds great idea
does anyone unironically use flatpak?
geniunely interested, only ever built stuff from source or installed from repos.
what's the point?
It makes installing RuneScape easy.
Appimage is easier
did they make their logo in secondlife?
Don't think so. Second life one looks more proportional.
Based, this shit is only a problem for retarded devs and proprietary garbage.
are you telling me a cube i took literally 10 seconds to create looks better than a "professional" logo
I use flatpaks for about half a dozen programs. It's nice to have updated packages for Kodi, Libreoffice, GIMP, etc. That being said, I don't see a reason to have flatpaks of most packages.
Guix and nix exist and they are more reliable than flatpak
You may only post in this thread if you are employed.
what's wrong with exe files? Those are great
Microsoft isn't sharing how to implement them into other OSes
Lole dude, just ship a single giant-ass statically linked standalone executable whose only userland runtime dependency is libc.
Well, fair enough. Those fucks can figure it out by themselves.
More proportional doesn't mean great. Asymmetry is an important part of art.
alright i was just making sure i am by no means a builder in SL
that's nonfree right? I guess it makes sense for nonfree software, I didn't consider that anything couldn't be built from source.
are you saying you do or don't use flatpak for Kodi, GIMP etc or for other packages? if you're saying you do then how does it make them updated? and if not, what do you use flatpaks for and what's the advantage to you?
and then Microsoft will sue them to hell
>are you saying you do or don't use flatpak for Kodi, GIMP etc or for other packages?
No, just the opposite. I'm saying that I do use flatpak for those packages
>if you're saying you do then how does it make them updated?
They are updated from flathub. I wrote a script that updates them along with apt-get upgrade so they are updated every time I update Debian
>and if not, what do you use flatpaks for and what's the advantage to you?
Nothing other than being up to date
exe files are literally just archives like zip. wine's existence proves they can be run on UNIX-like systems.
Yeah, you're right, but you're missing the point. Everything known about their implementation is only known because of reverse engineering. Microsoft could switch it all out on us at any time and we'd have to start over from scratch. Wine and all third-party EXE extraction utilities would instantly stop working and no one would be able to fix them until we've spent a few years cracking the new format.
>Microsoft could switch it all out on us at any time and we'd have to start over from scratch.
Doubt it because they live on legacy support, and it would have to be an OS-level change pushed in a windows update which means 75% of users and 99.9% of software would stop working. It would be a suicide because all devs would abandon windows.
As for wine, nothing would stop working except the latest shit. You'd still be able to run old software/games.
If they do anything it will just be a new file-type when they move to an android-like experience and force the use of their store. Which they'll likely do because they're already experimenting with it and the use of per-app permissions, and a new file type for programs would make it easier.
Nah, I use snaps.
based flatpack lets me install steam on my arch laptop in less than a day
its in the repos you idiot it takes like 3 seconds to install
>Let's talk.
Yeah let's talk
Your API is so fucking convoluted I'd rather memorize the entire STL.
the distributions take care of the packaging
the developer just needs to publish the source code
285 different distros. It's more convenient for the developer to keep the app up to date than expect hundreds of different teams to independently do it.
>the packaging system is the only thing holding back linux ports
hearty kek
Wouldn't that cause a lot of fragmentation? Idealistically, with Flatpack and Snap, you just package and distribute once, and it should deploy to any modern distro and you get the freshest updates regardless of your distro.
The problem with your idea is that there are a ton of different distros out there, and expecting nearly every distro to keep the packages updated would be unrealistic. It's like with Android where most phones are two or more versions behind despite being less than three or even two years old, and the manufacturers/carriers forgetting to ever provide even small updates soon after release.
nice wincuck mentality
it's up to the users to keep their system up to date
an application developer has no busyness maintaining MY system
>it's more convenient for the developer to package his application himself
no, it isn't
>than expect hundreds of different teams to independently do it
he doesn't need to expect anything of anyone
he doesn't need to do anything more besides making the source code available
Fucking retarded devs
1) appimage
2) just provide a tarball and we'll just build from source and package it ourselves? Unless...
Aha, sounds about right. Fuck normie devs.
>he doesn't need to expect anything of anyone
What's the point in releasing source code to just forget and not give a fuck anymore how the ports are doing and possibly ruining your reputation cause people associate the soft more with you than a fat lonely piece of shit that ported it
>he doesn't need to do anything more besides making the source code available
Well nobody has to do anything. Everyone can just ditch their egos and personal accomplishments, fucking give up and die peacefully. Not everyone wants to be a surrogate developer and telling a person to become one is a sign of lack of understanding of the concept of personal acomplishment.
pretty sure the thousands of free software devs wouldn't be doing it for free unless they got some sense of personal accomplishment from what they're doing
actually, I'm pretty sure the sense of personal accomplishment from working on a free software project and being renowned in the community is much greater than being some nameless cog in a proprietary software corporation
and if the distros weren't doing their part of taking care of the distribution properly, this model simply wouldn't work
also, why would you even suggest that this model somehow diminishes the personal accomplishments of the developers at all?
I personally would consider it an honor and a great accomplishment if my program got accepted in the official debian or gentoo repos
The real universal packaging format is tarballs with makefiles in them
guix f*m
correct
What's stopping developers from releasing the source? Oh yeah proprietary trash.
yOu aRe BeInG uSeD
It's useful on slow distros like Debian Stable... if you don't mind the limited Gtk theme selection for flatpakked applications. I'm just a lazy fuck who uses arc theme so it works for me.
Seriously, getting code into Debian-main is a high honor.
Snap u fookin idiots
>it's overwhelming
you only need to make a .deb and a .rpm to support 100% of Linux users that matter
as an aside, most commercial Linux software I've seen doesn't bother with package management anyway and just provides an install script that puts the program and required libraries in /opt/
>you only need to make a .deb and a .rpm to support 100% of Linux users regardless of whether they matter
Ftfy. Anyone using a distro that's not .deb or .rpm knows their shit, so they can just manually download and unpack your package.
> It's too overwhelming. We need a better solution.
> I'm so glad you asked. Let's talk.
It's like you are targeting idiots with sentences this short.
Sorry, your dependency is no longer available to the repository anymore and there is no replacement
Programs from literally 2015 no longer install on the newest Ubuntu
>he uses ubuntu
Just use Windows lmao
Freetard desktop is literally decades behind
You can just include repositories from 14.04 or 16.06. It isn't hard.
You can install anything on any system if you put some effort into it.
You could design a package manager around this. Have every makeable tarball include an extra file listing URLs and md5s, and have a single system file listing md5s of tarballs that were installed through the package manager. When you run it on a tarball or URL, it recursively downloads and unpacks dependencies whose md5s aren't on the list, with the desired package itself being the starting node, and then, in the proper order, it goes into each unpacked tarball and ./configure + make + make installs. If the dependencies file isn't in the tarball it just skips checking dependencies. If no configure it just does make + make install. If no configure and no makefile then idk it just merges the tarball root to the install prefix or something.
That would be probably the most rudimentary possible package manager that would still have dependency support. It abstracts so little over the basic formula of tarball + makefile that you might even call it "the" package manager, such that if you built a distro around it, that distro would be "the" Linux.
I feel like I've used this before...
Maybe I'm just tired.
Host a binary. Let us put it in our repos.
Actually the spec behind Microsoft's Portable Executable format (which is used in .exe, .dll, and .sys files) is open and well documented. Wine's problems are not from loading exes, but from porting libraries that may be poorly documented themselves.
Appimage just works.
samefag
What if i don't trust them to do it? I want to be able to hotfix any bug in case of energency.
What is more convinient
>throw binary and source code on github/gitlab/you iwn site
>throw source code somwhere and then beg repo mantainers to inckude your software.
My first post ITT, you faggot.
If you're willing to put some effort into it you just use gentoo in the first place. Learning all the complexities is unironically easier than trying to fight with a distro whose whole purpose is literally to get you as far as the assumption that it knows what's best for you can take you
>no proof
triggered samefag exposed
Not him but proof is impossible.
If he's telling the truth he should be able to provide a corroborating screenshot, granted. The problem is that such a screenshot is very easy to forge as well, and no other kind of proof is possible.
you've literally just proved that you are a samefag
congratulations on exposing yourself lmao
Your allegation is unfalsifiable. Go back to the stone age where you belong, anti-sciencer
It's just another package management system. By the logic in your post, why not Snap?
And downgrade my deps so every other program stops working?
Here you go, faggot.
Why would you do that instead of downloading the deps you need for the software you wish to use and then pointing the software to them? It is FOSS, you can do what ever you want.
It sounds like you don't use GNU+Linux very much.
>What if i don't trust them to do it?
maybe don't release it as free software in the first place and target a more appropriate platform like windows
>I want to be able to hotfix any bug in case of energency
just add a backdoor for autoupdates
also don't forget to add telemetry, you need those detailed usage statistics if you want to improve your app
>What is more convinient
if your program gets popular and the source code is available, it'll get picked up by distros eventually
if you don't want that to happen, don't release it as free software
meant for
just stop, you're embarrassing yourself
rpm is the LSB standard package format. Debian created alien in order to be LSB-compliant
you've literally outed yourself lad
>n-no i'm not a samefag h-here's proof !
>Screenshot_20190912-104859.png
>157 KB, 720x1440
>browser
>Screenshot_20190912-072941.png
>125 KB, 720x1244 cropped; originally 720x1440
>clover
I think we're gonna need more proof.
>One of the biggest things keeping us from porting to GNU is that we want to publish fucking non-free bullshit that we have to package ourselves instead of just releasing fucking source
Fixed. Fuck any developers who feel this way. Stay on your fucking shit Windows and Mac spyware platforms, fuckstains.
samefag
sad
We have executable files on GNU.
Why don't they just release the source code so other people can maintain the binaries for their distro and package manager?
The virgin flatpak
The chad snap
This
>flatpak/snap
>I know, let's bring in externally compiled packages with spyware/malware/other garbage to GNU, we're sick of having a usable, Free, secure OS
Fuck you and fuck your nonfree shitware. Go infect stupid Winbabies with that garbage.
Most developers do. Flatpak is just a way of making stuff easier to distribute.
Ignoring the rest of you bullshit: what the fuck is "extremely compiled" supposed to mean?
are you illiterate?
>phones have stadart screen defenitions
Ok and what?
>reductio ad absurdum #1 and 2
Want to realise my packages without middleman is not a sign that i want propreitary software
>reductio ad absurdum #3
What if i made some niche software that nobody besides my niche (like geological software) cares about? What if i want to pack dependencies alongside my program so that it would not get lost in time?
I use it solely for apps like Spotify, discord, mendeley, and any others that have shitty in-distro support
They're literally trying to this with Windows store apps, UWP or whatever it's called