31–40 of 241 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As near as I can tell, yes.
Application binaries must statically link libc and ssl when making programs for packging into appimage?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As near as I can tell, yes.
Application binaries must statically link libc and ssl when making programs for packging into appimage?
Each app has it's own copy of libssl etc embedded into the prepackaged "binary" which is executed.. That's enough to know it's going to lead to all sorts of suffering when you actually try and rid yourself of $CVE of the month.
I believe the core problem here (that led to containerization, application images and alike) is that correct packaging for most distros is hard. There are tools like fpm or even checkinstall that can build simple good-enough-but-not-really packages, but I think maintaining a "proper" Debian packaging requires some pretty arcane knowledge that's spread around various pieces of documentation (and maybe I'm just stupid,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because users and developers both want to be able to download and use new versions of software at a release cadence that makes sense for that application. The "every application gets the same release cadence no matter what" approach only appeals to people making distros.
Nothing in using the distro's packaging formats forces you to release only at the same time as the distro.
I could be erroneously attributing the intended use case, but I believe this isn't designed for people who know what they're doing; it's for people who don't know, like grandma.
As a user, I want to download an application from the original author, and run it on my Linux desktop system just like I would do with a Windows or Mac application. Please pull over. I want off this ride. Why the hell are we regressing to shipping around hackily built binaries?
Because users and developers both want to be able to download and use new versions of software at a release cadence that makes sense for that application. The "every application gets the same release cadence no matter what" approach only appeals to people making distros.
The "every application gets the same release cadence no matter what" approach appeals to me, and I'm a normal user.
Do you guys remember those "Portable" Windows executables?
Obviously it's terrible for getting security patches. Not entirely sure what to do about that. It would be nice to make package management more consistent across distros but I digress.