• thevoidzero@lemmy.world
    0·
    3 hours ago

    I’d like to make it like that for my projects, but I don’t use windows so I can’t do well with packaging them. And sometimes when I try it runs in the computer, but then doesn’t run in other computers because of missing dlls or some other things.

    Anyone have good idea how to make it easy. Using windows VM is such a hassle to install and such just for tiny programs I make.

    • hangonasecond@lemmy.world
      0·
      2 hours ago

      Make them in a portable language. Something like Java for example. Or you can write in rust and compile for each target.

      • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
        0·
        1 hour ago

        It’s in rust. Problem is the gtk part, it has to be installed in the system, which makes it run there. But how do I distribute the program without having everyone install gtk on their computer. In Linux it’s just a dependency so it’s not a problem, for windows I can’t seem to make it work.

        Edit: also, I need gtk because people around me who uses windows aren’t going to use CLI program at all.

  • MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    0·
    4 hours ago

    On a somewhat related note, why do so many open source projects give me a zip file with a single exe inside it instead of just the exe directly?

  • Shipairtime@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 hours ago

    I just got blender after having last looked at it ten years ago. It looks so much better! I had an easy time finding stuff. If you tried it in the past and are afraid of how ugly it was it is worth another shot. Also look up the doughnut tutorial.

    • Matriks404@lemmy.world
      0·
      3 hours ago

      If you don’t count professional software, nowadays it’s actually the opposite. Very often in proprietary software there are features removed with no alternative provided by developers, or there’s one but actually it has nothing to do with what you actually want.

        • belathus@bookwormstory.socialEnglish
          0·
          3 hours ago

          But… it is easy. And so is the package manager. You don’t have to use the command line if you don’t want to, it is just another option.

          • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
            0·
            3 hours ago

            No, I call any command-line interface that runs from an internal drive “DOS”. I do mean the term somewhat generically as a Disk Operating System.

        • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
          0·
          4 hours ago

          You got downvoted by the Linux fanboys, but it’s not wrong. Linux has a big issue with approachability… And one of the biggest reasons is that average Windows users think you need to be some sort of 1337 hackerman to even boot it, because it still relies on the terminal.

          For those who know it, it’s easier. But for those who don’t, it feels like needing to learn hieroglyphs just to boot your programs.

          • 474D@lemmy.world
            0·
            3 hours ago

            I ran Linux Mint for close to a year and never used the terminal. It’s not 2000 anymore

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      0·
      7 hours ago

      It’s literally how Blender is distributed. Get archive, extract wherever, run blender.

      • DannyBoy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        0·
        5 hours ago

        Yeah but then I get an ancient version because I use Debian.

        I think the last time I used Blender I installed it through Steam.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          0·
          5 hours ago

          That is part of the deal with Debian. You get stable software… but you only get stable software. If you want bleeding edge software, you’ll have to install it manually to /usr/local, build from source and hope that you have the dependencies, or containerize it with Distrobox.

          If you go to a butcher, don’t complain about the lack of vegan options.

          • DannyBoy@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            0·
            5 hours ago

            I’m aware and I’m not complaining. Just sharing what I thought was a funny story of using Steam as a package manager.

        • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          0·
          5 hours ago

          Time to install flatpaks. It’s the future of userspace programs on Linux anyway, you’ll get newest versions there the quickest.

      • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        0·
        7 hours ago

        I don’t really like the way software installation is centralized on Linux. It feels like, Windows being the proprietary system, they don’t really care about how you get things to run. Linux the other hand cares about it a lot. Either you have to write your own software or interact with their ‘trusted sources’.

        I would prefer if it was easier to simply run an executable file on my personal Linux machine.

        • NaibofTabr@infosec.pubEnglish
          0·
          5 hours ago

          As others have pointed out you can do this, but there are at least two major advantages to the way Linux distributions use package managers:

          1. Shared libraries - on Windows most binaries will have their own code libraries rolled into them, which means that every program which uses that library has installed a copy of it on your hard drive, which is highly inefficient and wastes a lot of hard drive space, and means that when a new version of the library is released you still have to wait for each program developer to implement it in a new version of their binary. On Linux, applications installed via the package manager can share a single copy of common dependencies like code libraries, and that library can be updated separately from the applications that use it.

          2. Easy updating - on Windows you would have to download new versions of each program individually and install them when a new version is released. If you don’t do this regularly in today’s internet-dependent world, you expose your system to a lot of vulnerabilities. With a Linux package manager you can simply issue the update command (e.g. sudo apt upgrade) and the package manager will download all the new versions of the applications and install them for you.

        • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
          0·
          6 hours ago

          Software Installation is all but centralized on Linux. Sure, there is your store or package manager, but both Apple and Windows do have that, too. But you can always add any source you want to that store (flatpak is great), find an AppImage, some doubious install script, find your own packages and manually install them (like .deb), use Steam or sometimes, like with Blender, download, decompress and run it.

        • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
          0·
          6 hours ago

          The difference between a package manager and an app store is that the package manager allows you to pick your own sources. You can even run your own repository if you wanted to.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          0·
          6 hours ago

          You can also just download any binary file you find online and run it. Or use any install.sh script you happen to find anywhere.

          Package managers are simply a convenient offer to manage packages with their dynamically linked libraries and keep them up to date (important for security). But it’s still just an offer.

        • folekaule@lemmy.world
          0·
          6 hours ago

          You can still do that on Linux. Just download it and run. You can even compile it from source if that’s your thing.

          However, because there is a much greater variety of Linux distros and dependencies compared to Windows or MacOS versions, it’s better to either have a Flatpak, AppImage, or package from your distro’s repo. That way you’re ensured that it will work without too much fiddling around.

        • zogrewaste_@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          0·
          6 hours ago

          Do you know about AppImages? Seems like those meet the need you’re complaining about.

          You still have to set the executable flag for them, but you can do that through the graphic user interface. No need to open a terminal.

      • herrvogel@lemmy.world
        0·
        2 hours ago

        No. You either go full Stallman and inject Gentoo directly into your aorta, or you might as well be deep throating Satya Nutella while bouncing on Tim Apple’s lap. Filthy casual.

      • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        0·
        3 hours ago

        Agreed, OSS purity is silly. I am running an open source client (Thunder) to this open source service on my Pixel 9 running GraphineOS, the low level firmware is still absolutely proprietary.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          1 hour ago

          Actually, to be clear, I don’t think FOSS purity is bad. I just mean that denigrating what others are doing because they’re using something non-free while they’re making steps in the right direction is dumb and counterproductive.

          To my mind, FOSS is the only way forward for a healthy, functioning society, and the fact that so much of our digital landscape is being gradually replaced with it is to me evidence of that. I think the end goal should always be pure FOSS, but that doesn’t (necessarily) mean immediately jumping to all FOSS; it just means taking steps to cut out proprietary software wherever you reasonably can.