-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Allow installing standalone binaries from Toolpacks #1079
Comments
I was talking with Ivan about this yesterday lol |
I guess GitHub is pushing that repository in the recommendations of our home :P |
We are actually in contact with @Azathothas He also has this repo for appimages and other portable formats. And there are two package managers that use it already dbin and soar |
Maybe I can add a If enabled, it will check if the program exists, and if so, it will create an installation script on-the-fly to install the program and to made it updatable. @Samueru-sama please provide me a direct link to a toolpack and a direct URL to an info page that contains the version of the program. |
Hi @ivan-hc If you use However if you don't want to parse json, you can still download the binaries but you won't have access to any metadata like !#Static Binaries
wget "https://bin.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/${BIN}"
#For example to download fastfetch
wget "https://bin.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/fastfetch"
#It is not possible to get version without parsing metadata !#AppImages,AppBundles,FlatImages etc
wget "https://pkg.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/${PKG}.${FORMAT}"
#Examples:
wget "https://pkg.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/steam.AppImage"
wget "https://pkg.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/steam.FlatImage"
!#It is possible to get versions here directly, just add .version at end
curl -qfsSL "https://pkg.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/steam.AppImage.version"
curl -qfsSL "https://pkg.pkgforge.dev/$(uname -m)/steam.FlatImage.version" A very long (will take long time to load) Readme is here:
For pkgs, it is here: |
Hi @Azathothas , I just asked:
|
I'll do the test with
|
does |
I don't think so and also it doesn't work on appbundles either. Only NixAppImages have compatible flags I think. |
that said, I'll allow only appimages |
this is the function to create the script on the fly
I must correct it, because
will made, for example this is instead how this function will be used, as a local script
|
to undestand my issue with lowercased URLs, this is what happe if I remove the
from that function, using this instead
simplescreenrecorder-2024-11-05_19.30.16.mkv.mp4 |
I think this needs to be fixed upstream, because yeah when using However if you will only allow appimages, you can instead inject |
this is a good idea |
anyone who wants to test and improve this function
the syntax is this
or
in addition you can use the flags only AppImages are supported. Have fun! |
simplescreenrecorder-2024-11-05_19.52.36.mkv.mp4 |
Maybe, also |
@Azathothas how to get only the description and the URL reference of one app from the info? I'm working on the info creation for
|
I have solved with the description
now I need a source |
This is the first draft of the function changed to show info about the single app installed
...however, I give up for the description and source |
any contribution is wellcome |
For AppImages it is much more feasible to create on-the-fly install scripts... but not for other types of Toolpacks, since they may or may not require a launcher or icons. Automating the creation of these scripts like this is out of my reach for now (see option |
@Samueru-sama this kind of approach (currently implemented in "dev") favors AppImage but prevents other formats. @Azathothas I find the indexing of application links a bit "confusing" for management via AM. So either we leave this function only for AppImage and increase the functions for other formats, or we unify the function so that it can handle both. |
just noticed that this page contain all the info I need also for EDIT: however, it is for AppImages (and similar) only |
so it should show more lines, not 100 less |
you are right... I forget to jump counting "metapackages" |
there are 79 items I don't include in total count, I call them "metapackages", i.e. many scripts with th exact same content to hel installing programs usinga keyword easier to remember, for example to install
or
because there are three scripts for
Also, htere are some items that start with so in total they are 79 "duplicated" I don't include in the total count. Try now with |
Now |
It is 4989, indeed. But my command still shows different numbers (same as the screenshots above). |
exactly |
why? 🤔 |
@ivan-hc this is what you call "deduplication", the original metadata uses the binary names, and in the repo, there exists sub-folders for different implementations of the same tool, for example, on the repo, there's But on the If it weren't for the "deduplication", you wouldn't be missing out on 606 binaries (these binaries are part of Baseutils, there exists "Bin", which contains statically linked executables, "Pkg", which contains portable formats, and "Base", which contains statically linked executables that could be categorized as System Utilities) |
ok, thanks @xplshn |
It has been fixed in: https://bin.pkgforge.dev/x86_64/AM.txt (pkgforge/pkgcache@af5067d) ❯ curl -qfsSL "https://bin.pkgforge.dev/x86_64/AM.txt" | grep -i 'ncdu'
| ncdu | disk usage analyzer | https://dev.yorhel.nl | https://bin.pkgforge.dev/x86_64/ncdu | 5decfa473168 | |
Hey guys, get ready to run
...to exit the developer mode. It's time to merge! Get ready for AM 9.1 stable! |
Folks, I'm sorry for this necrobumping... I have prepared a commit into a parallel branch main...toolpacks-without-appimages In brief, a lot of AppImages listed among the Toolpacks are duplicates of the existing ones in the AM repository, so this change prevents the installation and the listing of programs with name ending with This is the list of Toolpacks without AppImages ...do you agree with that 👍 ? Or should I leave all as is 👎 ? |
I don't agree because most AppImages in AM are glibc-only, while most appimages in Toolpacks are meant to work in any system, but I guess its okay, I don't use AM because it requires |
I noticed that there are some appimages I own and that are already in the repo of AM, same for others that come from their upstream developers... this is why I asked. These are all appimages listed in Toolpacks if you run
@xplshn I remember I have already many of them, and I suppose that they are the ones owned by their respective packagers... the reason is not to have duplicates. What are the missing ones in AM? |
Just checked and the only one I have not in the database is the appimage of VScode, since I have the original portable archive EDIT: also, the |
All of the appimages that are added to So if you want to only include official appimages, you should exclude the entire catalog.
None. And probably for a long time, since we will try adding appimages that AM already has first, before adding new ones.
We use repology & official app_id for naming schema. It's done this way so we can generate additional metadata easily.
Good Decision. I agree. |
that's exactly the point. I built my database by relying on the work of the people who own the AppImage packages, whether they are working or not, and with the If we decided to do everything ourselves, and without notifying the upstream developer, we would go against the very concept of "open-source community". Projects improve because there are users who report bugs, request features... and other users who contribute to improving the project. And that's exactly what happened for this AM release, 9.1. I wouldn't have gotten to release it if I hadn't received proposals. So, your packages can be better, of course... I don't doubt it. But if I were the developer of these packages (and for a good part they ARE REALLY packages made by me), I would prefer you to make me a pull request. Also because in the metadata there is a reference to my repository as a source. I prefer to take my responsibilities, take my blame as well as the credit. That said, I really thank you for the work you have done... but I will merge that commit into main. I have to do it, at this point. |
I've screwed up my projects so many times... but if they're better today it's because I've learned from my mistakes. I guess I'm not the only one who thinks this way, right? |
soar query steam.appimage #will display everything
soar log steam.appimage | less #will display the raw CI Build logs
soar inspect steam.appimage | less #will display the build script that was used
Even if the upstream doesn't provide logs or behaves shady, the way of extracting and checking the contents and repacking ensures that you will always have logs for any package from
You can see my activity on GitHub, though you would have to filter by the date ranging at least a year ago
I went from |
Ivan see this PR I made at helix fixing an issue with their appimage: helix-editor/helix#11243 the lead dev didn't like that I used go-appimage because what if malware?! (even though they were already using linuxdeploy) so I went and modified the PR to even not use either of the two. The PR is still open waiting... I also have another at lite-xl open and waiting, this is one is even worse because the current appimage no longer works. |
@Samueru-sama @Azathothas Guys, the more you come to tell me... all the more reason, YOU should take the place of the upstream packager/developer... with all the merits of the case. I say this for you, you risk doing the work for those who do not deserve it. And @Azathothas , precisely because you mentioned the slow responsiveness of certain developers... I am always here, actively, and at your disposal, as long as I am well... so why do the work twice? Help me to do it well instead, if you have better solutions. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Just expanding the number of packages provided
Describe the solution you'd like
I see two options:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: