- This topic has 53 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated Apr 3-10:03 am by caprea.
-
Posts
-
PPC
Thanks for this precious info, Robin. I tend o run big applications, like kdenlive or gimp from appimages, so I don’t install lots of dependencies on my system. The main problem is that most appimages are 64bits only, they are large and users have to create a .desktop file it to access from the menu, since the script that builds antiX-menu does not read the folder where appimages that offer to create desktop entries put the .desktop files.
I’m currently installing kdenlive using Package Installer, just to check if everything works, or if there’s any need to install more packages…Edit: everything works! The general advice to try to install something: 1st from the Package Installer; 2nd from synaptic or using apt on the browser, and only then trying other methods is the best practice in antiX.
Package Installer got a really bump in what packages it includes. I consider it a very complete app-store now, since it now includes just almost every major application most users want to install. For everything else, you have synaptic, .deb files made available by the developers of the app (use them with caution), compressed binaries, appimages and flatpaks…P.
- This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by PPC.
Brian Masinick
@PPC: regarding your comments about large programs and images, I’ve tried appimages and flatpaks, admittedly in their early days.
Yes, they are “convenient” in *some ways*, and in fairness, most of my “experiments” were some time ago.Nevertheless I did not find a single program that was worth the hunt, nor worth the alternative package format.
If I can’t get a package in a distribution’s native package format, I’d rather grab a compressed tarball or similar package distribution method instead of using flatpak or appimage format.It’s been years since they were introduced and I haven’t missed them yet.
One distribution that does pretty well with it’s combination of regular packages and community bundles is Endeavour OS. They have a decent collection of base packages, and when you have to chase a community package, they use AUR format, but they provide a convenience tool to grab the package, unload it from the format and install it. That’s the only alternative to either distribution package format or compressed tarball format that I’ve found acceptable, and frankly AUR format is pretty close to a tarball with an identifying wrapper identifier around it, though I’ve not examined it closely to prove that guess.
Regardless, I’m glad the larger ecosystem DOES provide various different formats; some people clearly do appreciate flatpaks and appimages; they’re just not for me. I’m very happy with what we have and I seldom have to veer very far from our standard offerings, other than my “personal experiences”, which are not part of any ecosystem other than my personal environment.
--
Brian Masinick@Mr Masinick – the advantage of using applications in appimage or flatpak format is that you can have a very stable system- like a debian based one and still have the latest versions of many apps “installed” on your system, without breaking it. It’s true that the same thing can be achieved using applications made available as “compressed” binaries, but in those cases, there may be some problems with dependencies.
My script to automaticly create menu entries for appimages is on stand by – I dedicated lots of time to antiX already recently. But the lack of integration in the system menu is, in my opinion the main problem with appimages in antiX.
Flatpaks are a pain to install (via cli) and for most of them to work, users have to edit their permitions. I even thought of a tiny script, that can be used to serve as a GUI to install .flatpak files, put their entries on the menu AND then offer to run flatseal (the GUI application that allows to change permitions for applications installed in flatpak format). It’s use would be akin to installing aplications on an android device- you go to the store, you choose what you want to install in the store (there’s a pretty good “on-line app store for flatpaks”) , choose to install the application and then give it the needed permissions…P.
Brian Masinick
@Mr Masinick – the advantage of using applications in appimage or flatpak format is that you can have a very stable system- like a debian based one and still have the latest versions of many apps “installed” on your system, without breaking it. It’s true that the same thing can be achieved using applications made available as “compressed” binaries, but in those cases, there may be some problems with dependencies.
My script to automatically create menu entries for appimages is on stand by – I dedicated lots of time to antiX already recently. But the lack of integration in the system menu is, in my opinion the main problem with appimages in antiX.
Flatpaks are a pain to install (via cli) and for most of them to work, users have to edit their permission. I even thought of a tiny script, that can be used to serve as a GUI to install .flatpak files, put their entries on the menu AND then offer to run flatseal (the GUI application that allows to change permitions for applications installed in flatpak format). It’s use would be akin to installing aplications on an android device- you go to the store, you choose what you want to install in the store (there’s a pretty good “on-line app store for flatpaks”) , choose to install the application and then give it the needed permissions…P.
Those are legitimate ways to do things. For me, it’s just that 1) my needs are simple and 2) I’m very familiar and “stuck” on methods and conventions that have been in place for a long time. It certainly doesn’t prevent others from doing things in a completely different way; in fact, that is the real beauty of the freely available software movement in the first place – differences and alternatives. I’ll always support differences, though it does not necessarily mean that I will personally test or use every alternative; other people with specific interests will each pursue the interests and methods that best suit their interests and preferences. I’m definitely ALL for that!
--
Brian MasinickCiara
why Gdebi is not included in antiX 21
Barcode Label Maker by https://www.barcodelabelmaker.org
Xunzi_23
-why Gdebi is not included in antiX 21-
Why not search forum, answered many times…
gdebi is problematic.
@ciara – I know you are here here – try really reading the “sticky” posts, some by me, that explain many things about antiX – it will save you from asking some questions like this one. Like Xunzi_23 said, gdebi was having problems correctly installing packages. In the current antiX 23 beta it was replaced by another GUI tool- deb-installer. It should be instable from the repository in antiX 21/22. Gdebi’s problems are mentioned on this thread are they not?
- This reply was modified 1 month ago by PPC.
caprea
@Ciara, on antiX21/22/23 you can install deb-installer. It does the same for you like gdebi.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
