-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 563
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
--appimage-extract-and-run #842
Conversation
Also change meaning of optional parameter to override output directory.
The build fails due to us using a "too old" version of GLib. As we build it ourselves anyway, I'm updating GLib at the moment in AppImageBuild, and will push the up to date images as soon as possible. Then, we can simply retry the build. I don't want to upgrade GLib any further to retain some backwards compatibility, i.e., if it doesn't work, I'll have to replace the offending code. |
My bad. The issue is of course not in GLib but glibc, which we can not upgrade. I'm replacing Note for myself: Don't try to use |
I prefer fts, as it doesn't require any sort of callback and is therefore easier to implement, but it doesn't work with LFS.
C strings are annoying...
Should speed up extraction on subsequent calls when using NO_CLEANUP in the future.
As the PR introduces some larger changes, I'll take the time to re-read all diffs to find potential remaining issues. I will merge the PR as soon as possible. |
We actually use a customised appimage runtime that automatically uses this (more accurately, our equivalent) functionality if the fuse/squashfs functionality fails. Not sure if there's any interest in doing that here, but it removes the need for the argument and does it seamlessly if Just a passing thought :-) |
We decided that this is unacceptable for us, as it ruins AppImage's UX. Please don't call that an AppImage then. This is a workaround which must not be available by default! AppImages must not be degraded to self-extracting archives! Quoting the spec:
|
Thanks for the heads up, absolutely understood :-) |
Is there a way to silence the extraction output? I'm using the |
Why not something like
? That way you don't need to extract every time you want to run it. |
Actually I support the idea of silencing the option. This is not the first time the issue is brought up. I'd rather introduce a @hongtron please make a separate issue. Random comments in closed issues are predestined to be lost. |
👍 @TheAssassin done: #1002 And thank you @probonopd, I think your workaround is feasible for my use case so I will explore that in the meantime. |
Fixes #841.
This is still WIP, please don't merge yet.