News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Single binary executable packages. Parent comment

Re:Single binary executable packages by _3u10 on Wednesday March 02, 2022 @11:05AM (#30528834)
It’s probably more realistic to have a single folder executable like .app “files” on OSX.

If the app has assets it gets a little crazy quite quickly.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Single binary executable packages by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Wednesday March 02, 2022 @12:44PM (#30530199)
There actually is/was two standards for this in Linux: GNUStep Application Bundles[0] and ROX-Filer AppDirs. Currently AppImage is trying to keep the dream alive, but it bundles the files in a squashfs image attached to the executable.

[0] Which of course came from NeXT Application Bundles, which is also where OSX Application Bundles came from.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Single binary executable packages by zozbot234 on Wednesday March 02, 2022 @11:28AM (#30529110)
AppImage does pretty much that out of the box.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Single binary executable packages by rathboma on Wednesday March 02, 2022 @11:37AM (#30529245)
AppImages are so good. They 'just work'. They're super easy to build and distribute too. I think more Linux distributions should embrace them as the de-facto app standard to replace snap and flatpak.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Single binary executable packages by teakettle42 on Wednesday March 02, 2022 @11:45AM (#30529359)
BeOS/Haiku appends assets to the end of the ELF file with a ToC and some easy-to-use APIs for accessing them.

I always wish that’d taken off.

I guess AppImage isn’t dissimilar in that it appends a squashfs image to be mounted with FUSE.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Single binary executable packages by immibis on Wednesday March 02, 2022 @12:44PM (#30530200)
Windows also does this. Linux doesn't, preferring to KISS because with demand paging there's really no reason you can't just put them in your rodata section.
[ Parent | on HN ]