Question about dependencies...

Mr. Alex · 2010-10-28 07:32:40

Please explain.
For example GIMP has dependencies:

gtk2 lcms libxpm libwmf libxmu librsvg libmng dbus-glib libexif pygtk desktop-file-utils gegl

Every package here including package "gimp" has list of files. So these packages are all the files GIMP really needs to work? This is the whole program, right? Including ~/.gimp.2.6 of course.

If I take all the files from gimp package and packages that are marked bold plus ~/.gimp.2.6, I can make a portable program, just like in Windows, when one directory contains the whole program and options (all these files)? And I will be able to move this directory between different PC's with GNU/Linux and run it there without installing those packages marked as bold?

P. S. The size of this directory is another story, I understand that it will take more place on HDD.

Allan · 2010-10-28 10:53:12

No... it does not work that way...

kachelaqa · 2010-10-28 11:30:43

@Mr. Alex

maybe you should try to explain the real problem you are trying to solve...

~Fir3fly · 2010-10-28 11:50:05

ok, im going to pressume you're a windows user, being new to linux.

"programs" are more modular in linux
for example, take Mozilla's firefox and thunderbird programs.

they are using the same "core" engine. (i forgot the name of it).
so the "firefox" program has the "firefox" frontend, and the "mozilla" core, plus whatever else it needs (this is only meant to be a simple example).
then, if we were to install thunderbird. we would only need to install the thunderbird frontend, cause we already have the core, therefore - less downloads, less to install, easier to update

this is a very simple example, i dont even know if firefox does have a "core" but we'll say it does.

its also, better in a sense with updates. you can update the "core" and it would be reflected in all the programs that use it.

thats the best i can come up with atm.

to make something "portable" you would have to copy all the other binaries aswel, but then they have their own dependancies, and etc.
but alot of linux computers have most of the stuff.

thats why you always install things, instead of just copying things over.

manmachine · 2010-10-28 13:40:53

Perhaps a search on how Zero Install does this, or how
this is packaged up will provide the info you need. I've only experimented with windows portable apps and it's not pretty. You'd need a special environment where the apps would find the libs they need without conflicts, so it's not as easy as simply making a tarball with all deps.

kpbotbot · 2010-10-28 13:59:20

manmachine wrote:

Perhaps a search on how Zero Install does this

Thanks. I was looking for this.

By the way, how does superdeb fit in this topic? I've heard about it some time a few weeks back.

manmachine · 2010-10-28 14:28:41

kpbotbot wrote:

manmachine wrote:
Perhaps a search on how Zero Install does this
By the way, how does superdeb fit in this topic? I've heard about it some time a few weeks back.

Looks like a fancy way of creating a meta-package for now, seeing that only ubuntu is supported i wouldn't exactly call the app 'portable'.
But i've never used linux portable apps, and pretty much given up on windows ones as well. It's a mess.

Last edited by manmachine (2010-10-28 15:42:39)

ChoK · 2010-10-28 15:13:56

You may find Chakra's bundles interesting. It's a KDE distribution based on archlinux, with all GTK programs (including GIMP and firefox) distributed as autonomous bundles containing all libraries they need to function (ala MacOSX). The packages needed to make those bundles should build easily on Arch by adapting chakra's pkgbuild.

Allan · 2010-10-28 23:12:10

Chakras bundles still rely on a lot of things on your system...

Awebb · 2010-10-29 01:48:39

To create a portable application, make sure you know about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_library

Mr. Alex · 2010-10-31 14:09:11

~Fir3fly wrote:

for example, take Mozilla's firefox and thunderbird programs.
they are using the same "core" engine. (i forgot the name of it).

"XUL"?

Last edited by Mr. Alex (2010-10-31 14:09:29)

kpbotbot · 2010-11-04 02:15:47

manmachine wrote:

kpbotbot wrote:
manmachine wrote:
Perhaps a search on how Zero Install does this
By the way, how does superdeb fit in this topic? I've heard about it some time a few weeks back.
But i've never used linux portable apps, and pretty much given up on windows ones as well. It's a mess.

I've only used them once and I never really liked using portable stuff. Unless, of course, I need the app. I'm pretty much concerned about the read and write cycles on my flash drive xD

Arch Linux

#1 2010-10-28 07:32:40

Question about dependencies...

#2 2010-10-28 10:53:12

Re: Question about dependencies...

#3 2010-10-28 11:30:43

Re: Question about dependencies...

#4 2010-10-28 11:50:05

Re: Question about dependencies...

#5 2010-10-28 13:40:53

Re: Question about dependencies...

#6 2010-10-28 13:59:20

Re: Question about dependencies...

#7 2010-10-28 14:28:41

Re: Question about dependencies...

#8 2010-10-28 15:13:56

Re: Question about dependencies...

#9 2010-10-28 23:12:10

Re: Question about dependencies...

#10 2010-10-29 01:48:39

Re: Question about dependencies...

#11 2010-10-31 14:09:11

Re: Question about dependencies...

#12 2010-11-04 02:15:47

Re: Question about dependencies...

Board footer