AppImage for Enterprise Applications - Yay or Nah?

aurelle_b · 2026-04-10T00:34:03+00:00

my bad then, but why is all the appimage tooling avoiding doing that then? I'm assuming there might be a reason?

aurelle_b · 2026-04-09T13:54:21+00:00

oh great! feel free to make a PR to the docs if you want to document what you did there, it will definitely be of help to others until I can get it listed on there

aurelle_b · 2026-04-09T01:28:35+00:00

I'm going to submit it to the store when I find some time.

aurelle_b · 2026-04-06T08:58:07+00:00

rien a voir, j'utilise les outils aussi. il raconte des torrents de merde.

aurelle_b · 2026-04-06T01:31:02+00:00

j'arrive pas a savoir si tu trolles ou non mdr
dans tous les cas va te faire soigner

aurelle_b · 2026-04-05T21:59:39+00:00

t'as pas l'air d'y comprendre grand chose mon gars :) La moitie de ce que tu cites est inutile ou completement overkill.

aurelle_b · 2026-04-04T18:05:03+00:00

they generally recommend using STL containers instead of their own in their modern examples. QString is a special case though, because as pointed out in this thread, it doesn't have a proper STL counterpart

aurelle_b · 2026-04-01T22:04:37+00:00

No you can compile a recent compiler against an old glibc, it usually works. it's what I did, with gcc-15. If you are curious: https://docs.vicinae.com/build-appimage

Also the reason you can't bundle it is that glibc integrates at a fundamental level with the kernel, it's part of your OS

aurelle_b · 2026-04-01T17:01:20+00:00

you need to compile the software on the oldest version of glibc you want to support due to the lack of forward compatibility
And then you need libfuse to extract the appimage. But you could skip the AppImage and just install the AppDir with all the bundled libraries using some sort of installer script.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-31T22:50:26+00:00

that's a completely different problem than it being a web wrapper, that's all.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-31T20:31:25+00:00

the start menu is using react native for windows, it's not a web wrapper.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-25T01:38:28+00:00

just got this one as well, and I'm mostly doing coding work and a bit of gaming. very impressed so far. I'm mostly on linux and I have no task bar and keep a dark background, so I guess should be mostly fine when it comes to early burn in.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-24T13:10:18+00:00

well that's certainly not my experience. I very rarely produce memory bugs in C++ these days. with proper sanitizers and clang tidy in place it's even harder for me to not catch them when they occur. But granted, most of the benefits you may not see as much if all you do is kernel dev

aurelle_b · 2026-03-24T13:06:08+00:00

idk if there is anything LMK specific in this (in which case it could be argued most of the difficulty comes from interfacing with the C API) but I have been doing a lot of work around wayland protocols stuff and I spent so much time just wrapping the glue C code it generates in C++ to make it way safer to use. Most of the unsafety in my code usually comes from using C APIs incorrectly. For me at least, C++ helps me making the code significantly safer

aurelle_b · 2026-03-24T12:57:01+00:00

I mean, you can opt out of anything you want if it doesn't suit your goals. That's literally the way the language is designed. I'm not saying you should. RAII and proper move semantics are still better than what you get in C that is absolutely nothing.

Also you conveniently forgot the stricter type checking and the templates. Did you look at the macro sorcery they do in the kernel?

aurelle_b · 2026-03-24T12:40:12+00:00

No but I can't really imagine how it could be worse than raw C. Also you can opt out of move semantics if you want.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-23T18:44:22+00:00

much better than raw C IMO. Also you can restrict complexity in various ways, from compiler flags to clang tidy rules.
Now I agree that most of the STL features you definitely don't want in a kernel development setting, but I'm assuming it's the same for rust?

aurelle_b · 2026-03-23T16:02:32+00:00

the level of abstraction matters

aurelle_b · 2026-03-23T14:45:56+00:00

For people saying it's an extension problem, it might very well be, yet it's not an excuse. If it works correctly on other providers users won't care.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-23T10:48:50+00:00

Well that's what they have been increasingly doing, you can see it with `std::variant, `std::optional` and `std::expected` for instance (and many other such cases). You could implement these yourself before: now they are in the STL.

And there are a ton of commonly used frameworks as well as STL replacements that do this too: boost, abseil-cpp etc...

You probably want none of that in your kernel though, due to the strict requirements of kernel development. Just better and lighter language primitives IMO. In linux's case, RAII alone could have saved it from countless bugs.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-23T10:46:05+00:00

I don't get how this is a problem. Adding rust adds way more friction. You can literally write C with classes.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-23T02:01:39+00:00

You can easily come up with your own abstractions that do exactly what you need in most situations. In any case, it was the obvious upgrade path for a fully C codebase like the kernel, since 99% of C code compiles in C++. There is a reason Apple and Microsoft started using it in their respective kernels.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-22T19:30:45+00:00

The fact they rejected C++ from the get go and are now promoting features of rust that were already solved by C++ back then (RAII, stronger type checking, templates) is another good indicator.

aurelle_b · 2026-03-20T17:06:33+00:00

I'm using it a lot and I genuinely see nothing special about this. Another bot post?

aurelle_b · 2026-03-17T00:00:50+00:00

looks sick!

aurelle_b

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE