You must log in or register to comment.
I mean. I like compiling stuff myself but when I have to update 100 tools and all are source code to be compiled, then I can’t use my pc for a whole day or so.
I’ve failed in my duties as a penguin and am not nerdy enough to get the joke. could a more pious user explain?
It’s a reference to a meme from yesterday:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/51545047
We have officially reached circlejerk point.
we’re doing WHAT in a circle?
Just write your own PKGBUILD. It’s easy.
How?
Ugh, with a keyboard and a text editor. Duh!
I guess it’s saying that Arch people use the AUR and PKGBUILD files. Idk exactly. It might even be a reference to the (somewhat) recent malware incident with the
*-patch-binbrowser packages. I must admit that I don’t really find it funny. But maybe I too am missing the point here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Anyway, in case you don’t know, and wish to use Arch at some point, the content on AUR is user submitted, and hence security cannot be guaranteed. People do report malicious packages, and it’s safe in general. But always read the PKGBUILD before installing anything, just in case something silly is going on.
i did know, but thanks for telling me
I’d say it’s more about that Linux packages aren’t (distributed as) compiled binary installers (appimages are executable
s, but no installers), like msi or exe installers for Windows, but (as) essentially plain archives.MSI files are actually comparable to Linux packages, from what I understand, in that the program that does the installing (and which gets root/admin permissions for that) comes with the OS itself.
And AppImage files are fun. They contain a filesystem of their own. This filesystem need to get mounted and the contained executable needs to be started in such a way that it thinks the mounted filesystem is the root filesystem.
So, AppImage does need somewhat of a runtime environment and isn’t just a plain executable. But for this particular comparison, they’re still most comparable to self-contained executables, in that they do not need root permissions, because they don’t need to install themselves.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Installer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppImage#Design
MSI files are actually comparable to Linux packages, from what I understand, in that the program that does the installing (and which gets root/admin permissions for that) comes with the OS itself.
Neat. I’ve always wondered why e.g. 7zip is distributed as both, MSI and exe installer. Now that makes somewhat sense to me.
The arch user asked for a feature they don’t want and won’t use
Just get it from the AUR, make sure to add -patch-bin to the package name for best results.
“Aur”? Says here in my notes something about “Pacman” but that can’t be right…
Pacman is Arch’s package manager. The AUR is the “Arch User Repository”, which is just an alternative repository where users can upload whatever they want. (And the comment you responded to is sarcastic, because it happens that there’s malware on the AUR.)
Just get it from the AUR.
That sentence has a very different meaning to Romanians :))
