Nightly Subsurface AppImage for most Linux distributions

[Dirk Hohndel]

> On Oct 17, 2015, at 8:44 AM, probono <probono at puredarwin.org> wrote:
> 
>> We make binaries for Windows and OS X.
> 
> subsurface-4.5.exe for Windows is 83.5 MB in size, Subsurface-4.5.dmg
> for Mac weighs in at 38.3 MB. Both bundle not only the application
> itself, but also the required Qt libraries that the application needs
> to run. Also included are dependency libraries like libssh2.1.dylib
> and libzip.2.dylib.
> 
>> We basically don't make binaries for Linux. Why? Because binaries for Linux desktop applications is a major f*ing pain in the ass. Right. You don't make binaries for Linux. You make binaries for Fedora 19, Fedora 20, maybe there's even like RHEL 5 from ten years ago, you make binaries for debian stable, or actually you don't make binaries for debian stable because debian stable has libraries that are so old that anything that was built in the last century doesn't work. But you might make binaries for debian... whatever the codename is for unstable. And even that is a major pain because (...) debian has those rules that you are supposed to use shared libraries.
> 
> So why not use the same approach as on Windows and OS X, namely, treat
> the base operating system as a platform on top of which we tun the
> application we care about. This means that we have to bundle the
> application with all their dependencies that are not part of the base
> operating system. Welcome application bundles,
> https://blogs.gnome.org/tvb/2013/12/10/application-bundles-for-glade/.
> 
> Here https://github.com/probonopd/AppImages/releases is is an AppImage
> of Subsurface, built from the latest git sources in an automated
> process (https://github.com/probonopd/AppImages/blob/master/recipes/subsurface.sh).
> Just download, chmod a+x, and run. With 73.3 MB,
> Subsurface_4.5.0_x86_64.AppImage is roughly in line with the binaries
> for Windows and OS X. With some more hand-tuning, the size could
> probably be brought further down.

This is AWESOME. I have been hoping that someone would do that. I had looked
at the AppImage stuff but just don't have the time to try all the cool stuff.

> So far, the AppImage has been verified to run on
> * CentOS Linux 7 (Core) - CentOS-7.0-1406-x86_64-GnomeLive.iso
> * CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) - CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveGNOME-1503.iso
> * Fedora 22 (Twenty Two) - Fedora-Live-Workstation-x86_64-22-3.iso
> * Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS (Trusty Tahr) - ubuntu-14.04.1-desktop-amd64.iso
> * Ubuntu 15.04 (Vivid Vervet) - ubuntu-15.04-desktop-amd64.iso
> * openSUSE-Tumbleweed-GNOME-Live-x86_64-Current.iso
> * Antergos - antergos-2014.08.07-x86_64.iso
> * elementary OS 0.3 Freya - elementary_OS_0.3_freya_amd64.iso
> 
> Most likely it will run on others, too - and with some fine-tuning of
> the recipe (i.e., bundling additional dependencies) on even more.
> Probably the recipe is not perfect yet and might be missing some
> stuff, but that should be easy to fix.

I will ABSOLUTELY help with tuning this. You did something that I wanted
to do for so long. THANK YOU.

>> And if you don't use shared libraries, getting your package in, like, is just painful.
> 
> "Getting your package in" means that the distribution accepts the
> package as part of the base operating system. For an application, that
> might not be desired at all. As long as we can package the application
> in a way that it seamlessly runs on top of the base operating system.

That's pretty much where we are. We have started to ask distros to not
ship Subsurface (we are, however, happy to work with distros who want
to ship a Subsurface that is built just like the binaries we create - for example
ArchLinux has such a build and Fedora may get one...)

[removed some stuff I completely agree with to keep this shorter]

>> And then all the distributions come in and they screw it all up. Because they break binary compatibility left and right.
> 
> Luckily, binaries built on older distributions tend to still work on
> newer distributions. At least that has been my experience over the
> last decade with building application bundles using AppImageKit, and
> before that, klik.

I have some mixed experiences there. For example I happen to still have
a Gtk version of Subsurface in one of my trees. And I cannot get it to run
whatever I try :-(

>> They update glibc and everything breaks. (...)
> 
> There is a way around this
> https://blogs.gnome.org/tvb/2013/12/14/application-bundles-revisited/
> although not many people actually care to use the workaround (yet).
> 
>> So that's my rant. And that's what I really fundamentally think needs to change for Linux to work on the desktop because you can't have applications writers to do fifteen billion different versions.
> 
> AppImage to the rescue. The AppImage format is a standardized format
> for packaging applications in a way that allows them to run on target
> systems without further modification. The AppImage format (which
> basically is an ISO that gets mounted when you run the applicaiton)
> has been created with specific objectives in mind, which are explained
> in more detail in the AppImageKit documentation at
> http://portablelinuxapps.org/docs/1.0/AppImageKit.pdf
> 
> 1. Be Simple
> 2. Maintain binary compatibility
> 3. Be distribution-agostic
> 4. Remove the need for installation
> 5. Keep apps compressed all the time
> 6. Allow to put apps anywhere
> 7. Make applications read-only
> 8. Do not require recompilation (not always desired or possible)
> 9. Keep base operating system untouched
> 10. Do not require root
> 
> I would welcome application developers to pick this up as an easy way
> to provide nightly builds that run (almost) everywhere and leave no
> traces in the base operating system. Some upstream projects like Glade
> (https://github.com/GNOME/glade/tree/master/build/linux), Gstreamer
> (http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/gstreamer-bugs/2014-May/124914.html),
> and Pitivi (http://pitivi.ecchi.ca/bundles/) have been using
> AppImages. There are more sophisticated approaches in the works like
> http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
> and https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/SandboxedApps, but in the meantime
> here is something reasonably simple, universal, and robust that works
> today.
> 
> Your thoughts are highly welcome.

Amazing. Wonderful. More power to you. Let's work together and create
a well tested and optimized AppImage for Subsurface-4.5 and another one
for the daily build.

I am a bit busy again today with other stuff but will try to look into this as
soon as possible.

Thanks you for the work you've done there. Very very appreciated.

/D