Forums
Hi,
I know some projects have auto-updating Appimages. What about the QStuff Appimages?
I'm on CentOS, so using Appimages is tempting, especially if they auto-update. The alternative is building new versions by hand from time to time, since I can't seem to get most of them to build cleanly in the Fedora copr.
re. Appimage auto-update?
take note that, my stance on AppImages are great but, again in my POV. are just for starters :) one you get the notion it somewhat works as in the prospect, you should and here strongly be encouraged to build or ask for a definitive and compliant build from your distro or package provider.
on every and any conceivable GNU/Linux eco--system, that should be the ultimate rule, believe me.
cheers
I believe you! :)
I believe you! :) For one, the vee-one apps don't have lv2 versions, which is a bad thing to say the least.
re. I believe you! :)
for two :) there's no practical nor technical way to distribute LV2 plugins--or any other kind if that matters--in this containerized way of application deployment, be that AppImage, flatpack, snap(craft.io), whatever... only the stand-alone versions of the vee-ones may be delivered that way... sorry, delivering plugins is not an option there and probably won't ever be.
hyu.
cheers
I was wondering about this
I was wondering about this too. In some cases there are actually some advantages to using an appimage. If the they are in the type 2 format they can be updated from the menu if desired. This would be really great for the q-stuff.
Thanks,
Add new comment