Linux download via AppImage

[SteveBaker 2]

I see that CURA for Linux is now only available by downloading an "appimage" file.   I know that this is very convenient for you guys as software developers - but your decision has some drastic implications.

 

AppImage is designed to be only ONE way to get Linux packages - typically something someone uses when they just want to try something out without actually installing it.

 

For long term use, it's a disaster.

 

Linux systems use "package managers" - I'm using Ubuntu and the "apt" system...but the "deb" system is OK too.   The problem is that Linux users have an expectation that their system will be kept up to date with the latest versions of software automatically.   I have several dozen large applications like yours - and there is no way I'm going out and updating all of them manually ever couple of weeks by going to a bunch of websites and downloading a bunch of appimage files.    I just say "sudo apt update" / "sudo apt upgrade" and everything is at the latest revision.

 

Cura 3.1.0 is the latest version in public repositories - so if I leave my package manager to handle it - I'm stuck on that revision.

 

Using appimage as the only means to get new versions is also dangerous.   You depend on a lot of other libraries and such that are stored within the appimage.  If one of those has a security issue or some other major problem - it's not going to get updated in a timely manner - and THAT means the CURA could be the source of security issues in the future.   Using apt to upgrade things means that library fixes get update as soon as they possibly can.

 

So - **PLEASE** make the necessary ".dep" and apt installer files for the major Linux repositories to mirror...because otherwise the vast majority of Linux users will be stuck on CURA 3.1.0 forever - which is not good for anyone.

 

 

[gr5 1,605]

Yes that would be nice!  Cura is made with qt I think.  I'm not sure if it's easy to make repositories with qt?

 

I use ubuntu and appImage and it works well for me but it would be nice if I could use apt-get.

 

The nice thing about appImage is I can have multiple versions of Cura.  There are forked versions of Cura that have critical features I need sometimes that aren't merged into the main branch.

[nallath 878]

We used to have .deb packages, but it was a complete nightmare to maintain. On paper it all works, but in practice, not so much.

 

The reason why it's so hard is that we use a ton of libraries that work together. In theory minor version increases should play well together, so it shouldn't matter if you have version 5.11 or 5.14 of a given library, as long as it's higher than 5.11. In practice however it could very well be that 5.14 has some issue with version 3.2 of another library (but not with 3.3 on certain operating systems).

With a .deb we simply can't control this, since each operating system decides what versions of a package they support. 

 

I'm very much aware of the advantages of using .deb files, but as it stands, I simply can't defend the extra (continued) effort this would take for us to support it.

[SteveBaker 2]

There were .apt builds available up to CURA 3.1.0 - but evidently, that's where it stopped.

 

* https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-i-have-a-problem-with-appimages-on-linux/

* https://www.reddit.com/r/linux4noobs/comments/kevz58/isnt_appimage_just_as_bad_as_an_exe/

 

But I guess CURA is open-sourced, so all that's really needed is for someone out in the community to build a version and throw it into a repository someplace.

 

[SteveBaker 2]

On 2/25/2021 at 10:28 AM, gr5 said:

The nice thing about appImage is I can have multiple versions of Cura.  There are forked versions of Cura that have critical features I need sometimes that aren't merged into the main branch.

 

The idea is that developers provide BOTH an appimage (for short term convenience) and a repository version for stable builds for long-term users.   So you could still have multiple appimages if you need that.

[nallath 878]

15 hours ago, SteveBaker said:

There were .apt builds available up to CURA 3.1.0 - but evidently, that's where it stopped.

 

* https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-i-have-a-problem-with-appimages-on-linux/

* https://www.reddit.com/r/linux4noobs/comments/kevz58/isnt_appimage_just_as_bad_as_an_exe/

 

But I guess CURA is open-sourced, so all that's really needed is for someone out in the community to build a version and throw it into a repository someplace.

 

We didn't develop / maintain those builds. Someone else did. The problems with maintaining it also why it stopped.

 

There are parties that provide something like apt builds for Arch linux. The amount of issues we get reported from that is pretty staggering.

I personally don't share the concerns that the people that posted the links have with appimages. The same could also be true for software provided via apt. Cura is also open source, so you could just see if it's doing something nefarious.