As much as I miss Windows at time, I don't miss having to download a pre-compiled ffmpeg binary and do some bullshit to get cmd to point to it.

>>109992936
thats based doe

>>109992936
Just use a package manager like unigetui or chocolate.

>>109993331
package managers on windowes = humilation ritual
allah himself uses exes btw

>>109993453
One click installation then automatic updates vs downloading, unpacking, setting paths, ... everytime. but the former is the humiliation ritual? How much lifespan have you already wasted on manually installing stuff again and again like a retard?

>>109993470
>automatic updates
SAY IT WITH ME
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade

File: cat-say-bleh.gif (182 KB, 220x275)

182 KB GIF

>>109993475
>apt

File: windows-multiarch.png (9 KB, 333x107)

9 KB PNG

heh

>>109993489
its a critique on package managers as a whole

>>109993493
WOW

>>109993494
It really isn't but ok

>>109993507
it is

>>109992311
Nice dubs

Anyone have a replacement for spotdl?

>>109993608
OK buddy

>>109993619
you dont understand the concept of a package manager

>>109993623
>>109993619

File: 1764429158080.jpg (91 KB, 1170x1105)

91 KB JPG

>>109993630

>>109992936
>Add a <directory>/bin to your path
>Copy ffmpeg to it
>????
>Profit
What's so difficult about that?
Plus you have chocolatey and winget if you want package managers (I don't)

>>109993493
>Why?
I don't know linux simply breaks everything after it switches to 64 bit and literally nothing that is 32 bit works. Keep begging the OS devs to rewrite and compile the program you like for 64 bit.

>Why?
Why is there /bin/ and /usr/bin/ ???? What is even the difference? Do you even know? I know however do you?

How about /sbin/ and /usr/sbin/ ??????

>>109993637
>inb4 making a directory everytime is too difficult or something
Just copy it to your mingw64 or cygwin installation dumbass. You don't need to clutter your path with 90 different directories for every program you install.

Better yet, just copy it wherever and make a junction in the path if you want organization.

>>109993637
>>Add a <directory>/bin to your path
See: >>109993632
See: >>109993660

>Muh loonix
Place that binary in /usr/bin/ thank me later.

>>109993648
>????
it's not the dark ages anymore, we have usrmerge now

>>109993670
Dumbass. Some programs expect there to be a <directory>/bin, <directory>/lib etc. unix like structure.

>>109993679
>we have usrmerge now
Why? Fix your shit loonix breaks compatibility multiple times in the same year why not fix that shit?

>>109993634
>>109993619

>>109993681
>unix like structure.
honestly we should do the same functionality like we have for simple command line programs for appimages so drop it in some system folder and it just werks
>Muh structure
The OS can create a folder in ~/.config that has the same name as the appimage file

>>109993693
The issue isn't what we can. With the exception of the syscall translation layer dlls, which reside in static locations on the path anywyay, most programs can statically compile most of their dependencies.

It's that most programs don't and won't, because either they're following the standard windows model of having a set of core first party(separate from OS functions) and third party apis, which they dynamically link to(or putting those dlls in the same directory as the executable), or they're following the ubiquitous unix structure since they are primarily developed for Linux/BSD and doing extra work to build a separate structure for Windows is unnecessary.

>The OS can create a folder in ~/.config that has the same name as the appimage file
Windows programs already do that in %appdata% or localappdata and that is also not relevant to what I said at all. Some programs expect some dependencies to be in "$0"/../lib, and there's nothing you can do about it. Even modifying the source is extremely painful and completely unsustainable in most cases.

package managers are for tech illeterates
imagine not being able to download a file and then move it somewhere

>>109993750
I see you do not understand what an appimage is.
>Some programs expect some dependencies
Not understanding an appimage!

Daily reminder that the correct thing to download from the website is the appimage not the 15 different .deb and other shit.

>>109993756
you give no value to your time then

>>109993799
who hurt you

>>109993773
I know what an appimage is dumbass.
I'm saying appimages aren't made for windows because that isn't the windows way.

If you want your program to be self contained (You can't because you have to link it dynamically to kernel32.dll and other system dlls), the idiomatic way on windows is to put all the dependencies in your program's directory. It doesn't have to be, but that's the windows standard.

>but you CAN have appimage like executables
You CAN, but good luck getting anyone to do it. Appimages are a good idea on linux because protocols and apis change rapidly, sometimes even within the same major version and more often than not, only one version can be installed in the "default" location every program looks for first.

Common windows APIs and protocols are very resitant to change, and when they do change with a major versipn bump (think directx for example), the library gets a new location and name on the path so there are never conflicts.

It's an environment standard, not actually technological merit on any end, but windows program actually like dynamic linking due to the culture on windows while linux programs don't.

You don't have appimages on windows because people don't need them. You can use the more stable, resitant apis and protocols as a shared library and you can include the more finicky dlls in the program directory as that gets searched before the path when autolinking.

The only downside is that you can't directly just copy the executable to path, but you can make junctions, or just have an installer that auto adds the program to path and registry.

>>109993843
>I know what an appimage is dumbass.
clearly you dont

>>109993846
Sure. I don't understand the basic bitch concept of an executable file also carrying dependencies and config information within itself. Thanks for informing me.

I'll try to do better next time.

>>109993856
>dependencies
thats where youre wrong

>>109993843
>I'm saying appimages aren't made for windows because that isn't the windows way.
????
Thread about linux
> appimages aren't made for windows

>Windows
Sorry i forgot to mention I am trying to get out of windows since I am not interested in running giga NSA spyware framework that on top of it has some pseudo OS named windows.

And I am not joking here if I run a handful of automated scripts like gallery-dl to download things then windows lags itself to hell and I see Microsoft antivirus(or what is the name of that shit) taking up 95% of the CPU with not way to disable that cancer.

Like I can not run scripts because windows will piss and shit itself that there is a virus or something and I must stop downloading and writing to the SSD 10 files every second! Not a problem on loonix.

>in windows
In windows 12 you will be only able to use the windows store to install things.

>>109993862
I am really not interested in playing pedantry with you, thanks. But yes, dependencies.

>>109993870
And you should read what this reply chain is about. Start here >>109992936
Good for you that you don't use Windows. It's not like I'm hating on Linuxes or BSDs or anything.

>>109993870
>I see Microsoft antivirus(or what is the name of that shit) taking up 95% of the CPU with not way to disable that cancer.
Also I'll tell you a cool trick.
You can take away executable permissions from SYSTEM and TRUSTEDINSTALLER for any system program you don't want running on your system.

>>109993887
>I am really not interested in playing pedantry with you, thanks. But yes, dependencies.
translating
>i know nothing about anything but im gonna pretennd i do to sound smart

>>109993929
Exactly, thanks for filling in for me. I was drawing blanks on my words, clearly.

>>109993936
>he now resorts to using AI to win an imaginary argument in his head

>>109993887
>And you should read what this reply chain is about. Start here >>109992936
????
>As much as I miss Windows at time, I don't miss having to download a pre-compiled ffmpeg binary and do some bullshit to get cmd to point to it.
This clearly is talking about installing things in linux.
Appimages are for linux.

This discussion is over.
You are chatGPT!

>>109993941
I didn't know only AIs were receiving licenses to be sarcastic in Bongland anymore. Rest assured, I live in a better place.
My condolences anon.

>>109993951
using the advanced chatgpt huh

>>109993947
I said
>start here
Not
>read this and only this
But, really I'm late for flame wars on >>>/tg/ now honey. I know you're hungry for attention but I'll take care of you later.
XOXO

>>109992936
putting a binary on path is not unique to windows
stupid linux sycophant

>>109993493
if you want an explanation;
originally there was just system, since windows was entirely 16-bit, then when we got 32-bit components we got system32, makes sense so far.
but then we were on 32-bit windows for a long time, unlike 16-bit windows which was relatively short-lived (technically it was around for 10 years but nobody used windows before 3.x really, which was only a few years before windows 95, the first 32-bit windows)
so we had way more 32-bit software than 16-bit by the time 64-bit was put on the table. lots of software assumed libraries went in system32, because they did. also it's usually quite trivial to compile 32-bit software as 64-bit with little to no code changes, unlike 16-bit.
so to keep it as compatible as possible, "system32" became the 64-bit library folder, so programs can keep using the same name, and "sysWOW64" became the 32-bit library folder, which stands for system Windows-On-Windows64, that is the name of the system that can run 32-bit windows programs on 64-bit windows, which internally presents that folder to 32-bit programs as "system32" as well, so actually both kinds of programs think they're using "system32".

why didn't they just make 64-bit programs think they're using system32 and direct them to system64?

iunno