It’s been a long day and I’m probably not in the best state of mind to be asking this question, but have you guys solved packaging yet?

I want to ship an executable with supporting files in a compressed archive, much like the Windows exe-in-a-zip pattern. I can cross-compile a Win32 C program using MinGW that will always use baseline Win32 functionality, but if I try to build for Linux I run into the whole dependency versioning situation, specifically glibc fixing its symbol version to whichever Linux I happen to be building from at the time. But if I try to static link with musl, the expectation is that everything is static linked, including system libraries that really shouldn’t be.

AppImage is in the ballpark of what I’m looking for, and I’ve heard that Zig works as a compatibility-enhancing frontend if you’re compiling C. I’d just like something simple that runs 99% of the time for non-technical end users and isn’t bloated with dependencies I can’t keep track of. (No containers.) Is this easily achievable?

  • brenno@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’ve built a Dockerfile that does a hybrid of solution 1 and AppImage building.

    It compiles the software with an older Debian release, then packages the software in a Python AppImage with necessary dependencies installed and the proper dynamic libs copied.

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Using containers for build environments is probably my favorite use of containers.

      I have an application I build for Linux, Mac and Windows and frankly building two or three Linux builds in containers is easier than the Windows and Mac builds alone. A github action automates it easily.