search

NatronGitHub / Natron

Open-source video compositing software. Node-graph based. Similar in functionalities to Adobe After Effects and Nuke by The Foundry.
http://NatronGitHub.github.io
GNU General Public License v2.0
4.65k stars 338 forks source link

Natron 2.6 (Qt5) binary distrib for Linux #741

Open devernay opened 2 years ago

devernay commented 2 years ago

Natron 2.6 will probably require some rework of the script that build the distribution/installer.

We may want to abandon the Qt installer, and maybe build snap/AppImage distribs instead

rodlie commented 2 years ago

We may want to abandon the Qt installer, and maybe build snap/AppImage distribs instead

Personally I'm not a big fan of snaps etc, but that's just my opinion (mounting disk images to use an app is IMHO a bit silly). Any reason why we should remove the installer?

As long as the binary tarball is still kept I'm happy :)

YakoYakoYokuYoku commented 2 years ago

Would be a good idea to use GitHub actions for the distribs, should we give it a shot?

rodlie commented 2 years ago

Maybe.

I tried doing this with Travis, but the time limit was not high enough. GitHub support up to 6 hours I think, so we are good there. One build + tests will probably take 2 hours.

alexmyczko commented 2 years ago

I'm trying hard to get Natron built on Debian sid (where python2 and qt4 do not exist anymore), but I keep failing, no matter how hard I read: https://github.com/NatronGitHub/Natron/blob/RB-2.5/INSTALL_LINUX.md

maybe I'm missing something? But if you're interested in having Natron be part of Debian (Ubuntu, Raspbian) officially, help is welcome.

That's part of the output:

sh: 1: python2: not found
sh: 1: python2: not found
sh: 1: python2: not found
sh: 1: python2-config: not found
sh: 1: python2-config: not found
sh: 1: python2-config: not found

here's where i work: sid.ethz.ch/debian/natron/2022/ althouth openfx-* is part of it, i'm able to build -text and -misc separately: see the respective directories on the same host.

things could be sped up if any of you is also on irc... (/msg tarzeau)

devernay commented 2 years ago

Personally I'm not a big fan of snaps etc, but that's just my opinion (mounting disk images to use an app is IMHO a bit silly). Any reason why we should remove the installer?

The current installer is Qt4 and it's ugly.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of installers:

As long as the binary tarball is still kept I'm happy :)

There's no reason to remove that.

rodlie commented 2 years ago

The current installer is Qt4 and it's ugly.

There is nothing stopping us from updating it.

they often write in a filesystem shared between users, which is normally where the OS goes

It writes to $HOME as default last time I checked.

you know how to install, but the installation procedure is often impossible or hidden

We have a uninstall icon, users can also just remove the folder.

Anyway, I'm not going to argue about this, remove it if you want. Note that an AppImage might not necessarily be a better solution.

cgvirus commented 2 years ago

Folks, Snap is very limited when comes to server workstation. They are often locked and offline. Appimage is nice, but probably fall into difficulties with plugins and external OFXs (Not sure). I use appimage for most apps these days in Linux. For Natron tar ball and portable is nice IMHO.

alexmyczko commented 1 year ago

I was curious what speaks against native debian packages? It what works best really for multiple decades of years...

rodlie commented 1 year ago

I was curious what speaks against native debian packages?

We provide universal binaries for Linux, not distro specific packages.