4 ms·
I read "standalone executable that will run anywhere without being installed" to mean that it's a single executable file that you can move around, it doesn't dr
by kenbellows 12y ago
I read "standalone executable that will run anywhere without being installed" to mean that it's a single executable file that you can move around, it doesn't drop a mess of `.so`s or config files all over your system, and it doesn't need to be in any particular directory to work properly, but NOT that it has no dependencies. As you alluded to, it's nearly impossible to package any non-trivial program (especially anything with a GUI) into a single executable with every dependency statically linked; it would be enormous and unwieldy. So defining "standalone" in terms of the number of new files entering your system (only one) is, IMHO, the more useful definition.
- gw 12y agoYeah that's a good way of putting it (I'm the developer). I intend to bundle the GTK libraries in the Mac version when I'm ready to start pre-building it.
- 616c 12y agoI just want to say I am way below your skill level, and I mean no disrepect. I see a lot of standalone (especially playing with Haskell binaries, like pandoc). To use one such example, even Pandoc and company are not even self-contained. The problem is I am not sure where other people in Linux communities draw the line. It is not a really serious thing. Still I applaud you and other Rustaceans. It is nice to see fully formed GUI apps in Rust, because it makes it look to outsiders that news of stabilizing releases means people are really investing building useful tools.