Some of the other repos like libs-gui have GitHub workflows that use a script to pull libobcj2, tools-make and all the needed things. I was thinking you could do the same for the individual app repos.
Joseph Maloney Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for iOS. -------- Original Message -------- On Tuesday, 05/26/26 at 11:24 [email protected] wrote: > Yes that’s an option, but a lot of the requirements are the same (objc > runtime, base, gui, back, the helper tools, the config file etc) so there’s > also value in having a shared process that all apps can opt into. I don’t > know that gnustep-make is the right place for this, but it has some useful > attributes. Another option is to use one of the other “packaging” outputs > like deb and then a package converter to build the AppImage. > > Cheers, > Graham. > >> On 26 May 2026, at 17:18, Joseph Maloney <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> That's really cool. I wonder if it would make more sense to make a reusable >> workflow that could apply to specific repos like apps-easydiff, >> apps-projectcenter, apps-gorm instead of tools-make though? That way you >> just go to those repos, get the appimages, etc. >> >> Joseph Maloney >> >> Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) secure email. >> >> On Tuesday, May 26th, 2026 at 11:12 AM, [email protected] >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> HI all, >>> >>> I used some time today to prototype this in GNUstep make, and successfully >>> built a portable image of EasyDiff: >>> >>> https://github.com/gnustep/tools-make/pull/70 >>> >>> I think lots of caveats (documented in the PR description), but it >>> basically works. It would be nice to have CI that builds non-flattened >>> AppImages that work on multiple architectures, for example. >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> >>> Graham. >>> >>>> On 25 May 2026, at 12:37, [email protected] via >>>> Discussion list for the GNUstep programming environment >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>>> Am 25.05.2026 um 10:41 schrieb Riccardo Mottola >>>>> <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> [email protected] via Discussion list for the GNUstep >>>>> programming environment wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think, GNUstep needs lower hurdles for entering our ecosystem and so I >>>>>> had the thought „What if we distribute the GNUstep dev tools as >>>>>> AppImage?“, e.g. bundling everything needed (basic GNUstep installation; >>>>>> compiler, linker, make; Gorm.app and ProjectCenter.app; some example >>>>>> code) into an AppImage like PikoPixel did, so that our App can be run >>>>>> everywhere AppImages are supported. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you think about the idea, would it help our cause? >>>>>> >>>>>> What would be the prerequisites for such an attempt? >>>>>> >>>>>> How much work would it be? >>>>> >>>>> I don't know about AppImages but GNUstep supports packing everything into >>>>> a single directory containing Application, frameworks, themes, >>>>> preferences into a single folder. >>>>> >>>>> It is useful to ship a single application with its environment, I use it >>>>> with success on windows and have scripts for that. Very convenient. >>>>> Theoretically it can also contain more than one app. >>>>> >>>>> It is instead not very smart having several directories for each app, >>>>> since that way you have multiple runtime installations and running them >>>>> in concurrency may cause issues (beyond space waste). I don't know how >>>>> AppImages would handle this. >>>> >>>> I mentioned AppImages because those are a recognized way to distribute >>>> apps für Linux (and BSD? I don’t know). Yeah, they somewhat reinvented the >>>> wheel after OpenSteps app bundle, but they still seem to be the way >>>> commonly used. Please correct me if I am wrong. >>>> >>>> Despite all this I am off course open to other but similar easy ways to >>>> distribute (binary) apps to users. >>>> >>>>> -R >>>> >>>> kind regards, >>>> >>>> Lars
