Timeline for Why isn't installing with apt/yum to a home directory a mainstream feature?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 5, 2019 at 15:09 | answer | added | kemotep | timeline score: 3 | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 12:53 | comment | added | TheMeaningfulEngineer | @mosvy install binaries as a regular user. How? By manually copying a statically compiled binary to your home dir and executing it? your friend bill has already installed it That's not the use case I'm aiming at is that bill and jack both have their own separate binaries (with the libs that were missing on the system) | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 12:30 | comment | added | user313992 | I don't know wtf "appimages" are, but for the "or similar" part it has ALWAYS been possible to use as install binaries as a regular user. I have some 20 or 30 versions of firefox, jdk and chrome, and I've never compiled any of them from source. As to why sysadmin-tools like package managers should be run by the ... sysadmin, I don't think that it warrants any discussion: good luck designing a package manager where when user jack calls apt-get install vim, it gets back: "no need to install vim; your friend bill has already installed it in /home/bill/.local/". | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 12:25 | comment | added | Ulrich Schwarz | Look at the mount man page – noexec means it may have been difficult for you to run a (possibly CPU-expensive) binary from your home directory on a shared system even if you had access to a compiler. | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 11:24 | history | asked | TheMeaningfulEngineer | CC BY-SA 4.0 |