I first met the term "standalone" when I initially made contact with
Rev. Before this, using Windows only, I had always dealt with "executables".
So now, in order to clarify certain issues connected with the subject of
installation, I would like to make a series of statements about these 2
types of binary files, and I would be grateful if you would correct me
if I am wrong.
A "standalone" means what it says. It stands alone and is completely
independent. It carries what might have originally been library
information within itself, and uses this at runtime. It does NOT refer
to what might be similar library routines already embedded in the
operating system it later runs on, that could be more or less current or
"up to date" in comparison. Consequently, if I produce a "standalone" as
a single file in Rev, everything it needs is bundled with it and it
should run on anyone's machine by simply copying it (almost anywhere) to
the HD and double-clicking on it.
My recent little experiment of producing a GUI module in RB has been
very instructive. It did not run on Mark Wieder's Kubuntu and complained
about the unavailability of a certain library routine. To me, this seems
to indicate that RB does not produce a "standalone" GUI program but an
"executable" one in the traditional Windows manner. At runtime, on a
different machine, if the libraries found in the operating system are
not 100% compatible with the libraries present in the system where the
program was created, it fails. Thus, such RB programs, different to Rev
standalones, might require a "setup" in the traditional Windows manner,
even under Linux.
If what I say is correct - AND PLEASE JUMP ON ME IMMEDIATELY IF I AM
INCORRECT - then the question of "setting up" Rev programs in Linux is
**normally** a relatively simple one. There is no damn "registry", and
all you have to do is to copy (perhaps with decompression) the program
and other files where you like on the HD, and to provide (if you can)
icons on the desktop and/or in the start menu.
Here are a few more statements that I hope you will put me right on
where necessary.
There are 8 HD paths that my little module hopes to deduce from the
operating system. On my Ubuntu Linux, here is an example:
/home/bob/Desktop/ (DesktopFolder)
/home/bob/ (PreferencesFolder)
/usr/ (SystemFolder)
/tmp/ (TemporaryFolder)
/home/bob/ (ApplicationSupportFolder)
failed (FontsFolder)
failed (StartupItemsFolder)
/home/bob/.Trash/ (TrashFolder)
And here is another example on Gentoo (with KDE):
/home/rishi/Desktop/ (DesktopFolder)
/home/rishi/ (PreferencesFolder)
/usr/ (SystemFolder)
/tmp/ (TemporaryFolder)
/home/rishi/ (ApplicationSupportFolder)
failed (FontsFolder)
failed (StartupItemsFolder)
failed (TrashFolder)
Of these, the first 5 are always the same under all distributions of
Linux, except for the user name. Therefore, as Jacqueline Landman Gay
suggested, the use of the global $HOME variable in Rev should be
sufficient to deduce these paths.
Different distributions of Linux typically vary the paths to the last 3
categories, and the RB functions for deducing them may or may not be
successful, or in other words, they are unreliable for general Linux use
and can only be employed perhaps for a limited set of distros where they
are known to succeed.
And finally, considering the above, although it would be nice if Rev
implemented the suite of reportable system path-deducing functions
through specialFolderPath in Linux, or even extended them to provide
reliable reports on the Fonts, Startup Items and Trash, there is no
greatly imperative need for it at this very moment, unless you want to
install new fonts, get your program executed automatically at OS
startup, etc.
I AWAIT YOUR CORRECTIONS. Thanks.
Bob
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
