> Are we talking about the same autotools? Yes. Instead of figuring out how to do something particular with every single software package, I can do a --with-foo or --without-bar or --prefix=/opt/baz-1.2.3, and be fairly confident that it will work the way I want. Certainly with package managers or (FreeBSD) Ports a lot is taken care of behind the scenes, but the above would also help... - Source: Hacker News / 2 months ago

What you're looking for sounds like AppImages (https://appimage.org/) . I have only used them while downloading games from itch.io, etc. (since I prefer package managers) but they seem to work out of the box on popular distros. - Source: Hacker News / 4 months ago

Ideally a new instance of the application is installed for each user. This also provides better isolation if one user upgrades/removes/breaks their application instance. I, for one, have really come around to the AppImage model [0] in the last couple of years. [0] https://appimage.org/. - Source: Hacker News / 5 months ago

There is AppImage[1], which packs a lot of stuff into a SquashFS filesystem, appends it to the executable, so everything is in one file. [1] https://appimage.org. - Source: Hacker News / 10 months ago

Nah I think yall just hating appimage. Real gold standard. Source: 11 months ago

Although I haven't used plugins feature myself yet, this does sound like the perfect use case for them. Not every patient needs to access every single source. With plugins you can load only the source (or few sources) that they actually need. You can still use something like https://appimage.org/ to give them "a single binary", but will actually contain your slim binary and all the plugins. Source: 11 months ago