I would like to propose some changes in the command line of an AppImage:
--appimage-extract ==> -e
--appimage-mount ==> -m
etc.
The “<”, “[”, “]” and “>” marks are used to improve visibility and they should be skipped while typing)
* -m <path_to_mount> <mount_parameters>
* -e <path_to_extract>
etc.
Above changes will improve the ease of use of the AppImage
No. Because the payload application may already be using those.
Actually, the “payload” as you call it, (in my case) does not use it, plus the given options were just a example proposals.
My idea was to remove from the “–appimage-command” the “appimage” part.
Additionally, the additional parameters for this commands would allow users to decide how and where to extract, mount, run it, etc.
Forcing the AppImage to be mounted and run from the /tmp folder causes issues, with I will describe in a separate report.
The application inside the AppImage may use any command line arguments and parameters it wants to use. So, in order not to conflict with those, all commands added by the AppImage system are prefixed with --appimage-.... This is intentional.
If we would use -e, -m,… then those would no longer be available to the application inside the AppImage. For some applications this would be very bad.
So we will not change this.
Hello and thanks for the answer. I understand your conterns that the given as an example parameters may conflict with the app inside of the AppImage, but I thought about that problem as well and had probably found a solution for it, but it would need some cosmetic changes in the source of AppImage.
How about do make that while creating the AppImage, it would be created a launcher with would run the program inside of AppImage with needed parameters, so the AppImage won’t run directly the program. This would prevent the parameters conflict.
Additionally, there is a issue that the Appimage is beeing mounted with invalid permissions, with makes impossible to do anything (even change the ownership and permissions, don’t mention to do anything with the files)
I don’t see how this would solve it. Let’s say the application uses -e. Now AppImage wants to also use -e for --appimage-extract. Now what should happen if the user runs the AppImage with -e? It’s a logic problem, not a code problem. Hence, the seldom-used AppImage-specific command line arguments are all prefixed with --appimage-.... This is called “namespacing”.
Please give more details, in a separate post. Thanks!
Additionally, there is a issue that the Appimage is beeing mounted with invalid permissions, with makes impossible to do anything (even change the ownership and permissions, don’t mention to do anything with the files)
Please give more details, in a separate post. Thanks!
Hello. I had created a separate topic for the issue as you requested.