Add detection if user is using builder installed from flatpak (org.flatpak.Builder) #3

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 17:32:14 +02:00

using a bit of checking (削除) and alias expansions (削除ここまで), this should help with users who use the flatpak version of flatpak-builder (me)

using a bit of checking ~~and alias expansions~~, this should help with users who use the flatpak version of flatpak-builder (me)

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 17:33:18 +02:00

this has been tested on my machine :3c

this has been tested on my machine :3c

aylamz commented 2025年05月11日 18:58:30 +02:00

(this is out of scope for this pr i think but): i wonder if it would be better to combine these two scripts as well and have a --release flag so building a release build would be build-aux/flatpak.sh --release instead of build-aux/release-flatpak.sh. the reason why they are separate in the first place is that i don't know bash scripting that well so it seemed easier to have two scripts for this instead of trying to combine them

(this is out of scope for this pr i think but): i wonder if it would be better to combine these two scripts as well and have a `--release` flag so building a release build would be `build-aux/flatpak.sh --release` instead of `build-aux/release-flatpak.sh`. the reason why they are separate in the first place is that i don't know bash scripting that well so it seemed easier to have two scripts for this instead of trying to combine them

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 19:21:14 +02:00

oh i can help with that
the simplest way is to have a default RELEASEMODE var that equals the filename of the dev json, and then detect --release and change it with the release json
i could cook that up after you merge this in :3c

oh i can help with that the simplest way is to have a default RELEASEMODE var that equals the filename of the dev json, and then detect --release and change it with the release json i could cook that up after you merge this in :3c

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 19:22:53 +02:00

also json*

also json*

aylamz commented 2025年05月11日 19:27:31 +02:00

hm, i think it would be better to have just the flatpak version of flatpak-builder, instead of also supporting the distro package. i don't really see much point in that as flatpak needs to be installed to build Subcode anyways so might as well also install flatpak-builder as flatpak and use that. i don't know why i used the distro package in the first place to be honest..

hm, i think it would be better to have just the flatpak version of flatpak-builder, instead of also supporting the distro package. i don't really see much point in that as flatpak needs to be installed to build Subcode anyways so might as well also install flatpak-builder as flatpak and use that. i don't know why i used the distro package in the first place to be honest..

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 19:31:07 +02:00

me too, also works better cus bugs that distro versions have aren't present in the flatpak (looking at you, ubuntu)

me too, also works better cus bugs that distro versions have aren't present in the flatpak (looking at you, ubuntu)

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 19:31:25 +02:00

maybe i could close this and just work on a refactor of the script?

maybe i could close this and just work on a refactor of the script?

aylamz commented 2025年05月11日 19:38:08 +02:00

yeah, sure!

yeah, sure!

fluoriteByte commented 2025年05月11日 19:39:16 +02:00

okay, closing it and starting work on the refactor!

okay, closing it and starting work on the refactor!