I have observed in the downloads section that Krita's lastest version is not available for debian.

I have ubuntu, so currently, I have no problem, but I am thinking on trying a different distro that is based on debian, (well, it's steam os, you got me ), and the lacking of Krita for it, is stopping me.

I would like to ask if there are plans on developing the lastest versions (2.8/2.9) for debian and/or steam os.

Thank you.

it's more a question of packaging, KDE sw isn't developed for a particular distro, the distro takes the source and packages it based on their packaging system but there is the possibility of a newer version of an app requiring a newer version of KDE then the distro supports

you should determine what versions of KDE and Krita Steamos provides (assuming it does) and based on those answers you might need to think about compiling from source

jmolinero wrote:I would like to ask if there are plans on developing the lastest versions (2.8/2.9) for debian and/or steam os.

I'm no pro, but AFAIK it's the Ubuntu that is based on Debian, and Ubuntu uses the 'apt' package manager from Debian.

So any Ubuntu instructions should work for Debian.

http://dimula73.blogspot.de/2014/06/kri ... again.html

google01103 wrote:it's more a question of packaging, KDE sw isn't developed for a particular distro, the distro takes the source and packages it based on their packaging system but there is the possibility of a newer version of an app requiring a newer version of KDE then the distro supports

Ok, i didn't know that. In the downloads section, it is only stated that: "The current version supported for debian is 2.6". That made me think the problem was some incompatibility from Krita, not from the upgrading of the packaging system. (Curiosly, a similar thing happened to me because recently, I've had to wait some days until I have been able to use v2.8.3 on ubuntu).


But folks, if this is so, Krita has a problem. Because they release a newest version of the software, but they don't have control of the distribution of that software. In fact, they're having to wait for an intermediary to distribute their work, which would make to happen that... well, what it is currently happening... that in certain cases, users won't be able to get the software. (as it happens with 2.8 for debian).

Asking a user to compile the code is just crazy.

Can't be considered to distribute the software the way Blender does?

Blender skips the repositories, and the official distro's store, and simple give all the needed software and code, on a self extracting winzip folder. You only unzip the folder and place it where you want, and you can use it straight out of the box, clicking the app's launcher. No repositories, no installation, no problems.

Maybe I'm saying something silly, but if someone wants his software to be used as most as possible,it should be a very important thing to assure sure that users doesn't have to face these problems.

To me, this would be even more important than every other feature. That's just my opinion.

You seemed to have hijacked your own thread

You should open a new thread and ask if it's possible (it may not be) and if possible why not make available a static version like Blender does. KDE does not, afaik, package any sw it just provides the source code and that just because you can package sw that way doesn't mean all can be so packaged or that there aren't reasons why it's not optimal (possible downsides may include memory usage, performance and resources needed to do it)

If the distributions can provide packages that's generally better. It will give you proper menu entries, proper file associations, and a well-defined way to uninstall and update the application (plus various minor advantages such as dynamic linking which reduces memory usage). Blender's binary packages (for linux, at least) are a kludgy workaround for outdated distributions, and I would be surprised if Blender's developers would think differently.

Of course, SteamOS is a system intended for distribution of exactly such binary packages -- which makes sense for commercial games, but not so much for the typical OSS project such as krita.

On top of that there's the technical issue of making fully static builds, I'm not sure how easy that is to accomplish for a typical KDE app (if somebody has information about that, I'd be interested in reading it btw).

As google01103 said, _typically_ KDE projects don't do any kind of packaging, it's all left to the distributions -- we just publish the sources. I guess krita is not a typical project in that regard though

Greetings!

google01103 wrote:
You should open a new thread and ask if it's possible (it may not be) and if possible why not make available a static version like Blender does.

Right at this moment, all which I wanted to point on this issue has been pointed.
We will have to wait and see.

In regards to making fully static KDE applications - that is impossible as far as I know, at least in the KDE 4 series. With changes to plugin loading in KF5, it is possible that one could compile everything into one binary I suspect - assuming Qt 5 supports embedding plugins into the executable.

It probably doesn't rule you out from having a dynamically linked version of it though and having a wrapper to ensure the environment is sterile and limited to your jailed installation (but you would have to drag along numerous other things like shared-mime-database).

I think it should be possible to have a version of Krita that's packaged its using the LSB standard -- it would contain all the extra dependencies. It would give kind of the same thing as blender -- a standalone package that runs on all linux distributions. It's going to be a huge amount of work, though, especially to ensure there are no conflicts with already installed versions of those dependencies. We might want to do that for steamos in any case, or for the USB stick with Krita 2.9 which is a kickstarter reward.

I don't think it's worth it to try and create a fully static build of Krita, I don't believe it would be possible at all.

In the past, we made package using klik and autopackage and similar technologies, but all of those had problems, all of these were hard to maintain and gained us relatively little.

boudewijn wrote:I think it should be possible to have a version of Krita that's packaged its using the LSB standard -- it would contain all the extra dependencies. It would give kind of the same thing as blender -- a standalone package that runs on all linux distributions. It's going to be a huge amount of work...

If its gonna be a huge amount of work, at least, consider it to do it after 2.9 gets out, and with time, of course.
I simply say that this is a more important thing than it seems, because it rewards the app's distribution.

For example, I finally moved to Steamos. I'm writting this from my steamos, and I can assure this is not more than a tunned 7.1 Debian.

My feelings are like, "I have put money into Krita's 2.9 kickstarter, and I'm not going to be able to use it."
While I just could use blender in less than 2 seconds after extracting the folder, the farther I have achieved with Krita, is to get 2.7.5 through jessie unstable repos.

I tried to install 2.9 using David Revoy's method, and compile it, but I had a problem with "missing essential files", that prevented me from using it, and then, after making a broken packages cleaning and a apt-get upgrade to make another try, the apt-get upgrade operation, destroyed my entire steamos installation (I think I chose a bad option in the upgrading operation)...I have spend 4 days trying to fix this without success, and In resume, things can not be this way...because others will be in my same situation, when Krita becomes more and more popular.

This is just my feedback. Of course, do what you think it's the better, and thaks for this great app.

Well, one reason we want to have an LSB-compliant Krita package for Linux is because that way, we can add Linux to the support platforms for Krita Gemini on Steam...