Is it possible to have both installed?

yes. 3.0 is only available as a zip.

Thanks!

I was gonna ask the same question... what zip? Where is it?

At the bottom of this page you have the download links: https://krita.org/item/krita-2-9-11-and ... pha-build/

The zip is for windows, ofc. On linux just right click on the downloaded file > "preferences" > "permissions" > check "allow executing file as program". Now you can just open the downloaded version of krita with double clicking this file.

Thank you very much!

Never heard of Appimage before, but it works like a charm.
Why isn't there a link on the download page? Is there an archive link with similar files for other versions?

leonine wrote:Thank you very much!

Never heard of Appimage before, but it works like a charm.
Why isn't there a link on the download page? Is there an archive link with similar files for other versions?

because it's pre-alpha. We never put betas and alphas directly on the download page, because we have noticed that even with giant flashing warning signs with *warning warning - this is UNSTABLE AND MAY CRASH*, people still just download unstable version and try to do production work in them... and then they get angry at us when it crashes.

So instead we only put those in the news posts.

To make appimages, all dependencies need to be build from scratch(so they can be bundled, the file is just an iso), so there's no appimage for 2.9 as building all those dependancies cost boud about 3-4 months of suffering with cmake. He made a write up here.

TheraHedwig wrote:because it's pre-alpha. We never put betas and alphas directly on the download page, because we have noticed that even with giant flashing warning signs with *warning warning - this is UNSTABLE AND MAY CRASH*, people still just download unstable version and try to do production work in them... and then they get angry at us when it crashes.

So instead we only put those in the news posts.

To make appimages, all dependencies need to be build from scratch(so they can be bundled, the file is just an iso), so there's no appimage for 2.9 as building all those dependancies cost boud about 3-4 months of suffering with cmake. He made a write up here.

Yeah, it's true that my first launch of the Appimage resulted in a crash when opening a file, which doesn't happen much often with 2.8.
I think I had less than 10 crashs yet, it's very stable (if I don't count the many crashes I had when trying to save a file with 0B available on disk memory).

The write-up is quite interesting, and I really emphasize with that, fragmentation certainly is a big problem on Linux, and you can't say as with Apple "all of users have to the same", and them nodding blissfully...
But the 3 months of work seems to be related to getting the whole system in place, not just generating a specific Appimage? Or even then, it's still really time consuming to generate a specific Appimage?