Installing Love 0.7.2 on Linux Mint

[tentus]

Same as Jasoco for me. I accidentally downloaded the Love installer once. I deleted it and downloaded the zip immediately.

If it's not self-contained I tend to shy away from it, which you can see reflected in my programs of choice, like Notepad++, WinSCP, etc. I use a fraction of my hard drive space. Program size has not been a consideration for me in over a decade. The ability to jump over to a thumb drive and continue working is a consideration.

[Jasoco]

I don't care if an app needs to be installed. If it's required, it's required. Like PhotoShop. I'd rather it be a simple install like Pixelmator, but I guess PhotoShop likes to pollute the HD with a lot of shared libraries for all its other apps so it makes sense. If it's just a simple program that won't need to share files, self-contained is good enough.

And OS X's package-based application nature is convenient some times because I can easily open an application package and rummage around inside without needing to use any hex editors or viewers to do it. And I can replace stuff if I need to. Heck, even an app called Monolingual is able to take advantage of this nature by removing unneeded localizations and even unneeded PowerPC binaries from the applications themselves because they're just folders at heart. Applications on OS X are glorified folders. I love packages.. or as they're actually referred to, "bundles". Whatever you call them, they're great. <3

[T-Bone]

I guess I'm just too much in love with the Software Center and the way it does things. It seems we all have found the OS that fits us the best already

[Robin]

Can we please drop this? We are getting way off topic.

[tentus]

I don't care if an app needs to be installed. If it's required, it's required. Like PhotoShop. I'd rather it be a simple install like Pixelmator, but I guess PhotoShop likes to pollute the HD with a lot of shared libraries for all its other apps so it makes sense. If it's just a simple program that won't need to share files, self-contained is good enough.

Haha, actually, I use the mobile version of Photoshop CS4 (the... slightly less official version). I own a full install that I use at work, but honestly I don't notice a whole lot of difference between the versions.

Goes to show, I guess.

[scott_R]

I am speechless. How is that number of steps to get one program working on ANY OS acceptable? Can someone explain the reason for that madness?

This is an honest question, I'm not trying to start a Windows/Linux/Mac shitstorm.

Thanks for the fix fer0x, worked like a charm!

Not to rekindle the storm, but being new to Love (and game programming), but a long time Linux user, the answer is a matter of perspective. Try to install a Win7 program on WinXP, especially a version of XP you installed 2 years ago without a reinstall, and you'll appreciate the minor hassle of adding a couple libraries (automated through your package manager), and commenting out two lines of source code. (In fact, mine is a LM 8 upgraded to 9, so it'd be more like installing to WinME!)

Mostly though, making Love 0.7.2 work on Linux Mint 9 looks far more complicated in print than it actually is, and quite frankly, if following fer0x's clear instructions throws you, you're probably not going to enjoy programming (on any OS) much anyway.

[slime]

but a long time Linux user, the answer is a matter of perspective. Try to install a Win7 program on WinXP, especially a version of XP you installed 2 years ago without a reinstall, and you'll appreciate the minor hassle of adding a couple libraries (automated through your package manager), and commenting out two lines of source code. (In fact, mine is a LM 8 upgraded to 9, so it'd be more like installing to WinME!)

Speaking of perspective, Linux Mint 8 is 3 years old and 9 is 2.5 years old. Windows XP is a decade old. In fact, windows 7 was released before Linux Mint 8!

[josefnpat]

I don't know of a good reason why things can't be self-contained these days.

That's stupid. Imagine the file sizes of even a simple program if you had to embed several libraries into it, libraries that are used by loads of other programs on your system.

The filesize difference is only meaningful if you're installing modern programs on devices with very non-modern storage capacities, or maybe mobile devices.

My LÖVE application is 16.7MB. I have a 500,000MB hard drive. That's 0.00334% of total space, and my HD is small by today's standards.

I would like to put out there, that everyone here who releases a *.love file, is taking advantage of not having to compile the love engine into every single one of their applications. Someone said love is about a 16MB install, right?

Imagine having to download every game off the Projects and Demos with an extra 16MB, every time.

Code reuse is the future, and it's what linux is pretty much all about.