Hello all.
I realise that some of these topics have already been discussed, but I found that some of them date back to 2007, so I'll lump them all in one request.
There are some applications I use that are already portable in format, but not yet officially on the PortableApps platform. They are:
SMath (a free but currently close source MathCAD style application)
Portable Python (compiler, IDE and a number of useful libraries like SciPy for Python 2.7 - might be wrong about version number, but it's not Python 3)
FreeCAD (a free and open source 3D CAD software)
For some you can just copy and paste the files in the PortableApps directory (but it would be nice to have auto-updates like the supported apps), for FreeCAD, the file tree structure seems to include too many executables for that to work neatly, but, fortunately, it's open source, so there may be a relatively easy fix, i.e. having a dummy executable to launch the actual exe.
As I said before: the important thing is that they are already available in portable format, just not necessarily compliant with PortableApps standards, but I think it might be worth liaising with the developers to entice them to join in the PortableApps platform, as they are really good apps for technical work.
Best Regards.
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
probably you need first some reading on https://portableapps.com/development
but that some programs come in zip format and can be run directly from one exe does not mean they are portable.
You have to ask:
what does the program leave behind on the host machine? In registry? In other parts?
What permissions does it need? Will it work on restricted account?
Will it keep settings when moved to other computer? Will it keep its user data when moved to other computer?
Are all components included in the zip file you got? Or do you need something special to be preinstalled on your computer like .net components?
Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland
I take your point onboard. I also noticed that there was already a request for SMath, so apologies for that. On a general note, some of my thoughts are:
1 - SMath is distributed as a single executable. It is not an installation file and doesn't seem to write anything in the system. It might use .NET components, but I'm yet to see a Windows computer without at least .NET 2.0 libraries installed.
2 - As I said, I'm currently running the software on my office machine, and I haven't got administrator rights. I can't install FreeCAD in its non-portable format, but I can run it (and all the others) without problems in its portable incarnation. At the moment I have simply copied SMath and PortablePython in the PortableApps directory. I'm hesitating doing the same with FreeCAD because of the number of executables in its binary directory. But I might write a dummy exe myself for this purpose.
3 - I'm sure that there are going to be technical difficulties in implementing the "portabilisation" of these apps, which is why I suggested liaising with the developers. After all, if they have released their own portable version, they must share some of their goals with the PortableApps community, or they wouldn't have bothered. I know it's just an assumption, but it doesn't strike me as far-fetched.
Just my thoughts.
Ideas thrive when knowledge is shared.
>It is not an installation file and doesn't seem to write anything in the system.
Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland
If a program is run and it does produce files and folders and stores personal information and settings on the host computer, then this is not portable. It has nothing to do with installer or not.
Fair enough, to a point: if it writes files on the same drive/directory where it is run from, then it IS portable. If it doesn't write anything it is ALSO portable.
If you run a program, being a single exe, and it sets up an folder in user/appdata and stores the settings there or some other personal information, then this needs to be removed when program is closed.
And this is what portable apps do. The launcher will start the program and clean up when closing.
So the launcher turns portable apps that are NOT portable to begin with. I still can't see why apps that consist of a single executable or are run entirely from the portable drive (i.e. the cases highlighted in the previous point) are not suitable for inclusion in the launcher. There may be good reasons for it, no doubt, but not technical ones. I mean: the developers of these apps call them "portable". Surely it's just a matter of asking them what they mean by that, rather than pontificating blindly?
A program just delivered in zip format does not mean anything special, it does not mean it is portable.
It doesn't mean it isn't either. Bit of a weak point here.
BTW: every program you run will write to the local drive, it is just question what does it write and what will be left there when closed.
I'm sure it's true for most programs, not all. It is also, IMHO, very bad practice: interactions with the drive should be limited to opening and closing data files, launching the executable and loading up the relevant API's. Programs that do more than that are badly written and, as the developers skills improve, should be phased out. When £80 buys you 16GB of RAM there is no excuse for still using the hard drive for the normal running of a program.
I'll concede, however, that FreeCAD is still a bit raw for this application and nowhere near complete as far as the 2D part of it is concerned, but it's still worth watching.
On a general note: apologies if I sound a bit shitty, I didn't really mean to have a go at you. I am sure you mean good, however: I am willing to accept that there are good reasons why the apps I recommended are not a good choice for portabilisation. I would be more interested, though, in finding out why these specific apps are not suitable, rather than why some apps are not suitable. Bearing in mind that I run them regularly from my memory stick, both at home and at work.
Ideas thrive when knowledge is shared.
>Fair enough, to a point: if it writes files on the same drive/directory where it is run from, then it IS portable. If it doesn't write anything it is ALSO portable.I still can't see why apps that consist of a single executable or are run entirely from the portable drive (i.e. the cases highlighted in the previous point) are not suitable for inclusion in the launcher.I'm sure it's true for most programs, not all. It is also, IMHO, very bad practice: interactions with the drive should be limited to opening and closing data files, launching the executable and loading up the relevant API's. Programs that do more than that are badly written and, as the developers skills improve, should be phased out.
Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland
Otto,
I appreciate your patience in trying to inform me about the inner workings of programs. I'll admit that I never bothered checking the registry for this kind of thing and most applications that I've written myself looked simple enough not to warrant interactions with the registry. Then, again, I long for the good old days of Delphi when you could compile your app in a single executable and be done with it, or when any Mac program was just the executable and you could activate and deactivate Mac extensions by just moving them to another folder.
Having said that, I think we are looking at things from entirely different perspectives. I can do some programming, but I'm not a programmer, therefore what concerns you does not necessarily concern me. When I look up on forums for trying to solve a coding problem I see "real" programmers having heated arguments about security and, while I'm glad that they do that when they code software that does a lot of I/O online, I couldn't care less about it if it's just, say, a maths package: I just want it to do the task it's been created for. Why a maths software would gather any personal information or write to the registry beats the hell out of me. And why should any program be able to send email (as seems to be the ultimate goal in the *NIX world) is even more bizarre... hell: I still question the usefulness of mail readers and Outlook!
But I see where you're coming from. Personally I think security is more of a hindrance than a feature, but then, again, I don't do this for a living and I can always format my hard drive and re-install everything, so I have some sympathy for your position, as you probably have to think about this stuff, whether you like it or not.
I do like PortableApps and I think the latest incarnation, with its repository based update model is especially useful, which is why I made my request in the first place. As I said in my previous message: if there is any technical impediment to the integration of the two (I'll leave FreeCAD out for now) apps above into the platform, I'll carry on with my workaround hack. But, given that the developers of these apps have created a "portable" version, I wonder if it's not just a case of just liasing with them so that THEY can make their "portable" version fully compliant with the PortableApps protocol. After all, if you can make Portable an application that wasn't written with portability in mind, it shouldn't be harder to do the same with one that was (or for the original developer to learn how to re-package it in a way to comply - if they are asked and educated about the PortableApps standards by the PortableApps community/developers)
As I said at the beginning: I appreciate the effort and the patience you've put in informing me about general issues. My interest, however, lies more in the specific instances of SMath and PortablePython.
Ideas thrive when knowledge is shared.
for some very specific programs, use the part of the forum for request for portabilizing some software.
Best place one request in one thread only and state what is the program for and where to get it and if possible the legal status (open source, freeware etc) as in many cases of freeware the author has give permission to repackage it.
There are some instruction how to place a request here: https://portableapps.com/node/4507
Try the search feature as many programs are in develepment or testing stage and you might find what you need already done.
They are some authors, even commercial companies, who do produce the portable programs themselves, Teamviewer for example.
The complexity of a program alone is not exact measure how complex the thing is going to be, big complicated things like libre office work also
--
Why do programs today so much like to write here and there and all of them want internet connection?
Well in the 90ties, if a program did itself want connect to internet, it would be wiped of any computer! We would notice immediately when the modem started to dial the number of the next access node. Nobody would install a program which does 'call home'.
Such program would be declared as 'dialer' stealing your money. Today all programs which are somehow accepted by the general folks have to connect to some big brother networks 'to check for updates' all the time.
Today calling home is not a bug, it is a feature.
This is the time today.
BTW: All programs do write to registry, this is how windows is build. What ever you click on in the windows explorer will be registered. This is however not considered as personal data and is not removed.
But in many cases things are not so simple. Some programs need to write some cryptokeys somewhere and this would be in registry for example. The it is there and need to be removed if possible etc.
Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland