Support Manjaro

[bates64]

Should fix #1050.

@coreybruce can you test?

[coreybruce]

Should fix #1050.

@coreybruce can you test?

Should fix #1050.

@coreybruce can you test?

Sure, do I just need to clone his git repo and try it out?

[ethteck]

You clone this repo and check out the install-sh-manjaro branch

alternatively, you can run this gh command after cloning the repo if you have the github cli tools set up: gh pr checkout 1051

[ethteck]

I think we should just merge this

[bates64]

I think we should just merge this

I'd rather wait for confirmation that it works. There's no need to rush to merge it and @Gorialis mentioned something in Discord about arch and manajaro packages not necessarily being 1:1; we don't consider that at all here so it might be a problem

[ethteck]

okay, I'll tell the part of me that likes seeing a light PR list to chill out for a while 😛

[coreybruce]

Hey sorry for the delay, I'll get back to you and make sure this all works 😁🙏

[bates64]

@coreybruce Awesome! If you run into any issues, feel free to join us in #decomp-64 in https://discord.gg/paper-mario-modding

[coreybruce]

You clone this repo and check out the install-sh-manjaro branch

alternatively, you can run this gh command after cloning the repo if you have the github cli tools set up: gh pr checkout 1051

gh pr isn't a command, did you mean git checkout install-sh-manajro?

[ethteck]

sounds like you don't have the github command line tools installed. no problem - yeah, do that

[coreybruce]

Oh I see also do Ijust try install.sh on the branch?

[ethteck]

yep!

[coreybruce]

Hmm still the same, I also checked to make sure I changed branches also

[corey@corey-pi4 papermario]$ ./install.sh
The following distros (and their derivatives) are supported by install.sh:
- Debian/Ubuntu (apt)
- Arch Linux (pacman)
- openSUSE (zypper) 
- Alpine Linux (apk)
Please consider contributing and adding an installation script for your distro.
[corey@corey-pi4 papermario]$ git checkout
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/install-sh-manjaro'.

Would make it easier to maintain this repo and be less work if you gave the commands to build instead of using a custom script you will have to keep updating for every distro or just make it not check for what distro you use as it just seems to add more work on you guys for no reason 🙂

[ethteck]

Yeah I personally am not so keen on us maintaining an install.sh for a ton of different arches and would prefer to just have a document as well. it'd allow us to explain the caveats of different platforms and yada yada

[coreybruce]

Yeah I mean the script shouldn't to specify on architectures and be one universal script for Linux. You should also document the commands needed to build like if you use make for example.

So where do we go next with this?

[bates64]

"be one universal script for Linux" - this would work if the dependencies were under flatpak or something, but all the distros have different opinions about package management.

[bates64]

Would make it easier to maintain this repo and be less work if you gave the commands to build instead of using a custom script you will have to keep updating for every distro

Moving the commands from a script to docs would do nothing more than make it slightly less convenient for users. The commands differ per distro - for example, Arch and friends use pacman and the package names across Arch or Manjaro for example will probably be different.

We could just add a clause to the docs that says "hey if install.sh doesnt work then we recommend you find out how to install these things: x y z h" / fall back in the script

[ethteck]

I'll try to explain my reasoning for why a human-readable doc is better than a bash script in this case.

For starters, we end up installing things without really informing the user, running sudo. I think this is pretty bad practice, and I know it's been raised before as something to consider. I also think it's just generally better to have users install their own dependencies instead of running a bunch of commands for them. We of course can provide said commands, but running the commands automatically in their native environment to install system packages has always felt a bit intrusive to me.

Also, as we see in cases like these, if the feedback we expect doesn't exactly match what the bash script checks, the script just totally gives up or fails. Whereas a human-readable doc might lead someone to the correct solution.

In both cases, insufficiencies in the script/doc would lead people to ask for help and then we'd fix said script or doc. What's nice about the doc, though, is that it allows us to easier add notes and caveats that someone might care about instead of littering the shell script with logic and/or print-outs that will be drowned out by the other output from commands.

I guess you could ask "why not both?" and to that I'd say that maintaining two things is even worse than one. So I'd really prefer not to do that, but I acknowledge it'd be the best of both worlds...just at the expense of 2x the maintenance work.

[bates64]

That sounds good; you've charmed me 🐍. Perhaps we could have configure.py print out a nice error it if notices that you are missing dependencies, and link to this doc?

[coreybruce]

@nanaian I don't think you need to have the script install dependencies for you, just have the dependencies for different distros which will mostly be the same name other than with Ubuntu which has weird package names on the readme before mentioning the auto script or the manual commands to build themself as the user should install the dependencies on their own not to mention be less for you maintaining.

[ethteck]

Shall we close this given #1059 ?

[coreybruce]

Sure, if I run into any problems building with build commands on Arm than I'll make a new issue post.