Is there any way I can ignore all the java components that Install4J uses? For example not requiring the user to have java installed? I have a very simple executable that I would like the user to install onto their machine and I would like the user to be able to enter some input for things like port.
The issue is that Install4J requires you to have java downloaded, and it also installs a ton of unnessary items that I don't need for this project.
Reason I'm using Install4J is my company has a license for it, and its very clean and easy to use unlike something like Inno where its windows only and I would need to learn how to script it.
The project is a javascript nodejs file thats already been packaged. I just need a neat installer so that all the client needs to do is enter some information such as port and have the program read the xml file for the needed input.
Thanks.
EDIT: Seems to not be possible. See: Can you use nodejs with install4j
I recently started exploring npm and installed a github repo yoonic/nicistore.
But when I try to build it fails.
My question is if I start building things on top of node, which I see has tooo many dependencies from different vendors, Am I completely on the mercy of the respective package developers?
I have seen that most node based github repos fail to build in the first try. If I update one of the modules by running a console command, Is it likely to break all the application?
And if It is does, doesn't it prove node.js an unreliable and unstable development platform?
Think of it as the opposite of most other languages.
You are writing an app in Java.
You want to use LibA, LibB and LibC.
So you try to use LibC 2.4, and as soon as you do, your manager throws all kinds of errors at you.
Why?
Because LibB is using LibC 1.9
So now what are your options?
Strip out all of the calls to all of the new API for LibC that you wanted to use...
...or hope that LibB is open-source, and you can contribute an update for a new version of it, so that you can use the latest version of LibC (and hope it doesn't update).
So now you've done that... but now you've broken your LibA, because it wants the old LibB.
You didn't even want LibA, you just had to have it for your app to be happy with your framework, and the libs that you did actually want to use (B and C). LibA is closed-source, and isn't maintained, anymore. Tough luck. Go back to your old ways, and forget about how much better life could be, if you could only use your framework with the new version of LibC. Or start praying that your framework does a major rewrite, to get rid of the LibA dependency... but then figure out what new hell you have to deal with, just to get LibC working.
Is this really better than Node?
What node allows you to do is install dependencies which are at different versions than the same library that your dependencies are using.
Not that you can't do that with Java, too... but the entire community has decided that it's just not ever going to try to do that, and thus outlaw it at a tool level.
Next, you see too many things which leave you at the mercy of too many vendors...
Going back to Java (or C++, or nearly any mainstream language), looking at Java, itself, how many libraries are made by Sun Microsystems, or by James Gosling?
Moreover, if you want to boil it down, to suggest using only, say, one huge, overarching framework (like Spring MVC) and using no other libraries of any kind (like JodaTime), then how many libraries does Spring itself lean on, and why are they of no concern to you, even if you're just using the compiled VM bytecode?
In fact, a strong argument could be made to be more wary of compiled binaries, in languages where it was traditional to see strong, copy-left licensing like that of the GNU GPL... in that realm, you open yourself up to craziness.
Most of the Node stuff, by comparison, is dirt-simple freeware. And even if it's not, it's quickly replaceable as most are micro-libraries.
I would suggest that updating a Node package your server depends on, via CLI is less hazardous than doing the same to a full-fledged Java project, if your goal is to see your project compile again, some time in the next week, but with the newer fixes/features...
...but if you're talking about a full-scale, production application, you also want to be cognizant of what it is you're doing, with regards to your codebase, regardless.
As to why things don't build for you on the first try, assuming that you're on a non-Windows platform, and your environment is up to date, I don't know.
Most C/C++ projects I clone don't build for me, first try, either. I usually forget something, or there was something poorly documented, or the actual project was set up to make unfair assumptions about the system it would operate in.
Does that mean that C++ is an unreliable/unstable development platform?
Or the hours/days spent on getting Eclipse set up in an enterprise environment, with all kinds of crazy, company-specific projects and project settings?
It sounds like a case of bad design, more than anything.
Then again, most of my projects these days are wrapped in Docker containers. They all run in the same environment, whether they're running in Windows, on a Mac, or on the server. That tends to take the sting out of building projects, regardless of what language the code is in, or what VM / processor they're running on.
You should also be using NPM shrinkwrap files, or Yarn Lockfiles to preserve the build configuration, with the known-working versions of libraries. And you should have unit and integration tests to ensure that changing library versions has no discernible impact on your system.
I am still new to the electron ecosystem and desktop development in general but what I wish to do is to interface with a third party, open source application that comes bundled in with my software. First, I am unsure on what the package options to distribute should be. Is it customary to have two downloads, one for users that already have the third party binary installed, and another one that includes it? Also how do I go about actually packaging, and installing the binary? Should this be an option on my package.json? What kind of script should I execute? Are there any npm modules to facilitate this?
edit - is it possible to invoke npm from my main.js even though a user has not previously installed node? I know node is bundled with the electron package but is npm too?
-The binary in this case is PostgreSQL
There are a couple of options coming to my mind.
Bundle a 3rd party installer w/ your app. This is what I did recently. On the first run I check if the service that I need is installed / running and if not I call the 3rd party installer / start it. When the installer quits I simply app.relaunch() and start consumig it. Of course you'll need installers for each platform you plan to support. And you'll have to figure out ways to check if the software is installed (properly) for each platform.
Bundle binaries w/ you app. Of course you can bundle pretty much anything w/ your electron app. Again, you'll need binaries for each platform you plan to support. And of course they shouldn't be linked to anything that the default user doesn't have on his machine like SDKs and additional headers ...
Less comfy but you can alway add some start-up message or before-download massage telling the user that he needs software xy in order to run your application.
Derivate of 1/2: Download required stuff on demand. For your example this would mean checking the user's OS and arch and then just download the required installers or binaries if available. You could also build the stuff on the user's machine although this probably being the worst/biggest/most complex solution.
Then there's things like https://www.npmjs.com/package/pg - you should always check npm if someone already built what you need ;)
I'd recommend using the great electron-builder which makes bundling stuff w/ your app a piece of cake.
Feel free to comment if you need more intel.
I'm looking for some tool, which provide me possibility to dynamically (online) translate portlets in liferay. I mean, I wrote portlet in English, but people from other country may want to use it with their own language, and they can want to make translation. I know that there is Pootle tool, but I'm looking something what I can launch on Java (JBoss). There is a Jython, but I'm newbie on that, and I don't know how run pootle on jython. If someone have idea about way to solve my problem, please help.
Or maybe more simple Is there possibility to deploy pootle as war file in application server ?
regards
To your simplified question: Pootle is a Python application - AFAIK those get rarely packaged as WAR files. It might be possible, but I've never tried it...
That said, the sweet spot of Pootle is to prepare software translations and bring them back into the software development process - e.g. build. Do you want to "live update" your language files or are you ok with exporting them to your build system, then redeploying the updated plugins? If you want to do live-updates, pootle might not be the right system for you.
If you want to use the translations in the development process (e.g. in buildscripts), your real question might be "How do I install pootle?" - but for this you'd have to give some more steps that you tried, what worked and what did not work.
I never installed pootle myself, but I won't expect it to run seamlessly on a Java application server. If you've never done so as well, rather go the easy way and follow the standard installation procedure.
I am looking for a good way to install an application I developed with all its dependencies in a fancy way. Currently I have a big make file that downloads, unpacks, compiles and installs all dependencies. This however is a little tedious, since there are quite a few dependencies and the make file is getting larger and larger which eventually will be hard to maintain. Therefore I am looking for a packaging tool with the following features:
It should be a light weight package manager which is very easy to install (or even installs itself and afterwards all my dependencies)
The destination of the installed binaries, libraries etc. should be customizable
Each installation process of a dependency should be easy configurable
It should be possible to include self written scripts that get executed at a specific point during the installation process (in order to manipulate make files, flags etc)
No admin rights should be necessary since all clients that install my application will not have admin rights and are not able to use an already installed package manager
I do not know if this kind of software exists. I myself don't have much of experience with packaging tools.
Thx in advance for any link, hint, suggestion!
opkg is something thats based on ipkg (now defunct) and originally dpkg. Its used in embedded systems. Light weight for sure.
ports from crux linux (www.crux.nu)?
A quick search returns InstallJammer. I would propose make debs and rpms and tarballs and stick with standard installation process (root privileges and such)m but if you can't do that, then, well, you can't.
I'm sure you know how suspicious it would look for the user.