• Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      What could possibly go wrong with running precompiled binaries that were linked to a set of precompiled libraries with a completely different set of precompiled libraries.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Nothing, lol. I have no issues running precompiled binaries on a fucking source-based distro.

      • Sh1nyM3t4l4ss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        You’re not wrong, it’s definitely not something a n00b should attempt in most cases. But I’ve done this before to save myself the need for distrobox. A lot of proprietary software only offers .deb, but is usually either statically linked or comes with its own set of nearly all the libraries it needs. So just extracting and running it often does the trick on non-debian distros like Fedora in my case.

        Seriously though, just use distrobox or see if there’s an unofficial package for your distro that you trust (AUR/copr/ppa/OBS). It’s more straight forward especially if you don’t know what you’re doing.

      • Programmer Belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I don’t think the libraries would be in much different places but I think it would come down to the application and imprlementation

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Not the locations. The versions. Your libssl-1.0 isn’t the same as mine. There often are differences in major, minor or patch versions. There even are differences in compile options where a feature present in one is not compiled in another. E.g. ciphers available in libssl.