AppImageKit VS bauh

What you're looking for sounds like AppImages (https://appimage.org/) . I have only used them while downloading games from itch.io, etc. (since i prefer package managers) but they seem to work out of the box on popular distros.

Ideally a new instance of the application is installed for each user. This also provides better isolation if one user upgrades/removes/breaks their application instance. I, for one, have really come around to the AppImage model [0] in the last couple of years.

[0] https://appimage.org/

I found a similar issue on github and tried this solution but still getting the same error .

There is AppImage[1], which packs a lot of stuff into a SquashFS filesystem, appends it to the executable, so everything is in one file.

[1] https://appimage.org

Nah i think yall just hating appimage. Real gold standard.

Although I haven't used plugins feature myself yet, this does sound like the perfect use case for them. Not every patient needs to access every single source. With plugins you can load only the source (or few sources) that they actually need. You can still use something like https://appimage.org/ to give them "a single binary", but will actually contain your slim binary and all the plugins.

```dlopen(): error loading libfuse.so.2 AppImages require FUSE to run. You might still be able to extract the contents of this AppImage if you run it with the --appimage-extract option. See https://github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/FUSE for more information```

This doesn't look like a squashfs image. Cannot mount AppImage, please check your FUSE setup. You might still be able to extract the contents of this AppImage  if you run it with the --appimage-extract option.  See https://github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/FUSE  for more information open dir error: No such file or directory

appimages. Appimages are similar to flatpaks, exept that they are a file you download and double click to run. Think of them as portable softwares like windows has (portable apps). They are sandboxed too. You can learn more about appimages here

Like bauh which supports AppImage, Arch packages (including AUR), Debian packages, Flatpak, Snap and native Web applications

github/vinifmor/bauh

If you really want a GUI package manager that doesn't break EndeavourOS, I've had a good experience with bauh when I started using EOS. But I also do everything with yay now, as others have suggested, it is more convenient once you know the commands.

Lastly, deb-get + pacstall + bauh. All of these combined covers 99% of my software needs, much less need to find and install PPAs and .deb manually. Still not as convenient as AUR, but much better than it was before. Hopefully, eventually everything is on Flatpak, snap, or AppImage so I could just use Bauh for most apps, but for now, I'm glad that these tools exists.

Is it an AppImage? Did you make it executable? If you use a lot of AppImages then you may want to add DE integration via their utility. I do not use it, as it runs a backgroudn daemon, I prefer using bauh instead.

Bauh https://github.com/vinifmor/bauh

You can use bauh. Supports AppImage, Arch packages (including AUR), Debian packages, Flatpak, Snap and native Web applications. GitHub

You may wanna take a look at bauh.

Although, if I had to I would personally suggest bauh if you want a graphical package manager. I haven't had any issues with using it, and neither have I seen people complaining about it. It also supports the following formats: AUR packages, AppImages, Flatpak, Snap and Web applications. It also integrates with Timeshift to provide a simple and safe backup process before applying changes to your system.