pdfarranger VS AppImageKit

On Linux I like to use:

https://github.com/pdfarranger/pdfarranger and https://gitlab.com/scarpetta/pdfmixtool for such tasks.

Für PDFs verwende ich pdfarranger.

I see some questions in the comments about document splitting and if you are using PDF for the export in scanning, this adds an extra step but may be valuable in the long run. For Linux users at least, there is "pdfarranger" which most distros have. You can install that, load the PDF and re-arrange pages, remove pages, etc.

PDFArranger

So, I guess, pdfarranger might be faster than PDFSam. https://github.com/pdfarranger/pdfarranger

I like PDF Arranger for converting JPEGs to PDFs (open source on Windows) https://github.com/pdfarranger/pdfarranger.

I have always only been using PDF Arranger for manipulating PDF files (merging different files, arranging, adding, deleting pages) and I'm wondering if there really is no KDE equivalent for that application.

Like again if you are not sure, what open source means, this is open source: https://appimage.org/

Hope it is abundantly clear with this example. Docker tried it's best to do the whole open source but business first and it led to disastrous results.

At best this will make your company suffer and second guess itself and at worst this is moral fraud.

Talk to your group partner about this and explain to them as well.

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