make: improve appimageupdate rule
#11669
Conversation
Instead of trying to detect if running under Docker, use a simpler wildcard check to detect if FUSE support is available. This as the advantage of supporting Docker, rootless Docker, and Podman.
| # set to 1 if in Docker | ||
| DOCKER:=$(shell grep -q docker /proc/1/cgroup 2>/dev/null && echo 1) | ||
| # Is fuse support available? | ||
| USE_FUSE ?= $(wildcard /dev/fuse) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fwiw the AppImage docs supply the slightly unaesthetic example of APPIMAGE_EXTRACT_AND_RUN.
Edit: over this way https://docs.appimage.org/user-guide/troubleshooting/fuse.html#extract-and-run-type-2-appimages
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Which they decided against documenting in the --appimage-help output… sigh
There was a problem hiding this comment.
D'oh, I completely overlooked the implications (or perhaps rather: simplifications) of the and-run earlier. They added the --appimage-extract-and-run flag sometime in between 2018 and now, and I failed to realize it was a different option than --appimage-extract.
But that aside. Strangely enough https://gitlab.com/koreader/nightly-builds/-/jobs/6606286131 seems to think it does have fuse, which doesn't make sense to me. :-/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Damn. Forget about detection, just use --appimage-extract-and-run unconditionally then, since the performance impact is minimal.
Instead of trying to detect if running under Docker, use a simpler wildcard check to detect if FUSE support is available. This as the advantage of supporting Docker, rootless Docker, and Podman.
This change is