-
 KDE-Apps.org Applications for the KDE-Desktop 
 GTK-Apps.org Applications using the GTK Toolkit 
 GnomeFiles.org Applications for GNOME 
 MeeGo-Central.org Applications for MeeGo 
 CLI-Apps.org Command Line Applications 
 Qt-Apps.org Free Qt Applications 
 Qt-Prop.org Proprietary Qt Applications 
 Maemo-Apps.org Applications for the Maemo Plattform 
 Java-Apps.org Free Java Applications 
 eyeOS-Apps.org Free eyeOS Applications 
 Wine-Apps.org Wine Applications 
 Server-Apps.org Server Applications 
 apps.ownCloud.com ownCloud Applications 
--
-
 KDE-Look.org Artwork for the KDE-Desktop 
 GNOME-Look.org Artwork for the GNOME-Desktop 
 Xfce-Look.org Artwork for the Xfce-Desktop 
 Box-Look.org Artwork for your Windowmanager 
 E17-Stuff.org Artwork for Enlightenment 
 Beryl-Themes.org Artwork for the Beryl Windowmanager 
 Compiz-Themes.org Artwork for the Compiz Windowmanager 
 EDE-Look.org Themes for your EDE Desktop 
--
-
 Debian-Art.org Stuff for Debian 
 Gentoo-Art.org Artwork for Gentoo Linux 
 SUSE-Art.org Artwork for openSUSE 
 Ubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Ubuntu 
 Kubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Kubuntu 
 LinuxMint-Art.org Artwork for Linux Mint 
 Arch-Stuff.org Art And Stuff for Arch Linux 
 Frugalware-Art.org Themes for Frugalware 
 Fedora-Art.org Artwork for Fedora Linux 
 Mandriva-Art.org Artwork for Mandriva Linux 
--
-
 KDE-Files.org Files for KDE Applications 
 OpenTemplate.org Documents for OpenOffice.org
 GIMPStuff.org Files for GIMP
 InkscapeStuff.org Files for Inkscape
 ScribusStuff.org Files for Scribus
 BlenderStuff.org Textures and Objects for Blender
 VLC-Addons.org Themes and Extensions for VLC
--
-
 KDE-Help.org Support for your KDE Desktop 
 GNOME-Help.org Support for your GNOME Desktop 
 Xfce-Help.org Support for your Xfce Desktop 
--
openDesktop.orgopenDesktop.org:   Applications   Artwork   Linux Distributions   Documents    LinuxDaily.com    Linux42.org    OpenSkillz.com   
 
Apps
News
Groups
Knowledge
Events
Forum
People
Jobs
Register
Login
APPS
-


Sponsoring


-
- Content .- Fans (1) .- Knowledge Base  . 

BitRock InstallBuilder for Qt

   4.5.2  

KDE Development Tool

Score 63%
bitrockbitrock
BitRock
Home
BitRock InstallBuilder for Qt
zoom

BitRock InstallBuilder for Qt
zoom

BitRock InstallBuilder for Qt
zoom

Link:  Link
Downloads:  1476
Submitted:  Feb 16 2007
Updated:  Jul 23 2007

Description:

BitRock InstallBuilder for Qt allows you to create easy-to-use multiplatform installers for Unix, Windows and OS X. The generated installer for an application has a native look-and-feel and no external dependencies, and can be run in GUI, text, and unattended modes. In addition to self-contained installers, the installation tool is also able to generate standalone RPM packages. This edition uses Qt as the default GUI toolkit. It offers free licenses for open source projects.




Changelog:

Added new actions to calculate md5 and specify default user and group for installed files. Improved error notification for external program execution. Added the ability to access standard Windows shell folder locations using installer variables.




License: Proprietary License
(Installer download)
Send to a friend
Subscribe
Other  Apps  from bitrock
Report inappropriate content



-
.

 Who needs this?

 
 by brcha on: Feb 17 2007  
Score 50%
brchabrcha
Home

And what's wrong with Nullsoft's NSIS? It runs nicely under wine, so everybody can use it to make Windows installations of their programs. And it is 100% compatible with Micro$oft's MSI installer. And, as for GNU/Linux, Mac OS X and the rest of the bunch, they already do have package managers and it is not good thing to make new uncompatible pkg managers for them.


Reply to this

-

 Re: Who needs this?

 
 by bitrock on: Feb 18 2007  
Score 50%
bitrockbitrock
BitRock
Home

Hi Filip,

NSIS is a nice program but, as you mention, Windows only. Our installers are targeted at people who need to support applications in a variety of platforms. In particular, to ISVs and open source projects that do not want to have to package their application as an RPM for Fedora, a different RPM for Suse, a .deb for Debian, a .pkg for FreeBSD, another .pkg for Solaris, Mac OSX, and so on. Now throw in the mix Sparc/x86/x86_64/Itanium/PA-RISC and you get the idea... We are not out there to replace native package managers, but rather complement them:

- We register with the RPM package manager upon installation.
- We can actually *generate* RPMs if you need to.
- Our installers can be installed as regular users, not requiring administrator privileges.
- We can ask questions to the end-user (for example, to ask for a TCP/IP port and make sure there is no other application listening in there)

In summary, native package managers for a particular distribution are optimized for managing dependencies within its own software packages (usually system-level like libraries, etc). BitRock Installbuilder is optimized for distributing applications (like games or Java server applications) in as many different platforms as possible.

Best regards

Daniel


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Who needs th

 
 by tom1200 on: Mar 2 2007  
Score 50%
tom1200tom1200

Maybe NVIDIA and AMD/ATI (and so on) should have a look at this. A proper installation program for their driver software would be a great step forward for usability. (Would be a dream, wouldn't it?)


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Re: Who need

 
 by bitrock on: Mar 4 2007  
Score 50%
bitrockbitrock
BitRock
Home

Hey, we would be delighted to have them as customers :)


Reply to this

-

 Re: Who needs this?

 
 by undefined on: Mar 2 2007  
Score 50%
undefinedundefined
HJCMS
Home

I need this ;)
Now i can make a Programm Installer for Win32 Systems on Linux ;)
currently im using innosetup with wine for building.


Reply to this

-
.

 nice

 
 by linmain on: Mar 3 2007  
Score 50%
linmainlinmain
Home

hi, i find your bitrock installer good (my firm uses it for their programs).

and i really appreciate that you give away your installer for OpenSource projects for free (as you state on your website) . i program free opensource cross platform programs using wxWidgets and in future for kde4 too. so, does that mean i can use BitRock for free too for my OpenSource applications?

have a nice day, linmain aka' litb.


Reply to this

-

 Re: nice

 
 by bitrock on: Mar 4 2007  
Score 50%
bitrockbitrock
BitRock
Home

Yes, correct. Simply send us an email to info _at_ bitrock _dot_ com with the name/URL of your open source projects and we will send you a full license.


Reply to this

-
.

 free as in freedom

 
 by soulrebel on: Mar 7 2007  
Score 50%
soulrebelsoulrebel

"It offers free licenses for open source projects."

is that really free or just free of charge?
if it is only free of charge it seems rather useless to me. why would i want to package free software in non-free installers....

# cd /usa/whitehouse
# rm -rf *
Reply to this

-

 Re: free as in freed

 
 by bitrock on: Mar 8 2007  
Score 50%
bitrockbitrock
BitRock
Home

Correct, our installers are free as in beer. However, at the end of the day, it is just a packaging tool. It does not prevent you from releasing or modifying your software any other way you want, so it does not really restrict your freedom. Consider it a nicer alternative to using InstallShield or InstallAnywhere.

We have other software, such as LAMPStack and LAPPStack, which are distributed under an Apache 2.0 license.

It is just a matter of balance. We come from an open source background, and we have thought long and hard about how to make this work. If we found a business model that would allow us to open source the installer and still pay our mortgages, we will consider it.

Cheers



Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: free as in freed

 
 by soulrebel on: Mar 12 2007  
Score 50%
soulrebelsoulrebel

of course you are free to license your software in every way you want to to if you have the right to do so, but i personally just wont use non-free software, especially if it does nothing that special.

i just think you will not be successful trying to establish a non-free product for distribution of mostly free software on free operating systems and for a "self-contained" free community.

# cd /usa/whitehouse
# rm -rf *
Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: free as in f

 
 by momesana on: May 7 2007  
Score 50%
momesanamomesana
Home

Maybe dual-licensing this software would be the more suitable approach. Just the way trolltech handles the Qt libs themselves. Since you already offer your application free of charge to opensource developers, this wouldn't make a difference in terms of profitability.
But of course, other issues would arise, for example the danger of forking and the need to disclose the underlying code. On the other hand you would gain lots of credibility in the free software community, which is a factor not to be underrated.


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Re: free as

 
 by bitrock on: May 7 2007  
Score 50%
bitrockbitrock
BitRock
Home

Hi Naraghi,

Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. That is actually something that we have carefully considered. The main problem is that such a model works when the user needs to link or embed the application (such as in the case of Qt). It would not work as well when simply using the application, as in this case.

It may also make sense a similar approach if an installer was 'critical' or 'infrastructure' software, such as a database or application server. In that case you can still have a business model around support. It is more tricky when the software itself is an standalone tool.

A possible licensing approach would be a license that forces all software packaged with Installbuilder to be open source, otherwise a commercial license needs to be bought for proprietary software. I just don't think dual licensing (in the traditional GPL/proprietary scenario, like Qt) really covers that scenario (it would cover somebody making modifications to Installbuilder though)


Reply to this

-

 Proprietary

 
 by DaBlade on: Jul 13 2007  
Score 50%
DaBladeDaBlade
None

Why did you make it proprietary? You could make it free software, but still profit from it, just like Trolltech does from Qt.

"A life without knowledge is death in disguise." -- Hans-Peter Geerdes
Reply to this

-

 Cannot use

 
 by jardasmid on: Sep 27 2008  
Score 50%
jardasmidjardasmid

I wanted to use this for instalation of my application, but I can't. My application is opensource, but I provide binary only for Windows x64 but you don't seem to provide Windows x64 binaries of your installer - it is therefore unusable for me.

Do you plan to release x64 version for Windows? Qt4 can be compiled for x64 windows using Visual Studio 2005/2008, Windows SDK or mingw-w64.


Reply to this

Add commentBack




-
Linux42.org
-
NEWS
-
Popular Groups
-
Newest Groups
-
FORUM
-
POLL
-
Do you like or dislike Ubuntu Unity?
 Yes, unity is alien technology!
 It is less confusing than Gnome 3 default, shell.
 Granny thinks it is much more usable than Gnome 2
 Canonical is embarrasing itself with this split project
 Gnome 3 default shell is much better
 I dislike Unity, Gnome 3 default shell is alien technology!
 None of the above, I like the 2Gb for free and Apple alike behavior. Will post a comment instead

resultmore
KDE-LOOK.ORG
-
 
 
 Who we are
Contact
More about us
Frequently Asked Questions
Register
Twitter
Blog
Explore
Apps
Jobs
Knowledge
Events
People
Updates on identi.ca
Updates on Twitter
Facebook App
Content RSS   
Events RSS   

Participate
Groups
Forum
Add App
Public API
About KDE-Apps.org
Legal Notice
Spreadshirt Shop
CafePress Shop
Advertising
Sponsor us
Report Abuse
 

Copyright 2003-2013 KDE-Apps.org Team  
All rights reserved. KDE-Apps.org is not liable for any content or goods on this site.
All contributors are responsible for the lawfulness of their uploads.
KDE and K Desktop Environment are trademarks of KDE e.V.