Thank you 🙏

Will review and test this as soon as I get enough time.

Alright. I had some issues getting the existing build workflow running without secrets, but the second to last commit in the unsquashed branch (https://github.com/AlleM43/sniffnet/tree/d2577161117d8361c483347430ad3ea1238f3744) is what ended up running the AppImage build to completion. It should work without those modifications as long as the deb builds.

I noticed you're packaging it only for amd64... I'm wondering how AppImages are usually packed for different arch?
Would it be possible to also support at least aarch64 or arm64 or also 32-bit architectures? Would it make sense?

I haven't really looked into that, partially because the only system I have with a DE installed is amd64, and partially because I thought it best to get amd64 working first and try to expand compatibility later. I can take a look at it though.

Thanks.

Some other observations:

• sniffnet.yml should be under the resources/packaging/linux folder
• make sure the produced artifact name matches the style of other existing artefacts (Sniffnet_LinuxAppImage_arch.AppImage)
• if it's possible, execute a test workflow on dispatch from your repo so we can test the produced artifact

I've moved the yaml recipe and changed the artifact name.

https://github.com/AlleM43/sniffnet/actions/runs/16672113220 produced AppImages for amd64, i386, arm64, and armhf. I haven't tested running them, but I tested amd64 and i386 appimages built locally with the same recipe, and checked all executables and libraries in each AppDir to ensure they were for the correct platfor

I also changed cargo clean to be a separate step in order to deal with an issue I was having with cross. (cross-rs/cross#724)

Thank you.

https://github.com/AlleM43/sniffnet/actions/runs/16672113220

Do you have any idea why the dmg and msi fail?

produced AppImages for amd64, i386, arm64, and armhf. I haven't tested running them, but I tested amd64 and i386 appimages built locally with the same recipe, and checked all executables and libraries in each AppDir to ensure they were for the correct platfor

Awesome, I'll also test at least the amd64.
If you could also directly test such artifacts it'd amazing.

I also changed cargo clean to be a separate step in order to deal with an issue I was having with cross. (cross-rs/cross#724)

I added that cargo clean exactly because I was having issues with cross IIRC... 🤨

I disabled Windows and MacOS builds in my testing runs because Windows builds failed because of a lack of a secret and MacOS builds take too many GitHub Actions minutes. The one in the PR branch has those reenabled.

The cargo clean only ran when the tests were ran, which I also disabled to save time. Thus, I moved it to a separate step, to ensure it runs every time.

Oh ok, then I guess I can move it back to the original place.

Again thanks so much for your time 🙌

@all-contributors please add @AlleM43 for platform.

@GyulyVGC

I've put up a pull request to add @AlleM43! 🎉

I've just tested the amd64 and it perfectly works.
Wow. AppImages are cool actually.

I just had a doubt @AlleM43

Are we sure libpcap is the only needed dependency? See https://github.com/GyulyVGC/sniffnet/wiki/Required-dependencies

It may work on our systems if we already have the other dependencies installed, but not sure if it works in general...

The other dependencies are part of those assumed by the pkg2appimage devs to be present on every system (see https://github.com/AppImageCommunity/pkg2appimage/blob/master/excludedeblist) and would thus not be installed anyway.

Perfect 👌

Hey @AlleM43 some users reported a problem with the libpcap dependency when installing the AppImage.

Could you please check this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/s/x8lRJeJXCv