@gmgarciam It don't got to be open source. They can publish LLVM IR, un-linked object files (for us to link on different platforms), etc; nearly-compiled formats that don't allow modification (no more than a regular executable file does, at least) but do allow distribution.

@gmgarciam Ooo, can we get a link to this GitHub? Open-source competition for Opera GX time!

How is this still not a thing???? Every browser worth using has Linux support - I suppose the Opera team has willfully consigned GX to that pit where the likes of Internet Explorer, Safari, and Netscape rest in hated obscurity....

@eratedkrill not only is this is a well-known solution, it's a bad one. This is for a number of complex reasons under the hood, but basically Wine isn't perfect - it doesn't have the same performance as native binaries and is missing a lot of support.
As a Fedora user I can tell you that's definitely wrong - the package is wine-core (and has separate i686 and x86_64 builds available, so you don't manually install wine64), and we just use sudo like everyone else

What we want is a Linux build (or at least source code so we can build it ourselves and write patches for individual distros), for native performance and fewer bugs. If the only way to get GX is to run it in Wine, I'm just gonna use Firefox.

@doubledot Please have ChatGPT or something edit your messages before you post them, reading your post took far too much effort.
Regardless, I agree; us developers are heavily assf***** by Opera's refusal to do an easy Linux build. Hell, they could use all sorts of trickery to publish enough code for us to create our own Linux deploys (thus eliminating the need to support many platforms; they would just have to give us some object files to link), without letting us modify it. It's not hard to support the most popular operating system in the world.

Personally I would be willing to maintain RPMs for Opera, and I'm sure there are plenty who would do the DEBs and whatever magic Arch uses. The Nix users would have a blast (wait, do they already have it? Sounds like the kinda magic spell Nix users are so well known for...)

Come on, Opera dev team, show a lil' love and support the community! We promise to behave!

@Bati it's trivial enough to port resource code to a Unix environment, if they're using C or C++ it would just mean some preprocessor definitions and well-written interfaces. If they don't already have the code structured properly, that's a whole 'nother problem entirely...

@tomasso is Vivaldi any good? I'm running basic FF and it's pretty awful, but Chromium is even worse.

@tomasso is Vivaldi any good? I'm running basic FF and it's pretty awful, but Chromium is even worse.

@eratedkrill not only is this is a well-known solution, it's a bad one. This is for a number of complex reasons under the hood, but basically Wine isn't perfect - it doesn't have the same performance as native binaries and is missing a lot of support.
As a Fedora user I can tell you that's definitely wrong - the package is wine-core (and has separate i686 and x86_64 builds available, so you don't manually install wine64), and we just use sudo like everyone else

What we want is a Linux build (or at least source code so we can build it ourselves and write patches for individual distros), for native performance and fewer bugs. If the only way to get GX is to run it in Wine, I'm just gonna use Firefox.

@gmgarciam Ooo, can we get a link to this GitHub? Open-source competition for Opera GX time!

@Bati it's trivial enough to port resource code to a Unix environment, if they're using C or C++ it would just mean some preprocessor definitions and well-written interfaces. If they don't already have the code structured properly, that's a whole 'nother problem entirely...

@gmgarciam It don't got to be open source. They can publish LLVM IR, un-linked object files (for us to link on different platforms), etc; nearly-compiled formats that don't allow modification (no more than a regular executable file does, at least) but do allow distribution.

@doubledot Please have ChatGPT or something edit your messages before you post them, reading your post took far too much effort.
Regardless, I agree; us developers are heavily assf***** by Opera's refusal to do an easy Linux build. Hell, they could use all sorts of trickery to publish enough code for us to create our own Linux deploys (thus eliminating the need to support many platforms; they would just have to give us some object files to link), without letting us modify it. It's not hard to support the most popular operating system in the world.

Personally I would be willing to maintain RPMs for Opera, and I'm sure there are plenty who would do the DEBs and whatever magic Arch uses. The Nix users would have a blast (wait, do they already have it? Sounds like the kinda magic spell Nix users are so well known for...)

Come on, Opera dev team, show a lil' love and support the community! We promise to behave!

Other Opera on Linux posts keep getting locked lol, I think opera just doesn't care about their userbase at this point. Probably run by Microsoft Lackeys, eh?

How is this still not a thing???? Every browser worth using has Linux support - I suppose the Opera team has willfully consigned GX to that pit where the likes of Internet Explorer, Safari, and Netscape rest in hated obscurity....