possibility of Linux versions?

[spoontechnique]

I'm switching to Linux now that my PC can't run W11. I know about Yabridge and such, but it's no guarantee. Apqualizr and Apshaper are the main plugins I can't give up.

I know it's a pain, but is there any chance of Linux versions on the future? I haven't found any parametric EQs close to ApQ on native Linux.

[Pflugshaupt]

These days, building a linux version isn't that hard as the apulSoft plugins are built using JUCE - which supports Linux. I did do some test builds in the past and things seemed to work quite well.
Annoying things would be finding a way to do something like an installer and figuring out what distros/DAWs to target. Also I'd prefer to use LV2 for linux versions and that would require first migrating to the latest Juce. I think the best I could do was some kind of "experimental" linux builds for devoted users to be used without guarantees - once I find the time needed (some months off at least). To be completely honest - while I used linux for various things in the past I just never used it for audio - therefore essential expertise is lacking.

[audiojunkie]

This would be very nice! I’m a Linux user too. My only additional request for Linux versions would be to confirm that the plugins scale up for those of us using high resolution screens.

[spoontechnique]

It seems like the DAWs that support Linux list compatibility with Ubuntu, so I assume Ubuntu-based distros would be the best targets.

As for DAWs, Bitwig, Tracktion Waveform, Renoise, Reaper, and Ardour seem to be the major ones.

[audiojunkie]

It's a little bit more complicated than that, but in essense, yes. The real situation, is that most Linux libraries are backwards compatible. And Ubuntu is the most popular linux distro (whether it's the "best" or not is to be debated). But since each linux distro comes with its own libraries and library versions, there can be compatibility problems with the app between distros. Also, there are literally hundreds of distros. To ensure compatibility, one would have to compile specifically for the target OS. No developer wants to compile dozens and dozens of binaryes for each update to cover everyone, So, what developers do, is take the most popular and most likely to be compatible distro, compile on an older version of it, knowing that most libraries are backwards compatible, which means that on most modern distros, the package "should" in theory work for most cases. Then, they package the plugin in a distro agnostic package such as Zip or tar.xz or such and use an install script to install the binaries. This maintains the highest level of compatibility, while covering "most" of the distros. Many developers, in addition to making a distro agnostic package, will also create a package for .DEB package manager as well, since the majority of the world is using a distro that has APT as the package manager. This way, they have packages that should work for most everyone, and yet they only have to compile a couple of binary versions.

So, while most developers use older Ubuntu-based distros as their initial target, they also try to cover their bases well for other linux distros as well.

My personal pet peeve is when developers "only" provide a .DEB binary for customers. This targets a single family of distros that use the APT package manager, and doesn't consider that there are many, many people that don't use .DEB. The good thing is that there are only a couple of developers that do that anymore. Most of them provide a distro agnostic way of installing their binaries, so that everyone can benefit.

[audiojunkie]

These days, building a linux version isn't that hard as the apulSoft plugins are built using JUCE - which supports Linux. I did do some test builds in the past and things seemed to work quite well.
Annoying things would be finding a way to do something like an installer and figuring out what distros/DAWs to target. Also I'd prefer to use LV2 for linux versions and that would require first migrating to the latest Juce. I think the best I could do was some kind of "experimental" linux builds for devoted users to be used without guarantees - once I find the time needed (some months off at least). To be completely honest - while I used linux for various things in the past I just never used it for audio - therefore essential expertise is lacking.

Agreed, the installer issue is the big hang-up for developers. I would recommend a couple of things for best experiences all around.

For simple plugins, most are easy enough to manually install as long as the binaries are already compiled. You could zip the binaries in folders with Readme instructions of which folders to copy each of the files to. Most Linux users are comfortable with computers, and it's not too difficult a thing for us to copy them to the correct paths.

If you wanted to go further, or if you didn't want to leave users without an installer, a shell script in a tar.xz file that copies the binaries to the correct spot (as well as an uninstaller shell script) would be a great distro agnostic way of providing plugins to Linux users.

Most developers compile the binaries on an older version of Ubuntu, but also do as you recommended and provide a "try before buying" clause for their Linux plugin sales. That way the customer can't complain if there is a problem.

Some developers choose to go even a bit further--they not only compile and create a distro agnostic version for non-Ubuntu Linux users, but also provide a DEB file for all Debian based distros to use (including Ubuntu). This way, the user that is using a Debian based distro is likely to have the least amount of problems, and this will provide a good package manager controlled binary for the majority of linux users, while providing an alternative for non-Ubuntu users.

I really do hope more developers start providing linux binaries of their plugins. The linux user base is growing and it's a nearly untapped market.

[spoontechnique]

I've tested Apqualizer and Apshaper on my Linux PC (Pop_OS) using Yabridge, in Bitwig. The good news is that they definitely work flawlessly so far. While a Linux native version is probably ideal, I don't know if it's necessary if you have Yabridge.

[obeycelestia]

Yabridge solves a lot of things, yup! Perhaps a flatpak or something might be a way of getting a wider distribution that's distro agnostic and has stable internal library versions, etc? No matter how much I'd just love to use yay or paru to pull in an aur build, haha.