What’s the big selling point compared to ranger or yazi?

I haven’t used any of the 3, but from a look over them superfile looks a lot more user friendly and has a nicer overall look.

Glibc is the gnu c library. You wouldn’t just download that from apt. I’m surprised your Linux distro doesn’t already have that installed.

It’s definitely a big learning curve with how complex installing things on linux is haha, I’m still used to windows just open the exe installer and that’s it.

Yeah I hear that. I will say aptitude made my life a lot easier in terms of installing things with its recommended fixes.

I mean there’s that, but it’s a lot of work for a dev too.

I would rather Linux just be able to detect what’s missing and install it for me, or just have the required stuff ship inside the binary.

It was always nice with windows installers because they would come with the needed components, or windows would just prompt to install them automatically.

I guess that’s essentially what Flatpak solves too!

There are two specific problems I see here for the mentioned binaries.

The software is packaged as a generic archive, no format like rpm or deb the system package manager could/does handle. Thus, the package manager of your system does neither know that you’ve installed this binary nor what it depends on. The developer could have at least mentioned on which exact system the Linux binaries are supposed to work, e.g. Ubuntu 22.04, so that the user knows, that they might have issues running it on a different system.

The developer could have built and packed it in a way that it can be installed by the package manager of a specific distribution. Launchpad or OBS are made for this purpose. The other option, wrapping it as a flatpak, works too, but may bloat the system of the user as different versions of the same libraries are installed (system generic + flatpak version).

Nonetheless, you are encouraged to build directly from source.