[Cin] CinGG AppImage

[mat]

I think it is a good idea too.

I have done some editing, and found no problems. But I am not a heavy
user. 

Maybe in a separate section of the download page, and then maybe the
very first?
Keep the similar naming? Like

cinelerra-5.1-20201031.x86_64.AppImage

or using CinGG in honor of Bill:

CinGG-20201031.x86_64-older_distros.AppImage
CinGG-20201031.x86_64.newer_distros.AppImage

or something else. How many 32 bit distro users are there?

@Phyllis, if you can build from the 20201031 release code, then maybe
that should be the first one on there? So people can compare the
AppImage with the package-style release of the same vintage, and we
have a reference in case of things not working as they used to be.

Then because there will only be two versions ("older" and "newer")
there could be a few more "previous" ones than the 1 previous there is
now.

And it should be mentioned what the differences are between old and
new, and when you should use one or the other.

I have not tested cmd line parameter -r for batch rendering, not sure
if there are any other cmd line options I should test.

MatN

On Tue, 2021-02-23 at 08:23 -0700, Phyllis Smith via Cin wrote:
> Good idea.  I am working on BT #538 to install the latest latex2html
> on another computer so I have a backup.  Once I am finished with that
> I can update the distros pages "how to" on the website.  I do not
> think too many people have used the AppImage's yet but I believe that
> MatN uses it and has reported no problems.
> 
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 7:15 AM Andrea paz via Cin <
> cin at lists.cinelerra-gg.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I was wondering if it's time to put appimage as the main
> > installation
> > method of CinGG, highlighting it in the website and the manual. The
> > binaries remain working but not updated. What do you guys think?