I don't see how warp handles the most trivial case of a dynamically linked executable; I see no references to patchelf or other such tricks to ensure it looks within the application's cache directory for dynamically linked libraries, nor do I see any mount namespaces.
Does warp do that? Why would I use warp if it doesn't when there are more generic solutions that can handle such a case, namely binctr, docker, guix pack, nix....
binctr is Linux-only, and appears to need Docker as a runtime requirement? This has neither constraint, apparently?
binctr does not require any runtime component other than a modern linux kernel with unprivileged usernamespace support.
Targetting OSX / Windows does make warp distinct from what I mentioned, though I don't use those OSs so I admit I didn't think about that possible issue.
Anyway, I thought this was a solved problem on both Windows and OSX since they both have conventions for self-contained applications, while linux does not.
This is mistaken for Windows. Even if programs are run from Program Files, they will often source their DLLs from other locations.