282
submitted 2 years ago by Pantherina@feddit.de to c/linux@lemmy.ml

Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.

Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.

I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.

This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don't seem to get that.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] kugmo@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 years ago

don't care still using appimages and not flatpaks

[-] Pantherina@feddit.de 7 points 2 years ago

Thats a very constructive point!

[-] Jegahan@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

By the way, if you guys are interested here is a talk comparing Appimages Snaps and Flatpaks by Richard Brown, one the devs at Suse, a big contributer to openSuse and the guy who spearheaded the Desktop variante of MicroOS (the immutable openSuse Tumbleweed).

He isn't to keen on appimages either because of a miriad of technical issues.

[-] Pantherina@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

youtube.com/watch?v=4WuYGcs0t6I&t=456

For all the Grayjay/Newpipe/Freetube users

Very good video with additional points, will add them

[-] oldfart@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago

Why do I hear the argument about no .desktop entries in every thread like this? Creating a .desktop file is a requirement for the appimage creation tools to work, and appimaged installs it in the system menu immediately. It's seamless.

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 years ago

flatpak?

Frying pan, meet fire.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 5 points 2 years ago

AppImages as a universal packaging format seem fun in that I've had loads of issues getting them to run properly on different systems. I'm sure they're handy for some stuff but haven't personally enjoyed them.

[-] delirious_owl@discuss.online 5 points 2 years ago

AppImages can be signed. Flat pak is the lesser option for security

[-] Pantherina@feddit.de 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Explained in a other comment how a pain it is to verify such a signature.

Is that stored in the appimage file?

I find it funny how flatpak neglectors always spell it wrong

[-] penquin@lemmy.kde.social 4 points 2 years ago

I don't use app images of flatpaks. I don't like either.

[-] brax@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago

I hate them both, give me a .Deb (or equivalent) if you're gonna package it. And get off my lawn! 🤣

[-] Pantherina@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago

Installing .deb files from random sources is also very insecure and not reliable for updates.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] rotopenguin@infosec.pub 4 points 2 years ago

It would be nice if there was a way to bundle up a flatpak that was at risk of disappearing

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] spacebanana@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Static binaries, or dynamic binaries whose project has documentation on what dependencies they need, are better than appimages. This is because appimages are a container with the actual files inside, creating a layer of abstraction, and appimages require libfuse to work.

Imagine the case in NixOS, where dynamically-linked binaries don't work out of the box. You can patch or package these binaries, or just quickly use something like steam-run to emulate traditional Linux bin and lib paths, it works. With appimages, it won't work unless you already have libfuse in your system, so you have to extract the appimage first.

Still, flatpaks as the only official alternative isn't great for many reasons, and CLI/TUI programs are out of the equation. What is better is the devs distributing unpackaged binaries, jars, etc, and optionally flatpaks. Either way, Nix's repository is huge so I don't usually feel the need to run anything that isn't a nix package.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
282 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

59197 readers
326 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS