Keep Your Snaps and Flatpaks, I'll Take AppImages! DistroTube
video description
Date: 2022-03-30
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Gabifuertes
Flatpaks and AppImages are two different things altogether. They are as similar as containers and virtual machines. Both can be used as a single output from source code that'll run on any distro, but inner workings are night and day. Appimages are self contained portable, as the name implies, application images. Flatpaks are the solution between that and a regular package manager.
Package managers work great on a few conditions:
a) Someone mantains a central repository to match dependencies
b) Software is currently mantained
c) Software is free and open source, so dependencies can be updated in case the developer doesn't
d) The user wants to only keep the latest version available of the software
That's the case for most programs, but there are cases where these conditions don't match. Old games can have dependencies on very different versions of, say, dot NET or DirectX. You might think, well, why can't we have a -dot NET- directory with all versions, and redirect accordingly? And in that case you'd have more than a single file to move around. What's the point of it being -packaged- anymore? You'd need a -package manager- for that.
Modularity takes away simplicity. All in hopes of saving a few megabytes on disk.
reply
Flatpaks and AppImages are two different things altogether. They are as similar as containers and virtual machines. Both can be used as a single output from source code that'll run on any distro, but inner workings are night and day. Appimages are self contained portable, as the name implies, application images. Flatpaks are the solution between that and a regular package manager.
Package managers work great on a few conditions:
a) Someone mantains a central repository to match dependencies
b) Software is currently mantained
c) Software is free and open source, so dependencies can be updated in case the developer doesn't
d) The user wants to only keep the latest version available of the software
That's the case for most programs, but there are cases where these conditions don't match. Old games can have dependencies on very different versions of, say, dot NET or DirectX. You might think, well, why can't we have a -dot NET- directory with all versions, and redirect accordingly? And in that case you'd have more than a single file to move around. What's the point of it being -packaged- anymore? You'd need a -package manager- for that.
Modularity takes away simplicity. All in hopes of saving a few megabytes on disk.
reply
Bunstonious
I feel this video was a bit disingenuous when it comes to flatpak and the usage of appimage.
The way I see it appimage use case isn't the same as Flatpak or Snap necessarily.
I think going forward this makes a logical use case for each:
Package Distribution: This is how the core OS files are distributed, eg the base system and core functions like windows manager.
Snaps and Flatpaks: This is for the 'addons' that you may want that distribution maintainers have a long history of sometimes taking ages to package (eg. try getting Libreoffice up to date on a Debian based system, some are but most aren't. Source: My experience).
Appimage: Appimages are good for those big distributed apps where the developer wants max compatibility and might have lots of shared or older libs, contain everything in it's own package and it just runs with no issues. Essentially like the apps on Mac.
I also think that saying that the flathub is the only repository for flatpaks is just incorrect, as far as i'm aware unlike snaps it's an open format and anyone can have their own repository (Fedora have their own separate one), so it's incorrect to lump flatpak in with snap on that one.
reply
I feel this video was a bit disingenuous when it comes to flatpak and the usage of appimage.
The way I see it appimage use case isn't the same as Flatpak or Snap necessarily.
I think going forward this makes a logical use case for each:
Package Distribution: This is how the core OS files are distributed, eg the base system and core functions like windows manager.
Snaps and Flatpaks: This is for the 'addons' that you may want that distribution maintainers have a long history of sometimes taking ages to package (eg. try getting Libreoffice up to date on a Debian based system, some are but most aren't. Source: My experience).
Appimage: Appimages are good for those big distributed apps where the developer wants max compatibility and might have lots of shared or older libs, contain everything in it's own package and it just runs with no issues. Essentially like the apps on Mac.
I also think that saying that the flathub is the only repository for flatpaks is just incorrect, as far as i'm aware unlike snaps it's an open format and anyone can have their own repository (Fedora have their own separate one), so it's incorrect to lump flatpak in with snap on that one.
reply
Danny
I really don't understand why all these AppImage/Flatpak/Snap stuff is necessary at all. In the first place I want software working as intended at the first launch. Without doing any special stuff. Don't matter if it's -you need to right click and select AppImageLauncher- or -you need to run this and that command to allow access to XY-. I still prefer the tools which are coming pre-installed (apt, pacman and the like). If I'm not wrong you don't even say a word about that you have to update all your AppImages manually. No automatic updates. Correct me if I'm wrong. I personally prefer software which can be installed through apt on my machine. I get automatic updates, dependencies are resolved and installed automatically and everything just works. What's the purpose?
reply
I really don't understand why all these AppImage/Flatpak/Snap stuff is necessary at all. In the first place I want software working as intended at the first launch. Without doing any special stuff. Don't matter if it's -you need to right click and select AppImageLauncher- or -you need to run this and that command to allow access to XY-. I still prefer the tools which are coming pre-installed (apt, pacman and the like). If I'm not wrong you don't even say a word about that you have to update all your AppImages manually. No automatic updates. Correct me if I'm wrong. I personally prefer software which can be installed through apt on my machine. I get automatic updates, dependencies are resolved and installed automatically and everything just works. What's the purpose?
reply
Gabriel
Flatpak also support standalone files like AppImage. The main issue for me with Flathub is that they don't have a way to companies/developers publish their apps directly to Flathub. Another cool thing about flatpak is the PORTAL, you can talk anything you want, but, Flatpak is the future because it is trying the best to standardize things, like they did now with Dark/Light theme.
I basicly never work with Native Linux before and I keep search FOR HOURS to find a Good solution cross DEs to SELECT A FILE and there is none good enought that is cross DE and Flatpak is different, Portal does have this API, even if you don't use Flatpak you will have benefit of a DE that supports PORTAL
reply
Flatpak also support standalone files like AppImage. The main issue for me with Flathub is that they don't have a way to companies/developers publish their apps directly to Flathub. Another cool thing about flatpak is the PORTAL, you can talk anything you want, but, Flatpak is the future because it is trying the best to standardize things, like they did now with Dark/Light theme.
I basicly never work with Native Linux before and I keep search FOR HOURS to find a Good solution cross DEs to SELECT A FILE and there is none good enought that is cross DE and Flatpak is different, Portal does have this API, even if you don't use Flatpak you will have benefit of a DE that supports PORTAL
reply
Alexandre
Get down below some timestamps:
1:06 Basic of AppImage
2:48 AppImage Hub
3:29 AppImage Launcher (For the sake of your mental health use the .AppImage option huehue)
4:06 LibreWolf
4:30 Explanation about where to put the .AppImage file
7:34 AppImagePool (Kind of Gnome Software)
09:59 Xonsh - Used at 11:54
10:21 Failed try to get Powershell (Oh man dont do that hueuhe)
10:47 eDEX UI - Used at 12:40
11:37 Hyper - Used at 13:03
reply
Get down below some timestamps:
1:06 Basic of AppImage
2:48 AppImage Hub
3:29 AppImage Launcher (For the sake of your mental health use the .AppImage option huehue)
4:06 LibreWolf
4:30 Explanation about where to put the .AppImage file
7:34 AppImagePool (Kind of Gnome Software)
09:59 Xonsh - Used at 11:54
10:21 Failed try to get Powershell (Oh man dont do that hueuhe)
10:47 eDEX UI - Used at 12:40
11:37 Hyper - Used at 13:03
reply
Onek
Hi guys. Recently had to change working station to MacOS(due to work reasons), what is the adequate WM for macOS ? On Linux I-ve been using i3wm.
Have tried amethyst - not satisfied .
Heard about yabai, but since this is working laptop I do not have permissions to turn off some security things yabay requests to.
Any suggestions ?
reply
Hi guys. Recently had to change working station to MacOS(due to work reasons), what is the adequate WM for macOS ? On Linux I-ve been using i3wm.
Have tried amethyst - not satisfied .
Heard about yabai, but since this is working laptop I do not have permissions to turn off some security things yabay requests to.
Any suggestions ?
reply
Robert
Snaps are a nightmare and canonical is to blame. Flatpak is simpler and much more stable. The snap version of vlc for example frezees a lot while the flatpak version works like a champ. Appimages are the -It just works- example and honestly, when available, they are my To-go option. Example, etcher and openshot appimages.
reply
Snaps are a nightmare and canonical is to blame. Flatpak is simpler and much more stable. The snap version of vlc for example frezees a lot while the flatpak version works like a champ. Appimages are the -It just works- example and honestly, when available, they are my To-go option. Example, etcher and openshot appimages.
reply
itech
Was very frustrated by flatpak after installing wireshark and realizing you cannot capture packets locally and you cannot sudo flatpak run wireshark
So some limitations exist that you just won't be able to overcome and will need to install apps through more traditional methods.
reply
Was very frustrated by flatpak after installing wireshark and realizing you cannot capture packets locally and you cannot sudo flatpak run wireshark
So some limitations exist that you just won't be able to overcome and will need to install apps through more traditional methods.
reply
theologos
It doesn't matter, as long as we have all the applications we want and keep them away from system dependencies. A few years back we had to use all kind of wacky methods to get our software, now everything is one click away, it's nice.
reply
It doesn't matter, as long as we have all the applications we want and keep them away from system dependencies. A few years back we had to use all kind of wacky methods to get our software, now everything is one click away, it's nice.
reply
Tony
It is like choosing between poop, kool-aid, and a milkshake. Snaps are the kool-aid. They are not healthy for you. They are also bad for your soul.. Flatpak is a full meal. A health shake, with consistent flavor.
reply
It is like choosing between poop, kool-aid, and a milkshake. Snaps are the kool-aid. They are not healthy for you. They are also bad for your soul.. Flatpak is a full meal. A health shake, with consistent flavor.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
