3 ms·

I had to use flatpack to install Bottles, I'm on Porteus because it's the only distrib I found that would fit on a 15 year old 512MB USB stick and then in the R

I had to use flatpack to install Bottles, I'm on Porteus because it's the only distrib I found that would fit on a 15 year old 512MB USB stick and then in the RAM directly... Let just say it wasn't a seamless experience but I'm glad I managed to run Cinema4D R20 or MPC Software with Bottles without too many bugs. Anyway Bottles is just fantastic, I tried Wine before but it never worked properly, but having to install a package manager (flatpack) on top of another one (slackpkg) just felt absurd... What about appimage instead, like Krita? To me it's sounds like the best way to distribute a linux app in 202X... Managing to make things run on Linux gives a sense of accomplissement, at the same time, I can understand why most people won't move to Linux anytime soon given all the complexity involved... or it's just me and there was an easier way to install flatpack at first place?

cld8483 4y ago
AppImage is great, definitely the best of the bunch.
- PlutoIsAPlanet 4y ago
  Said no one relevant AppImage solves the packaging problem in a bad way (ugh, loopback mounts), but does not solve the dependency problem, try run AppImages compiled for Ubuntu on Fedora..
  - cld8483 4y ago
    > Said no one relevant [Retort insult.]
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    The main use case for appimage imo is things you just want to run once quickly and easily. Trying beta builds from github releases for example. It's quite poor for anything you frequently use or want to keep updated. It's also completely lacking security iirc which Flatpak does well.
- badsectoracula 4y ago
  AppImage is far from great, the great one is having a foundation that doesn't break every 5 years and programs relying on that foundation. AppImage is just the least bad solution - if nothing else it doesn't need some weird infrastructure to run. As a developer you just upload the binary to your site and as a user you just download the binary and run it.

cld8483 4y ago

AppImage is great, definitely the best of the bunch.

PlutoIsAPlanet 4y ago
Said no one relevant AppImage solves the packaging problem in a bad way (ugh, loopback mounts), but does not solve the dependency problem, try run AppImages compiled for Ubuntu on Fedora..
- cld8483 4y ago
  > Said no one relevant [Retort insult.]
- Gigachad 4y ago
  The main use case for appimage imo is things you just want to run once quickly and easily. Trying beta builds from github releases for example. It's quite poor for anything you frequently use or want to keep updated. It's also completely lacking security iirc which Flatpak does well.
badsectoracula 4y ago
AppImage is far from great, the great one is having a foundation that doesn't break every 5 years and programs relying on that foundation. AppImage is just the least bad solution - if nothing else it doesn't need some weird infrastructure to run. As a developer you just upload the binary to your site and as a user you just download the binary and run it.