3 ms·
AppImage are perhaps that only thing working OOTB like windows/Mac programs, and other container formats don't come close. Everything else is dependent on right
by 8474_s 2y ago
AppImage are perhaps that only thing working
OOTB like windows/Mac programs,
and other container formats don't come close.
Everything else is dependent on right configuration,
correct versioning and lots of
"magic" settings that need to be
set to make something functional.
Depending on correct glibc, dependencies
being installed with the right settings,
environment variables,makefiles
being compatible with what your system
has,having the right kernel version,
etc.
- f1refly 2y agoThat's all stuff the systems package manager handles for you, no need to touch any package versions manually ever.
- BigParm 2y agoAppImage is the best invention ever. If someone funded GearLever we would be in great shape.
- PlutoIsAPlanet 2y ago> Depending on correct glibc, dependencies being installed with the right settings, environment variables,makefiles being compatible with what your system has,having the right kernel version, etc. Apart from having a bingo at what dependencies you bundle, AppImage makes no effort to actually solve this, where as Flatpak and Snap do. The reason glibc, environmental variables, dependencies is important is because the Linux desktop is not a single distribution etc, nor is there one arbiter keeping ABI stability. You venture out onto a distribution that is not what the AppImage was built on and you see what a wild ride it is of if things are working or not. Incompatible curl versions, glibc, mesa, etc. AppImage pretends to work like .exe on Windows, or .app on macOS, but it doesn't share anything similar with them at all. Both Windows and macOS have stable userspaces where things don't change, Linux on the other hand... For refence, Flatpak solves this via freedesktop runtimes and Snap solves this by installing Ubuntu containers.