this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
458 points (91.5% liked)

Linux

56105 readers
1107 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mayako@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 9 minutes ago

Personally I am okay with them actually. I use several on my system and having each app allowed to have different permissions is super useful.

But also I like things that are directly installed cause they seem just a tad faster performance wise.

[–] machinya@hexbear.net 1 points 14 minutes ago

i mostly use them for proprietary stuff or for software that is incredible painful to package (mostly electron apps). i will probably never use them for anything that actually matters but i also use rolling release distros everywhere so latest release is never too far. for testing latest version of any software i prefer appimages since they are simpler and don't need a messy setup as flatpak, but i also won't use them pass the testing phase and i prefer packaging the software if possible.

snaps, on the other hand, will never go near any of my systems. not even by accident

[–] AndrewZabar@lemmy.world 3 points 44 minutes ago

I don’t really care about all these different things, as long as none of them become a crazy confusing mess, like Windows DLLs.

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 22 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

I've never heard anyone say that Flatpaks could result in losing access to the terminal.

My only problem with Flatpaks are the lack of digital signature, neither from the repository nor the uploader. Other major package managers do use digital signatures, and Flatpaks should too.

[–] Obin@feddit.org 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Nah, it's the same as with systemd, docker, immutable distros etc. Some people just don't appreciate the added complexity for features they don't need/use and prefer to opt out. Then the advocates come, take not using their favorite software as a personal insult and make up straw-men to ridicule and argue against. Then the less enlightened of those opting out will get defensive and let themselves get dragged into the argument. 90% that's the way these flame wars get started and not the other way around.

For the record, I use flatpak on all my desktops, it's great, and all of the other mentioned things in some capacity, but I get why someone might want to not use them. Let's not make software choice a tribalism thing please. Love thy neighbor as thyself, unless they use Windows, in which case, kill the bastard. /s

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 hours ago
[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 23 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

I spent my time fighting AppImages until Canonical started to force Snap on me. I hated Snap so bad it forced me to switch distros. Now I appreciate Flatpak as a result and I don't find AppImages all that bad, either. Also, I haven't found myself in dependency-hell nor have I crashed my distro from unofficial Repos in well over a decade.

-It's a long way of saying It works for me and it's not Snap.

[–] db2@lemmy.world 10 points 3 hours ago

Appimages are ok, bloated but ok. Unless a library inside is old and won't work.

Flatpak is annoying and I don't like it at all, so I don't use it. Easy solution.

Fuck snap though.

[–] kadaverin0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I'm relatively new to Linux. I honestly don't see what the problem is.

[–] frozenspinach@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It destroys the beautiful and carefully cultivated ecosystem of distributed packages that has been the bedrock of Linux for decades. They're bloated, often not quite as sandboxed as claimed, have created packaging chaos, and assume availability of system services that may not be there.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 13 minutes ago

All of this is true and precisely zero normies care about any of it.

The fact that I can put my ~~idiots~~ family on any modern distro and tell them to use the app store alone makes flatpaks king of the app management

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm not a huge fan of Flatpaks, they're a lot harder to distribute offline versus something like AppImage. Seriously, you have to like create an offline repository, then create a bundle, and it's like 6 or 7 steps, it's honestly kind of ridiculous lol but other than that they seem fine, and they're easy enough to update (but so are apt packages)

I know some people may say "oh why do you need that", but Linux has taught me that my computer is my own, and I should be able to use it the way I want to. I shouldn't have to fight with my package manager to get it to do what I want. So I guess you could say, no I'm not really a fan of Flatpaks.

Personally, I didn't mind Snaps, but I'm getting kind of really fed up with especially for-profit companies etc so I don't like Snap that much now either.

Apt packages are nice, but the more of them you have installed, especially if you're using Ubuntu-based distros and have lots of PPAs, the more annoying upgrading your distro version can be because of all the dependencies and cross-dependencies.

AppImage tends to just work for me, as long as it's not compiled with a newer libc-bin version than the distro I'm currently using has, and I really enjoy that it's just one file I can copy and run pretty much anywhere.

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 2 points 43 minutes ago

I seem to have constant issues with AppImages. Every single one I have currently won't open. I get an error message relating to either qT or GTK. Tried searching for the error and get a bunch of old forum threads talking about either not being compatible with Wayland at all, or comments stating that the one specific AppImage in question must have been "packaged badly". Thankfully, nothing 'mission critical' for me is an AppImage currently, but it is quite upsetting that I have the most problems with the supposed "just works" app packaging/distribution option.

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 23 points 5 hours ago (6 children)

Flatpaks are great for situations where installing software is unnecessary complex or complicated.

I have Steam installed for some games, and since this is a 32 bits application it would install a metric shit-don of 32 bit dependencies I do not use for anything else except Steam, so I use the Flatpak version.

Or Kdenlive for video editing. Kdenlive is the only KDE software I use but when installing it, it feels like due to dependencies I also get pretty much all of the KDE desktop’s applications I do not need nor use nor want on my machine. So Flatpak it is.

And then there is software like OBS, which is known for being borderline unusable when not using the only officially supported way to use it on Linux outside of Ubuntu – which is Flatpak.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 19 minutes ago

And then there is software like OBS, which is known for being borderline unusable when not using the only officially supported way to use it on Linux outside of Ubuntu – which is Flatpak.

But why is that? I mean just because it is packaged by someone else does not mean its unusable. So its not the package formats issue, but your distribution packaging it wrong. Right? In installed the Flatpak version, because they developers recommended it to me. I'm not sure why the Archlinux package should be unusable (and I don't want to mess around with it, because I don't know what part is unusable).

[–] Obin@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

Flatpaks are great for situations where installing software is unnecessary complex or complicated.

That's my main use for flatpaks too. Add to that any and all closed source software, because you can't trust that without a sandbox around it.

Recently I've moved from using flatpak for electron apps and instead have a single flatpak ungoogled chromium instance I use for PWAs.

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

OBS worked pretty well for me last time I used it, using the basic package Debian provided.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] The_Walkening@hexbear.net 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I like the idea of them because I don't like dealing with dependencies changing and breaking stuff and I don't really care too much about disk space in the context of non-game desktop apps, as I don't tend to install lots of them.

That being said I absolutely hate that permissions are all over the place and flatpak doesn't ship a GUI to manage them by default, nor do you get any indication as to what permissions a program has until you try some functionality (like filesystem or camera access) only to find out it doesn't work out of the box.

[–] Andrzej3K@hexbear.net 7 points 4 hours ago

Cursed solution to a cursed problem 🤷

[–] Bluewing@lemmy.world 20 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I have used rpms, AppImages, Flatpaks, and source. I have even used a snap or two when I had no other choice.

If you can't work with them all, can you even say you Linux Bro?

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

If you don't compile everything from source, you may as well get a Chromebook!

[–] Bluewing@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Never, ever, ever do more effort than is required.

[–] AnIntenseMoist@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

Bro, TRUTH. I have preferences but when you gotta get something done, it doesn't matter how the app comes bundled. I'd run .exe's through Wine if I needed to.

load more comments
view more: next ›