>>108235691
It's not just bad, it's shit.

>>108235691
>bloatpak

(((corporation))) is behind it. Appimage is better.

i never saw a downloadable flatpak in the wild, they are all always locked into "stores" and "hubs"

AppImage however is based and does everything you claim that flatpak does.

>>108235691
>Fagpak
You will never be a woman you tranny faggot

>>108235691
>Fudgepak
No thanks, I'm not gay

>>108235691
>turns a 15 MB app into 3 GB
Just use system libraries like a normal person.

>>108235691
>it's good because it practically installs an entire OS for every single program that I try to use, making it take at least 4x the storage and 3x the startup time
Why do you think like this?

>>108235719
The more apps you install the closer it comes to parity with system packages in terms of size since they reuse dependencies

>>108235906
Then whats the point?
If it has tons of dependencies anyway, why use it?
What is the problem it wants to solve?

It's bad for my use case.
It's good for retards and tech-illiterate people.
Simple as.

File: gaycord_flatpak.png (149 KB, 1001x887)

149 KB PNG

>>108235691
based
>verified and packaged by the dev
>no repackaged bullshit
>distribution agnostic
>runs even on LTS or GNU-less distros
>no dependency hell
>doesn't impact system stability
>allows apps to use the latst mesa driver
>1 click installation without sudo
>manage permissions with flatseal
>rollback or freeze with warehouse
>developed by the leading linux
>used by valve (SteamOS)
>targeted by 3rd party devs
>yes even proprietary garbage like jizzcord
I don't get the "negatives" sure, they are a bit bigger, but they share libs. You should upgrade your 128GB poorfag SSD. I prefer to install software directly from the dev (verified only), instead of using sudo to install a 3rd party package from a "trust me bro" maintainer on the AUR. It also really helps on LTS distros like Debian or Mint, to get the latest and greatest, without sacrificing your stability. I hate the Archlinux minimalism cope, crazy how people are getting filtered by permissions.

>>108236099
>no dependency hell
solved by apt

>>108235919
>What is the problem it wants to solve?
Devs being too lazy to code around minuscule differences in system library versions. Ironically web and mobile devs are forced to work around bigger differences all the time and it's taken for granted.

>>108236099
flatpaks dependency hell is even worse, because it pulls in GBs for something thats otherwise 1 MB.

And the devs do not package the flatpaks either, thats a lie that flathub tells you. The "verified" sign just means that the random 14yo transsexual on github, who submitted it, asked the devs for permission and the didn't openly refuse.
It is insecure as fuck.

>>108235691
>>108235707
It works and is more aecure than naked linux desktop.
There's no better alternative.

>>108236194
>it works
it doesnt

File: lolmaoeven.png (173 KB, 1476x1093)

173 KB PNG

>>108236166
>The "verified" sign just means that the random 14yo transsexual on github
Sauce? Whatever, I'll install OBS like the devs intended it to be installed: Picrel. Why are Archjeets so anti flatpak? It's funny that you say "le 14yo tranny on github" while your jeetware is most likely repackaged by some troon on the AUR.

>>108236194
>is more secure
it isnt

>>108236222
>Sauce
the flathub documentation
https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/verification
>authorized party
if you ever were part of any opensource project ever, you will know that random noname trannies, who nobody knows and have no history, come knocking and ask if you are against them doing a flatpak.
And if you say "whatever", they now have the verified badge and you have to deal with all the bug reports coming in, because they do a mediocre job.

File: trvke.png (95 KB, 875x802)

95 KB PNG

>>108236194
>There's no better alternative.
True, I mean it's preinstalled on every major distro. Even a lazy flatpak with horrible permissions is still better. But I have to admit, there is still some software that isn't suitable as Flatpak yet or some low level software, that needs system level access.
>>108236231
>it isnt
Why?

>>108236290
>Why?
because if one library has an exploit, you rely on a hundred random noname dudes on github to update their individual packages.... rather than updating one single package shipped by the distribution

>>108236284
>the flathub documentation
>https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/verification
Just a tutorial on how to get verified. What are you trying to achieve? And lets stop the tranny talk, I don't even know why you started this. But I know for sure that these people prefer Arch and Nix, which is the opposite of Flatpak.

>>108235691
i have workin avif support at krita
my nonflatpak imagemagick does not yet have avif but i am at 22.1 while main is at 22.2 or 22.3

>>108236322
it is the official flathub documentation telling you that the verified badge does NOT mean that its from the dev, or even recommended from the dev

You made the argument that flatpaks come from upstream... they dont.. so what now?
>it doesnt matter whether or not they are trans
true, you cant trust random people on github, even if they wouldnt be trans, its always a very bad idea

>>108236335
the official recommended way of installing Krita, according to its devs, is AppImage.
The flatpak is specifically not supported and if you go to them and report a bug while using it, they will tell you to install the appimage and check if it works there

>>108235691
any time i have had an issue with a program it was a flatpak when i uninstall the flatpak and install the system package all of a sudden the problems go away. so i use system packages. i dont care about any opinions only facts

>>108235691
No, it's bad because my distro's package manager already does all that, all with the convenience of not using double the RAM and disk space, nor forcing me to tinker with permissions.

File: landa_senpai.png (601 KB, 1125x1145)

601 KB PNG

>>108236356
Hey anon, I think I'm done here, I want to apologize for raising your blood pressure, I don't want any beef. And I don't want you to twist my words. I will agree with you with that:
>Verified flatpaks CAN be maintained by the community
Yes, this is true. But this doesn't mean that most Flatpaks are like this (OBS for example). But hey, don't feel personally attacked, I still use system level software, but I feel like there is no reason for me to install xxx program from the AUR with sudo vs a verified flatpak, UNLESS it needs special system access like ROCm for example.

>>108235906
>since they reuse dependencies
Not all of them. You can easily end up with a fuckton of different versions of Mesa because the Flatpaks all use different ABIs. With just 5 Flatpak applications, I have 16GB worth of dependencies.

>>108235691
I heard appimage is better
I've never used either one

>download flatpak app
>doesn't use my system gtk theme
>every command I try doesn't fix it
>stuck with lightmode eyerape
>try to use graphics acceleration
>can't find graphics card
>learn you need to install nvidia "runtime" for flatpak to be able to use graphics acceleration
>try to install it and realize my nvidia driver is one version ahead of the latest available nvidia runtime
>stuck without graphics acceleration
>sudo pacman -Rns flatpak
It's a decent idea but if the idea is to be able to run applications seamlessly on any distro with minimal tinkering it fails miserably at that. If I can't just run the application and have it run without spending more time fucking around than I would have spent just building it from source then it's not worth the extra complexity

File: appimage.png (463 KB, 1311x1036)

463 KB PNG

>>108236535
I'm glad linux copied this

>>108235691
All this trouble because peoples were mind-raped into believing static linking was bad.

>>108235691
flatpak, snap, deb, appimage... good lord how many .exes does this damn os need.

>>108236623
>flatpak/snap = windows store
>.deb = .exe
>appimage = portable.exe

>>108236661
.deb would be more like a .msi

>>108236718
In theory.
In reality .msi is so bad that most software ships as .exe installers that are basically self extracting archives.
It is really stupid if you think about it.

>Before you update SmallProgram, you must first update org.kde.Platform.
>380 MB file
>Progress bar hits 100% after 100 MB
>Actual file is 460 MB
Rapes my limited slow bandwidth.

>>108235691
It sells itself as a sandbox. It itsn't. I had a look at what exactly Discord has access to once, and I discovered (to my horror) that Flatpak's permissions model is so coarse that doing anything at all creates holes you could sail the Ever Given through sideways. You cannot usefully control what apps have permitted access to, never mind any sort of security. It does make things portable, but like others have said, AppImage does that too but simpler.

>>108235691
I like it, shit just works. And has improved software availability on my distro
>>108235734
What's the corporation?

>>108236142
>>108235919
It's not really devs but distro packagers who have to do a lot of work to fit all this software with all the other software in any given distro's repo

>>108236436
Wtf what flatpaks did you install? I wanna try too. I have 27 flatpaks and I have 8 gigs of deps

>>108236872
>Progress bar hits 100% after 100 MB
That happens because it only downloads what you already don't have. It just downloads the diff.

>>108237137
So what's the point of the progress bar? It's worthless.

>>108235691
appimage is the ultimate solution
flatpack is too bloated for its intent
if I want to bundle an executable in a portable with ease of use, appimage is just copy and paste, while flatpack needs a package mamager.
If I need a package manager, wthe fuck I wouldn't use dynamic linking?

>>108235734
>Appimage is better.
Tell that to my broken appimage that won't work properly because it says my laptop has 0 CPU cores.

did they fix flatpaks taking forever to start and ignoring the system theme?

>>108237215
It shows your progress, it just jumps to the end much sooner than you'd expect if you have a very similar files already

>>108237381
No... not yet..

>>108237307
If AppImages really bundled everything in, so that they'd truly be universal, you'd just be duplicating the same files again and again for every single program. With flatpak/snap, you have dedupping taking care of that. But you could also use filrsystem level dedupping to solve the whole issue

I don't even understand what it does.
Packages all the dependencies with it?
Isn't that what a package manager is for?

Or does it setup like specific paths for its specific dependencies so as not to mess with other versions and paths?

I don't really understand why it exists.

>>108235691
>it bundles everything up into an easy compatible package that even the basic computer users can install
You're confusing flatpak with appimages

>>108237448
Package manager figures what depencies a given package needs and installs all of those for you. Repo jannies are responsible of making sure that everyone can run on the same versions of libs and that a lib upgrade doesn't fuck up all of the shit using it. With flatpak you don't have to do that part

>>108237416
So you agree it's pointless then. Good. Had to pull it out of you.

>>108237540
I just explained how it works since you were confused

Generally I like to use native packages for system stuff, flatpak for general programs, and appimages for things I rarely use and don't care about being up to date. No real reason other than I just like to keep it organized that way.

That said it feels like a lot of the programs I would actually prefer to use a flatpak for end up have issues. Especially proprietary stuff.

>>108237553
I'm still confused by the inclusion of a worthless progress bar. Do I need to say the value in the progress bar is to show the progress in a download/upload/transfer? The assumption we all make is 100% means 'completion'.

It's just the contemptible backwards thinking from the brainiacs who design Flatpak. True innovators in misleading, time wasting, bandwidth destroying software repository design philosophy.

>>108237644
100% is what it shows when it's completed?
>Progress bar hits 100% after 100 MB
It just completes (goes to 100%) earlier than you'd expect because it knows how big the download it, only after starting it realizes that it has X amount of parts already downloaded. It's actually finishing quicker and downloading less, seems opposite of time wasting to me but I dunno

>install a game through flatpak
>play a level that feels like absolute bullshit
>search and find a replay file of someone beating it
>replay is only compatible with older version

you'd think all the sandboxing and container shit would make it easier but apparently flatpak barely supports something like installing an old version side-by-side with a current one. Especially since you'd have to redirect the home dir to not stomp on current version's saves/config.
Appimage could easily do it, possibly with bubblewrap if needed to deal with the /home issue.
The ancient windows technology of portable .zip with .exe in it would trivialize this. In the end, maybe simple is better.

>>108237659
No clue at what you're trying to say. 100% progress should simply mean 'download is complete'. This is how it's always been. NOBODY wants anything different from this.

If you actually ask around, you might be surprised to learn you are alone in believing a progress bar with no meaning is not appreciated at all.

>>108237716
The download is complete at 100%. How are you this dim lmao

>>108236099
>If you don't like programs taking up 5x the amount of space they need upgrade your storage
lmao, the only needed proof that linux for desktop is and always will be garbage is that packaging an entire OS for every single application is the only way to make programs actually work

>>108235691
docker but worse

>>108237046
The distro isn't responsible for that. Either the package developer themselves or someone else who cares about the package being included in a distro should make sure it builds with that distro's library versions.

>>108236290
ai;dr

>>108235691
I don't think it's bad, it's just you gotta wrestle with the flatpak maintainers so they don't have (You) working to get their shit to work.
Go look up at the long list of issues that the Steam flatpak still has right now. This is not a program that 2 or 3 people use. This is what every single mother fucking Windows refugee wants to use. They come across issues with the flatpak all the fucking time. They end up having no trouble with the native package provided by arch, openSUSE, debian, fucking fedora even. The bazzite guy, you'd think he's into flatpak dicksucking, he himself, mr. bazzite gospo, decided to layer this shit because the flatpak is so fucking bad.
For most normal shit that people wanna use I've seen much more success on base distro packages (unless you use, I don't know, a really shitty derivative) than fucking around with some flatpaks.

>>108237730
It's not complete you spaz. In my example, it keeps going for 80 additional Megabytes. Have you fundamentally misunderstood my point or did you flunk English class? Do you need some illustrations to understand?

>>108235691
flatpal and snaps are both trash. appimage bros rise up

>>108235691
I speak on behalf of the superior 1% of Linux users, not the cringe 99% of Linux users who are corpo devs or gamers who got into Linux when Steam got a .deb package or when Cachy and Bazzite were released. WE do not want normies to use Linux. We do not want Linux to be easy. We do not want Linux to be secure unless you make it secure yourself. Dependency handling and sandboxing is something the user should do manually. ALL software on Linux should be either given to you by your distribution maintainers or by you compiling it yourself, no exceptions.

>>108235691
Every single one of these container formats is shit and it's been that way since the OpenPandora when those retards started this trend with the PND format.

>install tumbleweed
>no codecs
>ok I'll do it the easy wa--
>"no don't! it'll go out of sync all the time!"
>have to replace my anything with flatpak
>eventually come to the part where my browser is a fucking flatpak instead because the tarball version can tell I have no codecs, so I can't watch the slop, and obviously using third party repositories is a big no no
>browser freezes all the fucking time and changes some fonts while at it
I am done with this experience

>>108235691
>"Bro just install random binaries from the internet! Flatpak is gay!"

This is the most windows-brained moron take ever. You guys love giving your computers aids don't you?

>that feel when immutable file system
>that feel when FANTASTIC cleanliness on all my PCs

OP is a FAGGOT

>>108238898
>that feel when the absolute buffoon in charge of your immemable distro sets something up wrong and you cannot change dick about it

>>108238449
the flatpak version of steam is used by almost 10% of linux users. so is it really that bad if there's 4x more flatpak users than debian or opensuse users?

>>108238603
appimage depends on a library which hasn't been maintained in a decade. I'm not against the format but there must be a better way to handle it. apparently there's some alternative package format which combines the ease of use of appimage with the security of flatpak without introducing runtime autism and general edge-case incompatibility flatpak has.

>>108238898
I'd mostly agree with you, but there are benefits in layering a package and making a system "less clean" by doing so. some things don't have a flatpak version and don't work in distrobox.

File: 1711051509550583.jpg (406 KB, 2560x1862)

406 KB JPG

>>108235691
>Fagpak
That's why I abandoned the adventure with Linux, it just smells like shit and that's it.

>>108239027
>the flatpak version of steam is used by almost 10% of linux users. so is it really that bad if there's 4x more flatpak users than debian or opensuse users?
And even worse.

>>108239027
>appimage depends on a library which hasn't been maintained in a decade
moot point as linux grows in popularity

>hey wouldn't it be a great idea if we reinvented winsxs but even worse all because this proprietary shitware can't be recompiled
>sounds great, ship it!

>>108235737
> i never saw a downloadable flatpak in the wild, they are all always locked into "stores" and "hubs"

It's because most flatpaks now have dependencies so they need a store to resolve them, they can't run standalone.
But it's still a better system than apt because it just is, ok?

The average poster pushing for flatpak usage is the reason why I don't use flatpaks often. They act like GNOME devs all the fucking time. They are truly insufferable maricones.

>>108239142
>proprietary shitware
Does that even have flatpaks? It would be the one case where all the sandboxing and duplication and permission jank actually makes perfect sense. But in real life, if you see proprietary linux shitware it probably ships with a .run file which is only supported on red hat 6.

>>108239774
yes
https://flathub.org/en/apps/us.zoom.Zoom

>>108238950
>that feel when the absolute buffoon in charge of your immemable distro sets something up wrong and you cannot change dick about it
every immutable distro offers documentation on changing parts of the system.
suse you make changes in a btrfs subvolume
nixos you use modules
ostree you make changes to a container image and push it to your registry
AB root you make changes to the other root.
that quote only applies to steamOS really

>>108236166
>ecause it pulls in GBs for something thats otherwise 1 MB.
I've seen people saying this, but checking the comparisons on my own system, it's more like a few mb more. I don't know why people parrot this.

>>108235691
i don't want fucking sandbox and some retarded portals and shit
anything made by freedesktop et al is retarded by design
squashfs solves the same without bloat and retarded shit

where's the .deb for the following:
>qbittorrent
>freetube
>metadata cleaner
>jellyfin
>SimpleX
>Heroic Games Launcher or any game launcher
>resources
>fSearch
>Librewolf
>Palemoon
>Ungoogled Chromium
>Mullvad Browser
>Floorp
>Mullvad VPN
I'll abandon flatpaks and take the minimalist route if I can have all these that I use daily without any weird issues and I can backup my files and profiles and transfer them to any PC

>>108241409
Stuff like qbittorrent and jellyfin isn't already in your repos? Here I was being annoyed with Arch for making me resort to the AUR for some stuff, I didn't realize how bad it was out there.

>>108238594
It jumps only to 100% after the file is fully downloaded. It shows up bigger after since it downloads a compressed file anon... And because some size chekcers don't notice the dedupping
>>108237918
>should
For inclusion in the distro repo someone has to do that distro janny work. If you decide to become the mainter of the package in distros repo, you've just become a distro janny yourself. But someone has to do that work for every distro you want it included in

>>108236099
>I don't get the "negatives" sure, they are a bit bigger, but they share libs. You should upgrade your 128GB poorfag SSD
Motherfucker, people are leaving Windows because it is so bloated.

>>108241176
People go download their first flatpak, it downloads a runtime with it, people think that that's how it is every single time and don't realize that it shares parts under the hood and doesn't actually use any extra space for shared parts. It's not the clearest thing in the world tbqh

Docker image deployment makes me coom.

>>108241606
no one is leaving windows because of how much space windows uses on a drive.
they are leaving windows
because, AI, advertisements, every update breaking something because its vibecoded slop managed by jeets. euros are leaving because orange man is too pro america for them.
windows could take up 500mb of space and if all the above was still true, people would still be jumping ship.

>>108241747
>on a drive
Forget about the drive, because running 100 different ABI's at once uses up all your RAM.

I just tried to install the .deb for SimpleX and run it on MX Linux and it won't run. Flatpak, no problem

>>108241768
>MX Linux
You exist?
I thought it was all mossad agents padding the distrowatch rank

>>108241778
g-whiz you have a point, but, I exist. I'm a minimalist.

>>108241754
no one even has 500 flatpaks on their desktop, not even fedora atomic niggers, let alone have them all running at the same time.
even if you could find one, windows has basically made 16 GB of ram the minimum for even shit tier cheap pcs. and thats enough to run 100(still a comically large number) flatpaks and still have unused ram leftover for 80-100 tabs on a browser.

Windows programs bundle their dependencies yet at the same time they dont weight 300MB-4GB.

This thread is exactly why I don't use Linux.

>>108241852
Windows can make assumptions about what sort of shared DLLs and what versions they have. With flatpaks runtimes do that work. And with two using similar runtimes, the actual space use is much less

>>108241852
flatpaks don't actually weigh that much more either, it's a meme

>read through arguments against it
>its all le tranny jew faggot ware
>no actual technical arguments
why do i bother reading this faggot board

Just fucking make a static binary

>>108235691
it's bloated for sure.
but after trying several things to secure the browser, flatpak is the winner.

only vm's would be a better solution. but firejail, bwrap or docker are limited in what you can do. flatpak's bwrap just seemed to work well enough for me.

>>108242386
Misses out on diff stuff and dedupping etc. And also misses out on advantages of traditional repo model too

>>108235919
If you need to install some dogshit bloatware like discord or teams then flatpak is good because it mostly ensures it will actually work. Bloatware will often randomly not work with system libraries because it's coded badly and uses 1000 dependencies so slightly different versions of them will break it. Plus if you use flatpak you don't have to install all those dependencies on your main system just to try out whatever piece of sneedware. Basically it's a poopoobox for software that is too dogshit to install normally.

I install some applications in flatpak, but a select few.
Zen Browser I don't, because it freezes. That never happens to me on any other distribution method. So you know, I could troubleshoot this bullshit, report this to the flatpak maintainer and do this sort of stuff, or keep using the native or tarball version instead which have worked for me for the longest fucking time. Conversely I can do the same shit when a native package doesn't work, just install the flatpak or appimage or whatever. I just don't think I can stomach the idea to being locked in to using flatpak and having to do ass backwards stuff like "layering" or basically installing another fucking distro just to run a little program that's not bundled as a flatpak or happens to have problems as a flatpak. I do not see it as a replacement at all.

Why is every flatpak over a gigabyte on my machine?

>>108242671
Shitting up your user folder and spaming trash in ~/.local/bamboo/drumpf/app.bloat.org isnt much better.

I just wish we could go back to simply running things as different users, but dbus, wayland, xdg-portals and pipewire made this really hard.
Imagine having all the flatpak trash under /home/flatpak, that would be nice.

>>108242786
uhhh mine all go to ~/.var/app/app.sneed.org, it doesn't put anything else in user folder except its config in ~/.local/share/flatpak

>>108242796
dont forget ~/.cache and all the random things any application does that has peromissions to write anywhere in your user folder

>>108242765
the first few you install are like that, at a certain point while they claim to install gb's, they only add a few mb's to existing blobs.

>>108235691
>flat
where is bustypak?

>>108242813
You can just take away that permission

I have no idea why (((people))) think that installing a flatpak is easier than installing any distro package.

They are all in the same GUI. It's the same application doing it. KDE Discover and whatever the GNOME thing is show both.

How is:
>i click on this app in the store
any easier than:
>i click on thos app in the store
Because it downloads longer, since its larger?

>>108242671
>bloatware like discord
Is better not installed at all.
All those electron bullshit apps have a website that does the exact same thing.

In the Linux ecosystem, the main problem is that Firefox is shit at PWAs.
>browse to discord.gg
>"hey goy, do you want to install it"
>"yes, sure, because i am cattle"
>now discord is installed as PWA... which, for the dumb ordinary user, doesn't make any difference compared to the electron app
This is how it should be. That should be the goal. Maybe you can integrate PWAs into the epic appstores somehow, with packagekit or whatever, all the technology already exist, it just doesnt get utilized

>>108243199
Yeah I've switched to using the website (not that I like discord, but unfortunately there is a lot of useful information there). Even the flatpak standalone had weird problems. However it was merely an example, it's the sort of thing flatpak is useful for IMO.

>>108235691
I don't use linux, I prefer windows. But from my poking around and playing with linux, I think flatpak has good potential, if they can fix the issues.
>Theming, a lot of flatpak apps are completely isolated it seems and it fucks up their theming a lot, including even text rendering inside of them.
>Slow to boot up, especially after a PC restart, even using the app can feel clunky, try opening the about thing in UI and it'll take half a sec to pop up.
>Sometimes break valid sandboxing, like in case of chromium browsers being worse off in flatpak format compared to basic .deb/.rpm
>Until more apps are in flatpak format by default in biggest distros like Ubuntu/Fedora it'll remain annoying that grabbing just one flatpak that should be 25mb in reality takes you like 1.5gb of space
>Updates are not the fastest in some regions and there's always worry of flathub decision making being influenced too much by US gov, IBM, RedHat, and GNOME teams.
Other than those big faults that should be fixed, it's honestly pretty cool that you can easily get any flatpak app just in GNOME software center in Fedora, you can install them with a single click in GUI, you can see if it's verified or not, and it can be setup to auto updoot if wanted or manually updooted, it has sandboxing by default and gives you a bit of a peace of mind there, and most importantly it basically acts like a portable app you can uninstall without any bloat and residue remaining, and its seperate from the package manager and rest of your apps, so the flawed immature linux ideology of all your apps interacting and your system just being a collection of packages becomes much more reliable when you mostly just run vanilla Ubuntu/Fedora that actually gets some testing and fixing, and have seperate flatpaks on the side that can't ever break your system after updoots and version upgrades.

>>108243266
nobody cares about you

>>108243282
leaking

>>108241409
If you using your web browsers as flatpak despite web browser developers explicity warning you about the worse security of flatpaks then you are too far gone anyways.>

>>108242796
~/.local/share/flatpak are where all the `--user` flatpaks are installed to
/var/app/ is where all the system flatpaks are install
~/.var/app/ is where the app config files are stored
none of its follows xdg base dir specs and they have even hardcoded the ~/.var location because lmao
https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/46

>>108241432
>Stuff like qbittorrent and jellyfin isn't already in your repos?
They are but outdated for sure, at least qbit is several versions behind last I checked on kubuntu 25.10

>>108241606
>Motherfucker, people are leaving Windows because it is so bloated.
Don't believe any shit you read. Try it! Install the most "bloated" Flatpak distro, install SteamOS, Bazzite, Fedora Atomic, GNOMEOS, KDEOS and install everything as Flatpak. I guarantee you - It will take MUCH LESS storage than windows.

>>108241409
>I'll abandon flatpaks and take the minimalist route if I can have all these that
Holy trvke. But Arch will tell you to stick to native packages and your repo, while they use the AUR, which had confirmed malware multiple time.
>to be fair
some of your packages have .deb's but I get your point.

>>108243388
There's that obvious problem that the user folder has user created files to begin with, cause that is its purpose.

Like in /usr/bin there are only system installed packages, and every package manager has the ability to check if a file got installed by it or not.
So you can easily list all files within /usr that did not get installed. Same with any other folder.
Meaning that you can very easily clean up trash if some application spamed bullshit (which its not allowed usually anyway).

The user folder meanwhile was always hard to clean up. Flatpak makes that even worse.
Whoever believes that trashing up your /home is somehow preferable, obviously doesn't know what he is talking about.

>>108243438
That's becaue debian kicked out maintainers for wrong think, but isn't willing to remove outdated unmaintained packages.
Ubuntu sits downstream from there.

The solution is to not use Debian or its descendants.

>>108243488
>while they use the AUR, which had confirmed malware multiple time.
Flathub had confirmed malware multiple times. Flatpak used to break browser sandboxing, potentially making it possible to get hacked by some fucking website running javascript.
The Google PlayStore has malware right now. Just like the Apple AppStore.

Those arguments are so dishonest.
Who do you trust more? User Alice (she/her) from github comiting to flathub or user Shaqlin (they/them) from the AUR?

At the end of the day, the most trustworthy packages are the ones from your distro, who have a list of verified maintainers and where anothet maintianer takes over if one leaves (at least in theory, if its not Debian).
Why? Because you have to trust those people anyway!
If you install a flatpak, you STILL have to trust your distro maintainers, you just ADDITIONALLY also have to trust Alice (she/her). The amount of people, who can fuck you over, increased.

>>108243679
>Who do you trust more? User Alice (she/her) from github comiting to flathub or user Shaqlin (they/them) from the AUR?
i trust Rajesh (he/saar) from github

>>108243679
>Flathub had confirmed malware multiple times.
I think you are confusing that with snaps.
>Those arguments are so dishonest.
Yes, because it feels like "NO YOU". I just don't like when Arch users try to trash talk fatpaks, while they keep using TroonUR.
>User Alice (she/her) from github comiting to flathub or user Shaqlin (they/them) from the AUR?
You are already setting this up. Btw, the AUR is more like Github, where xhey/xhem can upload build scripts.
>At the end of the day, the most trustworthy packages are the ones from your distro
I agree, I mean this is this one extra step to get your software, but especially for systemlvl stuff, I think it's very important to stick to your distros repo. I mean theoretically I could argue that grabbing a .deb/.rpm or whatever... directly from the source is "better", but that would be windows territory, hunting ".exes".
>The amount of people, who can fuck you over, increased.
Okay, in an ideal world, I'd like to have everything available in my default repo + an extra repo for proprietary stuff. But you have to keep in mind, that devs can host their own flathub repo (like nvidia). I hate that you try to frame it like it's always maintained by some weirdos, instead of the original dev.

>>108241852
They don't if they rely on what Windows provides. Look at something like GIMP which relies of free toolkits, the Windows version is much larger because now it has to include them.

It's a usability nightmare because it doesn't integrate with anything on the rest of the system properly due to the security clown theater. The fact this shit is being pushed on normies through the app store knockoffs is the number one reason shit still never works. The reason two is Wayland.

>mom has a windows computer connected to tv so she can watch some pirate iptv and stream some stuff
>old computer breaks so i cobble together a new one
>install linux on it cus how bad could it be
>oh i'll install the iptv app as a flatpak from the app store knockoff looking thing. it's recommended!
>it doesn't see system's VLC
>install flatpak VLC
>still doesn't see it
>install the normal binary version downloaded from github
>it just werks
>on windows she used to control the computer from her iphone like a remote. the app allowed mouse and keyboard input
>try both kde connect and rustdesk
>both have broken clipboard and non-english input support
>turns out it's the wayland or something

>>108243957
>non-english is broken
As it should be. Adapt or perish.

>>108241409
>metadata cleaner
that's been discontinued for some time, I'd get rid of it

>>108244171
Has anything replaced it?

>>108243761
The solution is to learn to contribute to your distro repo.

How many things do you miss?
If it is less than ten, it's not much effort to fix that yourself.
If the packages already exist, but are outdated, it is even less more. Sometimes it is as easy as increasing a version number.

The time you spend with
>this doesnt work from x, lets try it from y
is likely higher than the time you would have spent contributing.
You just have that initial barrier, of learning how to do it in the first pace.

In my experience, the distros that push it harder to use flatpaks are also the ones where package maintenance is miserable in the first place and they'll give you packages that are several months out of date because there are "breaking changes" (more like they're just fucking lazy)

>>108243761
> I hate that you try to frame it like it's always maintained by some weirdos, instead of the original dev
Sadly, you have to assume that, because flathub allows it and their verified badge is dishonest.
In any serious distribution, you have to commit multiple times successfully with maintainers reviewing what you do and then you can look for a "sponsor" who vouches for you and might get approved after some vote or something.
Meanwhile on flathub any random shithead can come around.
>but AUR has that issue as well
yes, but it is more honest about it

The AUR doesn't advertise with:
>SOME DEVS MIGHT CHOOSE TO DO IT THEMSELVES
Did you know that theres a Mozilla employee with the specific task of maintaining Firefox packages, who is a maintainer for a dozen different distributions?
Now you know. Yet no distribution would use this as a selling point.
Yes, a developer can contribute his own flatpak, just how he could contribute to the AUR or to the Fedora repository (after approval process).
This isn't something special.

>>108244255
For all the hate the AUR hates, at least I can very easily look at the pkgbuild before doing fucking anything and change it myself

>>108244277
takes* not hates

>>108236194
Just statically link a program

>>108235691
I like them in general but having to regularly give them additional permissions to work properly is a pain in the ass and makes them awful for normies.

>>108235737
They exist
https://github.com/0FL01/AyuGramDesktop-flatpak/releases
I use this modded version of Telegram, it comes as a Flatpak but it's not on Flathub and has to be installed manually

>>108244277
That's an important argument as well.
It also applies to Fedoras copr. Reading a specfile isn't that hard.
For the few times in your life you need it, you can easily scroll through the spec file and verify that it takes the source from upstream and doesn't include funky patches.

Meanwhile on flathub, good luck figuring out wtf this all does:
https://github.com/flathub/org.chromium.Chromium

>>108244374
I never get tired of people telling me third party repos are the most insecure thing in the world and I should use flatpaks instead, lemme tell you

>>108236591
>i see this and decided to install it
>ok, its installed now
>click on icon
>nothing happens
fuck this shit

>>108243679
>Flathub had confirmed malware multiple times.
Sauce?

>>108244277
You could look up the flatpak manifest, changing it, dunno how that works, probably works locally

>>108244374
Here's what you want to take a look at https://github.com/flathub/org.chromium.Chromium/blob/master/org.chromium.Chromium.yaml

>>108238667
Shut the fuck up, nerd.

>>108235691
>Bloated and slow to open
Why should I use these instead of installing a program directly? Even appimages are faster somehow.

>>108235691
My problem with flatpak is that it *doesn't* bundle everything up into one easy compatible package. Every time I go to install a flatpak it asks me to add some random repo then it connects to it to download 400MB of crap that isn't bundled with the .flatpak and is required to run the program. I prefer appimage because it's all offline.

>>108245360
That's not as bad as it initally seemed.
But still nowhere on the level of a proper specfile:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/chromium/blob/rawhide/f/chromium.spec

Look at how well every single patch is commented, how all the build switches are explained, how there is no external script for building.
And an extensive changelog where people sign with their real name.

Despite including 80 fucking patches, i trust that much more than i trust "refi64" on github managing that chromium flatpak unsupervised.

>>108236166
I came to the conclusion that the problem of modern technology are the devs, they have this autistic mindset obsession with external libraries and "not reinventing the wheel"

Try to install .deb and end up in dependency issue hell. I'll stick with flatpaks. they just werk

>>108245492
Why the fuck would you NOT use external libraries?
Do you want to manage all the dependency bullshit yourself and then have to track every single CVE in anything you ever used forever?

>>108245518
CVE
CVE
CVE
CVE
always the same bullshit
it's so over, I hate this retarded world

Downloading a zip or whatever with the executable inside from Github or wherever, then extracting into a folder and simply running just werks now. Just like on Windows. We don't even need those redundant package formats anymore. Use distro packages for everything you can. Just download the binary from GitHub for everything else. In fact when you install -bin stuff from AUR, it's just a script that downloads the same thing you would from GitHub and turn it into an Arch package for convenience (especially for updates).

So basically, millions must write PKGBUILDs for AUR.

>>108236099
> GNU-less distros
Any /g/tards using a GNU-less distro as their main desktop?

>>108235691
Except it doesn't work as it supposed to.
Try these
>Mirror Hall
>Moonlight

it's bad because
>help me i'm having an issue
>i'm using the flatpak version

>>108236099
>they are a bit bigger, but they share libs
They could be smaller and not share libs, like Windows apps.

>>108249180
Windows programs use shared DLLs from the system though

File: 1768435030441028.gif (425 KB, 450x338)

425 KB GIF

>>108235691
>even the basic computer users
That's the problem. Nobody wins by catering to basic computer users.
You either have business using a computer, or you don't. Structuring society such that everybody uses computers, even those who have no business with one, is the stupidest most malignant shit I have ever fucking seen come out of this retarded race of apes.

>>108249260
The iPhone and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race

>>108235691
I don't mind it being bloated, but it's fucking slow, that's why is bad

>>108249180
I dont know a single Windows "App" that doesnt come with a hundred DLLs.
Even the "portable" ones come with DLLs in a subfolder.

>>108235691
I'm fairly new to Linux, but the only issues I have with flatpak are when I give one permissions and it still can't find external files it needs. AppImages have always just werked. I dunno. It's mostly a non-issue in my experience, but if I had to pick I'd go with appimages.

>>108236591
Linux Tech Tips are the best

i have to install 4 different version of the full gnome system at 1,3gb each for a 1mb app
this is just malware at this point

>>108245434
you cant uninstall anything, install 1 tiny app you now have 20 forced dependencies and you have to brick your system to remove it

>>108244255
i think the arguments are stupid. if your project is so big its unfeasible to build from source its most likely big enough to hire permanent maintainers for packages.

if your project is so small u can just git it and build u dont need to maintain packages for each distro.
afterall theres only 3 actual distros debian, ubuntu which is just a gay debian and arch
everything else is just a mental illness

>>108252291
THIS
>install flatpak
>10 GB gone
>it either doesnt work or is shit
>remove flatpak
>only 20 MB get freed
>have to google commands to get rid of this bullshit

>>108252271
They actually only use extra space for what is changed, so it wouldn't be 4 x 1,3 gb. Still a lot for 1mb app

>>108252308

--delete-data

>>108252771
Not available to the normalfag who only installs via the "AppStore".
Meanwhile ordinary packages installed from the "AppStore" don't have this problem.

>>108252839
Normalfags don't have a proper idea of their disk space though, they just go on blissfully unaware savage lives and then it's suddenly all full, there's no managing the data and there's no concept of anything between

>>108237032
Mentioning it causes troons to have a breakdown on this board.
>>108237373
Appimage is better in theory *
I admit most AppImage builds are half assed and there also needs to be some kind of desktop environment level support.

>>108249250
They come with their own dlls and only use system dlls that are guaranteed to be backwards compatible and not break (something Linux does not have).

>>108235691
rewrite it in rust