this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
625 points (92.5% liked)

Linux

56121 readers
1774 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
[–] greywolf0x1@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

Size and gnome/GTK dependencies are main reasons why I don't use Flatpaks (I have nothing against gnome though, it just pulls in too much and KDE is worse in this regards, which is why I use Sway and River)

[–] MoondropLight@thelemmy.club 13 points 7 hours ago

Perhaps ironically, this is mocking a strawman. Flatpacks can be installed and managed using the terminal! Not only that but Linux-Distros have had graphical package managers for decades.

The primary reason that distros have embraced flatpack / snap / appimage is that they promise to lower the burden of managing software repositories. The primary reason that some users are mad is that these often don't provide a good experience:

  • they are often slower to install/start/run
  • they have trouble integrating with the rest of the system (ignoring gtk/qt themes for example)
  • they take a lot more space and bandwidth

Theoretically they are also more secure... But reality of that has also been questioned. Fine grained permissions are nice, but bundling libraries makes it hard to know what outdated libraries are running on the systems.

[–] nullpotential@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 hours ago
[–] arc99@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

While I wouldn't want flakpak going deep into the OS I think the advantage of using them on the desktop is obvious. Developers can release to multiple dists from a single build and end users get updates and versions immediately rather than waiting for the dist to update its packages. Plus the ability to lock the software down with sandboxes.

The tradeoff is disk consumption but it's not really that big of a deal. Flatpaks are layered so apps can share dependencies. e.g. if the app is GNOME it can share the GNOME runtime with other apps and doesn't need to ship with its own.

[–] RheumatoidArthritis@mander.xyz 2 points 2 hours ago

FTFY: Flatpaks are layered so apps can share dependencies. e.g. if the app is GNOME 4.2.11.3 it can share the GNOME 4.2.11.3 runtime with other apps and doesn't need to ship with its own, but every app requires a different GNOME version anyway

[–] commander@lemmy.world 6 points 12 hours ago

I'm happy to use Flatpaks but the annoyances I've had are like when one application says to use you'll need to point to the binary of another application that it depends on but very understandably doesn't package together, figuring that out to me can be annoying so I'll switch to a regular installation and it all just works together no fuss, no flatseal, no thinking about it really. Also some applications where it's really nice to launch from the terminal especially with arguments or just like the current working directory and with Flatpaks instead of just right off the bat it's application name and hit enter, Flatpak hope you remember the whole package name

org.wilson.spalding.runner.knife.ApplicationName ...

Ya alias but got to remember to do that. So far anything I'd ever want to run from terminal, no Flatpak

[–] Paddy66@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago

As long as software is available in the Software Manager to be installed that way... I don't care what format it's in.

But don't make normies go to the terminal. It's inhumane, and really does not help the masses get away from big tech - which is a worthier goal than keeping your software terminal-only.

[–] bunitor@lemmy.eco.br 12 points 14 hours ago

flatpaks are fine and useful, i just wish we didn't move into a scenario where applications that used to be easily available in distro repos start moving away from them and are only available through flatpaks. distro packages are just so much more efficient in every way. flatpaks are easier on maintainers and developers but that comes at a cost to the user. i have about a dozen or less flatpak apps installed and already i have to download at least 2 gigs of updates each week. i run debian

[–] SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

It's a neat concept. The distro-agnostic aspect is definitely a plus for some people but I still distro-specific installation methods. The only time I would seek out the Flatpak version of a particular software is when it's the only version available.

[–] Crabhands@lemmy.ml 10 points 17 hours ago

I'm 2 months into my Linux journey and I don't use flatpak. I've had the odd problem with it. I stick to pacman and yay now.

[–] spookedintownsville@lemmy.world 9 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

The issue I have with flatpaks is the size for most applications. It just doesn't make sense for me. Not that it's not useful and has it's purposes.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

and has it’s purposes

Unlike that apostrophe.

[–] Toribor@corndog.social 1 points 3 hours ago

Fast storage is one of the cheapest components of modern PCs so I'm always surprised when Flatpak file size is brought up. It's not something I worry about very much.

[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Flatpaks aim to be a middle ground between dependency hell and "let's pull in the universe" bloat.

Applications packaged as Flatpaks can reference runtimes to share "bases" with other applications, and then provide their own libraries if they need anything bespoke on top of that.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 8 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (5 children)

And they are still, in my experience, slow to load, a cumbersome addition to the update process, and often un-necessary.

Don't get me wrong, if you're in a tight spot and can't make two significant software packages work in a distribution due to conflicting library version requirements... some kind of lightweight container solution is attractive, expedient, and better than just not supporting one of the packages. But, my impression is that a lot of stuff has been moved into flatpak / snap / etc. just because they can. I don't think it's the best, or even preferred, way to maintain software - for the desktop environment.

(Returns to checking on his Docker containers full of server apps on the R-Pi farm...)

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago (5 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 9 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours 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 (4 replies)
[–] jabeez@lemmy.today 3 points 15 hours ago

Is that supposed to be Ed Norton, or just an uncanny coincidence?

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 12 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Could things like this go in linuxmemes? Memes are fun but it would be nice to keep this a place for actual information. And no, this is not a comment on what it's saying, I'm just tired of so many memes.

[–] fatur0000new@lemmy.ml 1 points 12 hours ago

I like flatpak, but I can't download Flathub flatpak applications and (specially) Flathub flatpak runtimes from my phone. I hope Flathub learns from F-Droid

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 2 points 14 hours ago

Furniture? Integrated circuit packaging?

[–] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ztwhixsemhwldvka@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I use SystemD binary Gentoo with Flatpaks. Sue me.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 11 points 19 hours ago

Watch out we've got a flatass over here

[–] Dirk@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 day ago (8 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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Jedi@bolha.forum 38 points 1 day ago (10 children)

About the image: The joke's on you, I install my flatpaks via the terminal.

I've started using flatpaks more after starting using Bazzite and I liked them more than I expected. As a dev, I still need my work tools to be native, but most of my other needs are well covered by flatpaks.

Tip: Flatseal is a great config manager for flatpaks' permissions.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 day ago
[–] Bluewing@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (3 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?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›