Appimages totally suck, because many developers think they were a real packaging format and support them exclusively.

Their use case is tiny, and in 99% of cases Flatpak is just better.

I could not find a single post or article about all the problems they have, so I wrote this.

This is not about shaming open source contributors. But Appimages are obviously broken, pretty badly maintained, while organizations/companies like Balena, Nextcloud etc. don’t seem to get that.

  • Atemu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I don’t get why we didn’t just do it macOS style; bundle everything into one directory with a standardised structure and wire up file managers etc. to run the correct executable inside it.

    • Kazumara@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Because the FHS is a more sensible organization of files. Not every user needs to have their own executable for each program, that’s a mess.

      • 2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        macOS has both, a system wide /Applications and per-user ~/Applications. Not to mention that it doesn’t really matter on a single user system anyway.

      • Atemu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Proper, integrated packaging is obviously preferred (though as a NixOS user I disagree that that implies an FHS) but this is about “stand-alone” packages. You’re missing the point.