this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2024
742 points (93.9% liked)

linuxmemes

20880 readers
5 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
742
Flatpak haters seem to believe that if an app isn't on their distro's repos, it's the developers' fault. (lemmy.world)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
198 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Because it's easier to use the version that's in the distro, and why do I need an extra set of libraries filling up my disk.

I see flatpack as a last resort, where I trade disk space for convenience, because you end up with a whole OS worth of flatpack dependencies (10+ GB) on your disk after a few upgrade cycles.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Is compiling it yourself with the time and effort that it costs worth more than a few GB of disk space?

Then your disk is very expensive and your labor very cheap.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago

For a lot of project "compiling yourself", while obviously more involved than running some magic install command, is really not that tedious. Good projects have decent documentation in that regard and usually streamline everything down to a few things to configure and be done with it.

What's aggravating is projects that explicitly go out of their way to make building them difficult, removing existing documentation and helper tools and replacing them with "use whatever we decided to use". I hate these.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

I should have noted that I'll compile myself when we are talking about something that should run as a service on a server.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

99% of the time it's just "make && sudo make install" or something like that. Anything bigger or more complicated typically has a native package anyway.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

They didn't say anything about compiling it themselves, just that they prefer native packages to flatpak

edit: I can't read

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago

2 comments up they said

If the choice then is flatpack vs compile your own, I think I'll generally compile it, but it depends on the circumstances.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I mean it's 2024. I regularly download archives that are several tens or even over 100 GB and then completely forget they're sitting on my drive, because I don't notice it when the drive is 4TB. Last time I cared about 10GB here and there was in the late-2000s.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Great that you have 4tb on your root partition then by all means use flatpack.

I have 256Gb on my laptop, as I recall I provisioned about 40-50gigs to root.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I'm sorry. I didn't realize people were still regularly using such constrained systems. Honest. I've homebuilt my PCs for the last 15 years.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 months ago

Why not upgrade your hdd?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

flatpak has dedub, so no

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Yep that's all well and good, but what flatpack doesn't do automatically is clean up unused libs/dependencies, over time you end up with several versions of the same libs. When the apps are upgraded they get the latest version of their dependency and leave the old behind.