For context: I habe a PC with an 8gb SSD and I somehow need to get an app on there that only has a flatpak release

  • Cethin@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    It’s useful, but it isn’t the best option for everyone, so other options should be available.

    • lastweakness@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Why would you want the app devs to make that? The whole problem with distro-specific packages is having to package for multiple formats and it’s a painstaking process that really isn’t worth any amount of time investment at all. If you’re an app developer, you’d much rather just make a universal package and hope that some distro package maintainer packages your app for their distro. That’s just basic common sense…

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Because Flatpaks can’t share libraries or anything. It creates a lot of bloat that doesn’t need to be there. It’s great for users that want to make sure the app will always work, but it isn’t great for being efficient.

        • lastweakness@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          This is just a straight up lie. Flatpaks do share libraries, both as runtimes (as seen even in the screenshot here) and through deduplication between different runtimes and runtime versions. There’s usually very little bloat, if any, especially if you use Flatpaks a lot, which you probably should, given the huge number of advantages especially with proprietary apps.