Reply to Re: Flatpak coming soon
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Quite recently I set up a GNU/Linux system running CachyOS. I attempted to launch my own AppImage only to be greeted by an error of some sort. I then attempted to compile it locally only to find that the window doesn't resize properly in Wayland. I then wrote a Flatpak manifest and installed through that, which seems to run well. The app store-style installation of Flatpak along with reproducible builds across compatible distros solves a lot of the problems that AppImages seem to have and the automatic updates may be desirable for users.
These days I am compiling AppImages on Ubuntu 24.04 which may have a glibc that is too new for certain distros, as glibc is not forward-compatible. I believe drone ran into trouble attempting to launch it on SteamOS at one point.
I can understand if people dislike Flatpak for various reasons (slow syscalls, bloated, subpar documentation), however all of the GNU/Linux packaging methods are terrible in one way or another, and AppImage seems to be slowly fading away in general. Ubuntu doesn't ship libfuse2 by default, potentially as a way to try and snub AppImage users in favour of Snap.
These days I am compiling AppImages on Ubuntu 24.04 which may have a glibc that is too new for certain distros, as glibc is not forward-compatible. I believe drone ran into trouble attempting to launch it on SteamOS at one point.
I can understand if people dislike Flatpak for various reasons (slow syscalls, bloated, subpar documentation), however all of the GNU/Linux packaging methods are terrible in one way or another, and AppImage seems to be slowly fading away in general. Ubuntu doesn't ship libfuse2 by default, potentially as a way to try and snub AppImage users in favour of Snap.
