Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux apps that run anywhere

appimage.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 117 posts

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#11

Post by morpheuskafka »

sandov wrote: post #6
dorfsmay wrote: post #3

Anybody has strong feelings about AppImage vs Snap vs Flatpack (and any other similar ones)?

I like the concept of AppImage much more than Snap and Flatpak. I fully embrace the idea of decentralized distribution of applications, as opposed to the way package managers work (central repository mantained by the distro) I believe the operating system should only be concerned about the base software and present a sane interface so that the user can then install the specific programs they need, the OS should not c…

I have a similar but different view. I don't mind a centralized distribution platform, but I like how snap seperates that from the distro so it's easy to target many distros with one package.

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#12

Post by satori99 »

voodootrucker wrote: post #5

What people use it for at the top, what it does in the middle, and how it works at the bottom, buried in a video - typical modern sites (except this one at least has the video). What I would like to see: 1. Problem statement 2. How this solves it 3. Usage guide 4. Source code link 5. No appeal to authority of who's using it

> and how it works at the bottom, buried in a video

A video that plays for 12 minutes before it explains the bit about using an ELF header which mounts a disk image payload using FUSE.

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#13

Post by Wowfunhappy »

dorfsmay wrote: post #3

Anybody has strong feelings about AppImage vs Snap vs Flatpack (and any other similar ones)?

AppImage makes me nervous because they don't actually create promise cross distro compatibility—it depends on what libraries the developer decides to ship alongside the AppImage, and which they assume the distro has. This also raises questions about forwards compatibility with future OS releases.

Snap and Flatpak, by contrast, have explicit systems in place to prevent this. Of the two, I much prefer Flatpak for being a community-driven project. Also, Snap doesn't let you disable automatic updates (without hacks to your hosts file or such). Whatever you think about the security implications, this feels very against the Linux ethos of the user always retaining ultimate control.

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#14

Post by sandov »

deviantfero wrote: post #9
sandov wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the concept of AppImage much more than Snap and Flatpak. I fully embrace the idea of decentralized distribution of applications, as opposed to the way package managers work (central repository mantained by the distro) I believe the operating system should only be concerned about the base software and present a sane interface so that the user can then install the specific programs they need, the OS should not c…

How is this different from windows? I think this is good for dependency heavy apps, such as krita, but you should still try to keep things as centralized as possible, makes updates easier and painless

it's not fundamentally different.

The practical difference is that the ecosystem of Linux applications is composed almost entirely of open source software. Consequently, installing something you downloaded from the web is much less dangerous than installing a closed source program on Window, provided that you trust the website.

I agree that the centralized scheme is easier to use in the 80% of cases. i.e. when:

(1) The package you want is in the repos, and ... (2) The version of the package you want is in the repos.

But, when those 2 conditions are not met, installing software is usually harder than on Windows. Additionally, I don't like the very nature of centralized things, even if they are managed by the good guys.

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#15

Post by viraptor »

im_down_w_otp wrote: post #4

One of the issues I've had with things distributed as Snaps or Flatpaks is that they tend not to pickup the settings and preferences that I've configured on my workstation. For example, if I've setup themes, fonts, scaling factors, custom keyboard shortcuts, etc., they tend not to be available/utilized by the applications which are distributed in these bundling formats. For the most part, that's why I avoid using the…

Just from reading the docs, it looks like your settings will be respected. By default it doesn't look like there's any sandboxing / namespaces happening. Haven't tried it in practice though.

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#16

Post by [deleted] »

sandov wrote: post #14
deviantfero wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from windows? I think this is good for dependency heavy apps, such as krita, but you should still try to keep things as centralized as possible, makes updates easier and painless

it's not fundamentally different. The practical difference is that the ecosystem of Linux applications is composed almost entirely of open source software. Consequently, installing something you downloaded from the web is much less dangerous than installing a closed source program on Window, provided that you trust the website. I agree that the centralized scheme is easier to use in the 80% of cases. i.e. when: (1) T…

[deleted]

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#17

Post by Annatar »

"No need to install". This is every system administrator's nightmare: users running arbitrary executables bypassing operating system packaging. Come time to upgrade or reinstall what can happen? If there are security updates which are needed to the program, what could happen, since this is statically linked?

This is the pinnacle of destructive lazyness and amateurism in IT: as a developer it is one's job to master every operating system packaging format for the target platform one develops for. OS packaging is a tool invented for developers, not a tool meant to be subverted at every turn and opportunity like this.

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#18

Post by deviantfero »

sandov wrote: post #14
deviantfero wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from windows? I think this is good for dependency heavy apps, such as krita, but you should still try to keep things as centralized as possible, makes updates easier and painless

it's not fundamentally different. The practical difference is that the ecosystem of Linux applications is composed almost entirely of open source software. Consequently, installing something you downloaded from the web is much less dangerous than installing a closed source program on Window, provided that you trust the website. I agree that the centralized scheme is easier to use in the 80% of cases. i.e. when: (1) T…

Yeah I agree that it is a pain when a package is not in the official repos and maybe I should see this a centralized solution to that, currently I think each distro tries to solve it somewhat, for example Arch and it's AUR

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#19

Post by viraptor »

Annatar wrote: post #17

"No need to install". This is every system administrator's nightmare: users running arbitrary executables bypassing operating system packaging. Come time to upgrade or reinstall what can happen? If there are security updates which are needed to the program, what could happen, since this is statically linked? This is the pinnacle of destructive lazyness and amateurism in IT: as a developer it is one's job to master ev…

I don't believe this is really a problem for administrators. Reasonable multi-user hosts will have both home and tmp mounted no-exec and will not allow fuse - appimage will not work. This solution will work just fine of personal machines though. I'd rather native packages were distributed too, but if the choice is this or nothing... why disappoint people?

Re: Linux apps that run anywhere

#20

Post by Pneumaticat »

FYI, AppImages do not run anywhere. There are a lot of issues with them in NixOS, since NixOS is all about having explicitly-linked dependencies, and AppImages still often have implicit dependencies that aren't in the image itself, since they are assumed to exist on the host system.

See https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/51060 for an example.

Post reply on HN