Why can't Linux agree on a single portable between distributions application bundle format?

What is even the point of these things?
Aside from taking up 10x the space than installing the application natively.

>>105805311
Not having to tango with different dependencies, I'd reckon.

>>105805275 (OP)
I imagine it's the same reason distros can't agree on a package manager. Their way's the best. Also, this >>105805311

>>105805275 (OP)
they do, its called makepkg

>>105805320
>>105805311
legit how else am I supposed to install things offline?
by compiling the source code tar balls whatever the fuck it's called myself?

>>105805397
>by compiling the source code tar balls whatever the fuck it's called myself?
yes

>>105805397
>legit how else am I supposed to install things offline?
>by compiling the source code tar balls whatever the fuck it's called myself?
Yes, but also whatever packages your distro uses in their package manager.

>>105805483
>it says it's self-contained package
You try to install it when offline:
>no internet connection detected

>>105805311
If you are a dev and want everyone to access your app, you put one of those on your website and you are done instead of hoping that the user distro managers have made a package and compiled vanilla. It also makes support much easier. As a dev, fuck distribution package managers.

>>105805311
>windiz: you want to install a thousand different versions of shitware okay
>linux: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
lol

>>105805275 (OP)
what's the use case?

>>105805275 (OP)
mentally ill trannies will always resort to infighting when left alone

>>105805275 (OP)
Agreeing on anything goes against the Linux religion.

>>105805275 (OP)
what's wrong with having alternatives?

>>105805580
>>105805580
https://www.marticliment.com/unigetui/

Windows has a complete package manager now but instead of relying on a centralized package repository, it get the app/lib from the original source.

>why can't everyone just agree on everything all the time
The irony of Linux haters sounding like freaks who have never had extended social interaction

>>105805275 (OP)
Different tradeoffs

>>105805275 (OP)
Appimage is straight trash
Snap is only good for small CLI tools
Flatpak is too restrictive

>>105805311
You can install 20 year old applications on superior Windows, while inferior Linux complains about your Python version number or some shit like that. Absolutely unusable OS, they really need to fix this shit.

>>105805311
For Flatpak at least, standardization across distros, easier dependency management, sandboxing, and permissions management. The biggest downside is that they're not as efficient as native packages irt disk space or RAM usage. Flatpaks also used to have issues with integration and theming, but I don't notice that nearly as much these days.
>>105805397
>>105805510
>>105805715
That's one of the biggest problems with Linux. Installing anything on an offline system is basically impossible, and applications often won't run if they're not compatible with your exact libc version. This is unironically something Windows has done better since the beginning. AppImages are supposed to solve this problem, but they don't.

>>105805721
Adding onto this, if they could actually figure out how to make Windows-style portable applications that work across different distros, that would be a gamechanger. Even if that means bundling a fuckton of libraries.

>>105805739
That's what AppImages are.

>>105805765
Except AppImages suck and don't do what they aim to.

>>105805778
They work great though.

>>105805788
What are some AppImages you recommend trying then? It's been a while since I've last used them, so perhaps things have improved.

>>105805275 (OP)
What do you mean? AppImage. That's it.
Those other two don't exist, you just made them up to troll us.

>>105805886
Most of the software I run as AppImages are emulators like PCSX2 and RPCS3

>>105805715
>>105805721
Old applications just needed to be bundled with their libraries, you had to specify the LD_PRELOAD variable in pointing to those libs. Sinple as, that's how you ran old stuff on linux before appimages, nothing esoteric.

>>105805275 (OP)
>Why can't Linux agree on a
Its called freedom.

>>105805275 (OP)
FUCK I HATE HAVING OPTIONS, ITS SO BAD. I NEED TO BE FORCED INTO A METHOD OF COMPUTING AS ENVISIONED BY ONE NAMELESS JEET AT A POWERFUL MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION OR WHAT EVEN IS THE POINT OF OWNING A COMPUTER?!?!?!

>>105805275 (OP)
I thought we agreed on Flatpak even though Snap has a superior permissions system?

Appimage.
Its settled, done. You're welcome.

>>105805397
Yes. Linux can't be used by non-programmers. That's why the desktop will always suck.

>>105805275 (OP)
Portable applications were intended to solve fragmentation and packaging issues, but they just caused more because people came up with their own portable application formats that now all have to be supported. 99.9% of Linux distributions are Debian or Red Hat based. It would have been way easier to just make some incentive for people to build Debian or RPM packages instead of all this nonsense that over complicated things. Now to support repository packages, you have a package manager. And if you're going to support snaps, you'll have a snap daemon. And if you're going to support flatpak, you have a flatpak daemon. And if you're going to support appimages, you have to have the proper libraries. This whole thing is a mess.

>>105806092
i can't program anything and I've been linux only for like a decade now lol

AppImage>>>>>>flatpak>snap

But they do, Its flatpak. Its supposed in mint's app store and most already use it in most distros.

This debate has already been over. Even flatpak steam which I've used as long as I use flatseal to allow it all my system files it functions exactly the same as regular steam. Nobody cares about downloading 1gb which will be used by all other apps anyways.

Also it's only grown since its launch and its here to stay. Official companies like discord have supported it. It's official now.

Also I don't notice any performance loss from using a flatpak, feels like the same app.

>>105805311
>10x more space
It's more like 15% more space or less on most applications

>>105806265
>likes 'you own nothing' crap like steam
>shills for flatpak
no surprise there

if there's no appimage, i use a snap. if there's no snap, i'll probably use a flatpak. if there's no flatpak, i'll compile it myself. if i can't compile it myself (often out of laziness), i'll install it through a package manager.

>>105805965
Nigger I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about so that's pretty esoteric.

>>105806433
It just means you're underage and/or shitting fud on linux.

>>105805397
Nigger you can literally download the entire repository and then install things as needed. What do you think how it was done before internet was widespread? Now try the same thing on Windows retard

>>105805965
Compared to Windows where you can just run an old program by double clicking the EXE, that's not "sinple as" [sic]
>>105806433
This guy gets it.
>>105806451
It's 2025. There are literally people born in 2007 turning 18. I was born in the early 90s and that blows my goddamn mind...

>>105806596
>Compared to Windows where you can just run an old program by double clicking the EXE, that's not "sinple as" [sic]
Windows applications do the same thing, they're always bundled with a ton of DLLs.

FlatPaks and and Snaps aren't exactly portable and AppImage is just a packaged directory tree.
So: distribute the software as a tar-archive or as an AppImage.

>>105806596
>Compared to Windows where you can just run an old program by double clicking the EXE, that's not "sinple as" [sic]
False equivalence because i explained to you the process on how it works not how it was served. The apt comparison would be explaining how to package old sofftware in a *.exe or *.msi file. In linux case it was a .tar file containing the libs and a script executable with already inside the LD_PRELOAD variable already specified, all you had to do is to extract the archive and double click on the executable, much like windows. The Neverwinter Nights linux binaries were packaged this way for example.

>It's 2025. There are literally people born in 2007 turning 18. I was born in the early 90s and that blows my goddamn mind...
Make sense, i'm an old fuck class '85 faggot.

>>105806620
I never said they didn't. The difference is that on Windows, you can just double click the damn EXE, and you don't have to specify the libraries that need to be loaded. It Just Works™.
It's a UX thing, so I can see why you'd have trouble understanding that.
>>105806630
>False equivalence because i explained to you the process on how it works not how it was served. The apt comparison would be explaining how to package old sofftware in a *.exe or *.msi file. In linux case it was a .tar file containing the libs and a script executable with already inside the LD_PRELOAD variable already specified, all you had to do is to extract the archive and double click on the executable, much like windows. The Neverwinter Nights linux binaries were packaged this way for example.
OK, so Neverwinter Nights did it, proving that it's possible, but how often do you actually see that happen? How often do Linux applications come with a script that automatically loads the required libraries?

>>105806638
It was common place enough for commercial stuff, on foss stuff wasn't exactly a priority because it was much rarer to stumble in a software that was useful and at the same time abandonware.

>>105805715
a more fair comparison would be superior Windows and superior Linux. But you didn't do that. Curious..

>>105806638
>you can just double click the damn EXE, and you don't have to specify the libraries that need to be loaded. It Just Works™.
You don't have to do that in Linux either. Just put the .so files in the same directory as the executable and it should load them by default, same as .dlls

>>105806662
Since that's the case, I say people should start doing it more. Distribute programs with the libraries they need to run.

>>105806680
That's common for proprietary software to do.
For FOSS it was more common to just compile it yourself since that's much more flexible and allows the software run on completely different POSIX systems too.