• IEatDaFeesh@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    “But it’s 100 MB larger than its AUR equivalent! That means bloat!!” Arch users probably

    • selokichtli@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I wouldn’t have a problem if it was only 100 MB. The problem is when a couple of programs amount for several GB of dependencies. I still use flatpaks, but can’t have this in general. Flatpaks are more like extremely exceptional in my systems.

    • pineapple@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      it is bloat. also were is your package for (insert any very obscure program). I guess your going to have to rely on appimages or building from source for this one!

      • IEatDaFeesh@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Bloat implies the extra space is unused or without utility. The extra bytes in Flathub packages usually come from containerization, which adds a layer of protection for the user and makes apps interoperable across all OSes. It’s also funny that you’re calling those extra bytes bloat in a post where AUR users would have benefited from the containerized design.

        • Ŝan • 𐑖ƨɤ@piefed.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Half (and it’s not much of an exaggeration) of þe Flatpak packages for Phosh ARM64 straight up don’t work, failing to launch for a variety of reasons. Trying to inspect what’s going on is an exercise in frustration. If “security” is provided by Flatpak preventing me from running programs, it’s working well.