undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrom-antics3y ago0 comments

I wanted to like AppImage, but it just didn't seem integrated well enough. Flatpak gives you:

- Installation (no manually moving files from ~/Downloads)

- Launcher integration (no writing .desktop files by hand)

- Auto updating

As far as I saw, AppImage didn't have any of that. Though it was a while ago (and maybe some of this was my distro's fault). Has any of this improved lately?

0 comments

9 comments · 5 top-level

edflsafoiewq3y ago· 4 in thread

An AppImage is just a regular binary. Basically if you have a directory containing a binary plus other files it needs (libraries, assets, etc), AppImage packages the whole dir up into a single binary. That's it. Running the AppImage is the same as extracting the dir and running the binary inside it.

rom-anticsOP3y ago

Right, it's just a binary. And if I'm installing an app, say Audacity, I would never go to GitHub and download the raw binary, because then I'd have to write the desktop file by hand, and also the app would never get updated when new versions are released. Instead I use a package manager or Flatpak.

How are people keeping their AppImages updated?

edflsafoiewq3y ago

I, on the other hand, want exactly that. I've never used a desktop file, and I want to control when and if I upgrade.

1 more reply

AnIdiotOnTheNet3y ago

If there had been an adopted standard for embedding icons in ELF, and if common Linux launchers had just been a menuized view of a folder structure, this would never have been a problem.

But Linux Desktop has a nasty habit of adopting over engineered solutions instead of simple ones, especially if any other desktop OS is doing it that way.

mikae13y ago

> How are people keeping their AppImages updated?

The only software I run as an AppImage is BitWarden (from the official GitHub repo[1]. It prompts to update itself when there's a new version which works very well.

[1] https://github.com/bitwarden/clients/releases

2 more replies

syrrim3y ago

AppImage now has solutions for all three issues. They all rely on a central daemon, which implies they will only work ootb with support from the distribution. The same is true of snap and flatpack as far as I'm aware, so this isn't strictly a deficiency of the format.

PhilippGille3y ago

It's been several years since I created an AppImage, but I think these were already available back then:

Installation, launcher integration:

https://docs.appimage.org/user-guide/run-appimages.html#inte... https://docs.appimage.org/reference/desktop-integration.html

https://docs.appimage.org/user-guide/faq.html#question-how-c...

Updates:

https://docs.appimage.org/packaging-guide/optional/updates.h...

What was missing was convenient sandboxing. Firejail was recommended but with the responsibility entirely on the user to install and use it.

Flatpak doesn't limit access by default (or rather it does but apps can just ask more permissions at build time and it's not prevented by default IIRC) but offers the user some options for being more strict without needing extra tools.

pkulak3y ago

Plus, it relies on system libraries like glibc. You can’t even use it on distros like Void and Alpine.

mackrevinack3y ago

there's a program called 'appimage launcher' or something along those lines, that will show a dialog window anytime you open an appimage and you can choose to just run it once or to integrate it, which copy it into a specified folder where the rest of your appimages are and then also create a desktop shortcut. it doesnt handle updates though

ive been using flatpak more myself these days but i hope the appimage format sticks around because its handy being able to quickly try out some software and then delete it when you are done, or to try out a new version of something and have both running at the same time

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse