Package manager, much higher chance I won’t forget to update it

I don’t like App Image because I have to manage everything myself or use a helper that may or may not be able to manage everything about all App Images.

But sometimes the dev supplied package is the only way to get an up to date package.

With the AUR, there is an “it depends” since AUR packages are unofficial and variable in quality.

That said, I have a strong bias for installing the distro package over using AppImage or Flatpak.

There are three reasons not to use the distro package:

• the package is not available
• the package is too old
• the package maintainer cannot be trusted

My #1 reason for using Arch is to eliminate 1 and 2. In my experience, the AUR is almost always fine for #3.

Even when I use another distro, I put Distrobox with Arch on it and get any of the packages that the distro does not have from there.

The only Flatpak I have had to install has been pgAdmin.

Pacman /w chaotic-aur, otherwise AUR with yay

Aur ftw.

But if I need to compile a large project then appimage

I really like App-images. For the most part, they just work, download, run, done. And sometimes you want the flexibility to install something the distro’s pacakage manager doesn’t give you (or doesn’t have the latest version of). It’s a little extra work to put the app in system menus, etc though.

Package manger still preferred. Having the system deal with updates and dependencies is nice.

AUR is still good, but I’d take the App Image. Sometimes these work for me, sometimes they don’t. Still have to manually update them, AFAIK.

It depends, there are no hard rules. I have a preference for the native package manager with pacman and repository of my distribution. I also would like to use AUR more often, but it depends who is maintaining that package. It also depends if there is a Flatpak available. Some AppImages have an auto update for itself, so I download it only once and use the applications own update functionality manually.

The good thing about AppImages are that they usually don’t require super user privileges to install (in other words use) them and I can also archive them very easily.

Using app images eliminates the chance of breaking your system to almost zero. But updating them could be an inconvenience.

Appimage. I oily use a few of them, and manage them with GearLever.

Personally, I prefer installation via the package manager… Saves some steps and I’ve not had a problem using this procedure since the 90’s…

AppImage is fine and all but there are some extra steps required to have that “app” appear in the OS menu and such…

And, as an old fuck, I’m not fond of referring to the software installed on my computer as “app”. It’s “software” or “a program”.

And, yes. Phone is also a computer and “app” is the appropriate word usage on that platform…

I know. Semantics. But it’s what I’m used to.

🤷‍♂️ 🤷‍♂️

AUR, when I can. I run my own binary package repo. App images are an interesting concept, but usually they are compiled against ancient versions of glibc for increased compatibility. Optimizations and CVE patches may or may not be applied, LD lookups are longer, etc.

My personal order:

Repositories > AUR > Making an own AUR package > Making an own package not in AUR > Flatpak > Using an alternative to that application > consider if I really need it > AppImage

AppImage. Because it has portable config feature

Depends on the release model of the distro and on the kind of software.

I’d pick the AUR package 100% of the time because I hate everything about the idea of appimages and the like.

I usually go Flatpak > system package (rpm) > AppImage > direct download. But it also depends on what I need.

• Flatpak usually gives the latest version and is nicely integrated with everything.
• System packages are usually outdated but use less disk space.
• I only use AppImages if that’s the only way I can get the version I need. I also have it integrated with appimaged.
• Directly downloading a tar.gz or similar I try to avoid as much as possible because it isn’t integrated with anything.

I use what’s packaged in my distro’s repositories, unless I need a specific version, or the software isn’t packaged at all.

I always use distro packaging, if it’s available.

I prefer distros if available, but in some cases the version in the distros can suck. A solid example, and this could 100% be user error, but I used aur to get Picard on my tablet, but there was no app menu bar. Like at all, no window settings in the world made a difference, and the global menu didn’t show anything either. So I couldn’t change settings at all. I removed the aur package and installed the flatpak, everything worked no problem.

Flatpaks are okay, but due to laziness, I’m not proficient with making them interact well with each other.

App images can be great, but also annoying depending on how your system handles them. On a Debian based machine it would “install” the app image as if it were a normal app, and in some cases even check for updates. In garuda I have to manually go to the file and execute it each time. I’m no Linux master, so I could probably do something in garuda to make it work similar to Debian, but I only have one app there that I care about and I’m lazy…

I don’t like snaps, they seem finicky to me.

If the Dev has their own recommended source, package, or whatever I try to stick to that. I.e. if they say their focus is on an app image, but aur has it, and there’s a flatpak, and x y z options, I’ll try the app image, and if that does what I need it to, I stick with it. If they recommend snap I try to find another app or another option to install.

I prefer AUR packages, but it depends on how many AUR dependencies it uses and how well maintained and used by others it is, I rely mainly on the official repo and try to use AUR and others in a complementary way, I also don’t run any AppImages, just the ones from open-source applications and that I trust minimally.