this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
183 points (98.4% liked)

Linux

6090 readers
528 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 122 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (14 children)

I'm not surprised that the OBS devs are considering suing Fedora for their Fedora Flatpaks.


For anyone out of the loop:
Fedora's been packaging and providing apps as Fedora Flatpaks which cause users trouble cause they're honestly pretty shit and known to be unreliable. The issue is that users assume that these faulty packages are provided by the Original Devs and complain towards the ODevs.

As endless waves of users complain towards the ODevs it causes them unnecessary headache as well as costing valuable time and resources to tell users that it's actually Fedora fucking things for everyone.

All of this is unnecessary because if Fedora stopped installing Fedora Flatpaks as the default then there wouldn't be this problem in the first place.

[–] Jayb151 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Thank you for the context. I've been kind of out of the loop with Linux on general and have been using fedora... But now a question. What's the most stable form of package and which distros use it by default? I've been kind of confused my the whole all image, flatpack, etc thing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Personally I'd recommend installing in this order:

  1. Packages from your distro's native repository.
  2. Flatpaks from Flathub (please avoid Fedora's Flatpaks).
  3. AppImages/Debs usually provided on the app developer's site.
  4. The Arch User Repository (AUR) if compatible.
  5. Tarballs.
  6. Ubuntu Snaps.
  7. Fedora Flatpaks.
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There isn't one. It's still a shit show.

The most reliable way to distribute software on Linux is still to make a statically linked binary (linking with a very old glibc is fine) and use curl | bash. But that isn't always possible depending on the language used and the app.

Seems like OBS Studio is C++/Qt, so it shouldn't be too difficult though. I've done it before in the distant past. But looking at their releases they only provide .deb for Linux, so I can understand why people would want something else.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I've made several Qt apps (in C++) easily packaged using AppImage. Perhaps OBS is harder because they require some level of integration with the hardware (e.g. the virtual camera perhaps requires something WRT drivers, I don't know), but in the general case of a Qt app doing "normal GUI stuff" and "normal user stuff" is a piece of cake. To overcome the glibc problem, it's true that it's recommended using an old distro, but it's not a must. Depends on what you want to support.

As a user, I prefer a native package, though (deb in my case).

load more comments (11 replies)