• jack@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    Didn’t appimage bundle all the dependencies inside it? That leads to way more taken disk space cuz of duplicate libs

    • Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I know this, but it’s still way lighter than flatpak. (the required app depencies size <<< whatever the hell flatpak downloads)

      An app image that weighs a few hundred megabytes ( it’s often less) becomes several gigabytes as a flatpak. I can download more than a dozen of appimages and it still would weigh as much as a single flatpak. I think it’s just that my use case require me to have a handful lightweight apps in their latest version and the rest can be managed by the OS.

      • jack@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yes, the first flatpak is big cause you have to download the runtime (most common dependencies you will probably need anyways in the future). The majority of other flatpaks you will download will use the runtime you’ve already downloaded so those flatpaks will be lighter than the appimage variant

        • uis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Solution to too many package managers: two more package managers