Screenshot doesn’t even show half.

  • QuazarOmegaA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    snap/flatpak >500mb

    Don’t know about Snap, but Flatpak download sizes decrease significantly after installing the main platform libraries, they can become really small; of course that’s pretty much fully negated if you’re installing Electron apps, but even then 500MB isn’t very accurate, more like 150MB on average

    flatpak run com.very.easy.to.remember.and.type.name

    Yes I hate it, what is even more annoying is that you can do flatpak install someapp and it will search matches on its own, it shows them to you to let you decide, but after that you can’t do flatpak run someapp because it “doesn’t exist”

      • QuazarOmegaA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Hopefully it would be fixed upstream on the actual flatpak command, but do you know if there are wrappers for it already?

        • Fisch@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          No. If I have to launch a flatpak through the terminal, I always just do flatpak list and copy the ID or whatever it’s called

      • QuazarOmegaA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Is it this one?
        It looks excellent, any idea why it’s not on Flathub yet? Never mind, I got it:

        This project is still in its early stages

    • aksdb@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Then you do a flatpak list and it abbreviates the shit out of the identifiers so you can’t use them either. Whoever designed that UX needs to lean back an contemplate life a bit.

      • QuazarOmegaA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Well that comes down to your terminal size, you have to filter the columns if your screen is too small: docs

        flatpak --columns="app" list
        
        • aksdb@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Sure, it’s possible. I can also use flatpak list -d to show everything. But the combination of these defaults is just fucked up UX (require the full id for certain operations, but don’t always show the full id by default).

          • QuazarOmegaA
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Yeah honestly they could have avoided putting Branch, Origin and Installation if there isn’t enough space available.
            The CLI definitely needs some polishing, not to mention flatpak update breaking horrendously on scrollback

    • brenno@lemmy.brennoflavio.com.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Snaps have a similar deduplication mechanism, and snaps allows calling apps from their names like you would do with regular packages.

      I think the reason for the second one is that while snaps are also meant to be used in servers/cli flatpak is built only with desktop GUI apps in mind.

    • d_k_bo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago
      ln -s /var/lib/flatpak/exports/bin/org.mozilla.firefox ~/.local/bin/firefox
      
    • janAkali@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Yes, sizes might be inaccurate - it’s been about a year last time I tried snap or flatpak. All I remember is that snap installs around 300 mb gtk3 runtime and it’s often 2 or more of them, because different snaps might rely on different gtk versions + other dependencies.
      And I remember that when snap and flatpak compared, allegedly flatpak requires more storage space.

      I am aware that runtime sizes doesn’t scale with number of packages past maybe 3-4, but I have only 4 appimages on my system right now and they take ~200 mb, it is absurd that I’d need 10 times more space allocated for the same (or worse) functionality.