Flatpaks aren’t huge at all. This is a debunked myth. I can’t recommend reading this article enough.

  • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t think the article was defending bloated applications. Instead, it was defending Flatpak’s use of storage.

    • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      You are right, and I understood that, but the methodology he uses - and therefore the conclusions - is wrong. He tests two virgin installs, adds some applications, and reaches a conclusion. It’s like saying that I watched a baby be born and live until she was five, and so I’ve proven humans live forever. I also want him to confirn that no Flatpack was used for any packages on the Workstation 36 machine; I can’t speak for Fedora, but on Arch AUR there are some packages that depend on Flatpack and will install it because that’s the only way upstream releases it. So you can easily unintentionally end up with Flatpack on your Arch box if you’re not careful.

      Let’s see a real-world, used desktop comparison with multiple package upgrade cycles after a year.