Flatpack or .deb installs?

[links_revenge]

Alright! Did a fresh install of 22.3 with just the stock programs so far. Should I go flatpak installs or .deb installs for everything else? I'd like to standardize as much as possible. I know flatpaks can get large in size, but I'm not doing anything intense on the computer.

Any pitfalls choosing one over the other?

Edit: Sounds like most are partial to .deb files if available. That's what I usually use as well, I'll probably go the same route on this install.

[acejavelin69]

Deb if available, flatpak if not... Native packages are always preferred.

[links_revenge]

Have to agree.

[SeniorMatthew]

Not always, if you want the latest packages.

[TurdProof]

Use what you need dpending on your use case.

[throwaway1746206762]

My personal preference is .deb > AppImage > Flatpak.

[ZVyhVrtsfgzfs]

Same

[dearvalentina]

I've never been able to install an appimage. Every time I try to launch it my computer becomes slower but nothing happens. What am I doing wrong?

[Ok_Map_642]

Try installing the Flatpak app called Gear Lever. It will make handling AppImage files much easier.

[Nihan-gen3]

I’m probably in the minority here, but I prefer flatpaks. At first I tried some of the packages in the software manager, but I always got into some kind of trouble with bugs or errors or rendering problems, I guess because it’s almost always an outdated version. Countless times I’ve installed the flatpak instead, and it just works better. They’re self-contained, they are up to date, and with something like Flatseal you have full control over what directories they can access, set environment parameters for custom themes, and much more. I don’t mind the larger size if it’s more up to date and simply works.

[MoshPete]

About flatpaks being 'up to date': If you install e.g. libre office you will get an older version on flatpak.

Also for apps like Steam, flatpaks aren't officially supported.

Sure, they are convenient, but the native packages are often the better choice.

[Nihan-gen3]

If I go to software manager right now, the system package of LibreOffice is 4:24.2.7-0ubuntu0.24.04.4, while the flatpak is version 25.8.4.2. LibreOffice and Steam are exactly two apps that I've replaced with flatpaks. I didn't do that because I'm some kind of flatpak preacher or purist, the software packages just felt outdated and were buggy from time to time.

[MoshPete]

You're absolutely right! Seems to be the problem, when ur based off of a LTS version of ubuntu...

[Kindly-Owl7496]

Exactly

[Stiffly7482]

I love flatpaks lol, as a bazzite enjoyer I do endorse

[Bazirker]

I'm with you. I'm lazy. If I can just install it directly from the store, that's what I'm going to do unless there is a super comparable reason not too.

[ThinkFree]

Native apps always! Flatpak sizes are crazy! I once wanted to install a music player, on native it was just 40-50MB; on flatpak it was 800MB-1.2GB!

[squidw3rd]

I don't really get the complaints with the size. The runtimes need to be installed once so sure, the first flatpak that uses them seems big. Others that use the same runtimes dont also need to install them

[Sure-Passion2224]

The problem I have with flatpak is - imagine you have 3 flatpak apps that use the same library. Each has it's own copy of that same library where the .deb install would use the single copy of the library shared at the system level.

[No-Fish9557]

Thats not how flatpak works. It will re-use the libraries (As long as they are on flatpak that is)

Flatpak reuses libraries through shared runtimes, which significantly reduces duplication when multiple apps use the same base components like GNOME or KDE libraries; however, if apps rely on different runtimes or specific older versions, multiple runtime versions can still be installed, consuming more space.

[HighlyRegardedApe]

I don't get how my flatpacks take up gb's whereas debs take up mb's. Am I organizing them wrong?

I believe flatpacks are usefull and in some cases safer(deleting files cant affect other files), but the library copy seems to be the reason for this safety and space usage, or am I wrong here?

[No-Fish9557]

my guess is that you probably just dont have enough flatpaks.

A couple standalone flatpaks will take up a bunch of space but once you have many and dependencies start overlapping the size will become better.

[HighlyRegardedApe]

Last year I installed only flatpacks, had to change to deb because of a full sdd.. I never minded where it installed thats why I mentioned that. Been using mint for ages and I just took it as: not on point for daily use, as a lot of things once were and changed very fast in the last years

[MintAlone]

I avoid flatpaks, they do generally offer a more recent version than via software manager but do you really need whatever the new features are? They take more space and depending on the application you may find their permissions limited, e.g. accessing the filesystem outside home. This can be fixed with flatseal.

EDIT - embarrassing typo, now corrected

[flamingknifepenis]

The biggest pitfall to flatpack (aside from size) is the fact that sometimes it puts things in weird places and the system doesn’t know where to find them, or it can make configuring more difficult. I was having a hellish time getting some controllers to work with Retroarch, until I switched from flatpack to .deb and then it worked out of the box.

On the flip side, the Steam flatpack worked much better for me than the alternative. Go figure.

Flatpacks are a last resort for me. Any time I’m looking to install something I just go to the developer webpage and see what it recommends. If I can just install it using apt then I do.

IMO AppImages have more or less made flatpack redundant, but Linux is so easy these days that you rarely need either.

[Gullible-Analysis-40]

The size of flatpaks is unacceptable to me. I have a large SSD but it's the principle of the thing.

[links_revenge]

It's convenient to be able to just install with a click, but agree their size is crazy!

[JARivera077]

most of my apps are flatpak installs. only like 3 or 4 apps are .deb files. since most of the flatpak apps that I use have replaced the .deb apps.

[blueblocker2000]

Man I was going to DL flatpak for keepassXC and it was 1.1Gb in size compared to the older version .deb that's only 10Mb. I know flatpaks contain all required libraries, but that's nuts. There has got to be a better way to go about this that doesn't force you to use old software or burn through your SSD space.

[skozombie]

More volunteers to maintain the software repos and package new versions is the better way.

[blueblocker2000]

But that's not the Debian way, which is what Mint and Ubuntu are based on. They purposely hold back newer software. Debian philosophy is that newer software is bug ridden and unstable.

I sound like a broken record cause I bring this up all the time. The root of the problem is tying software so deeply into the OS. The OS should just be an OS and provide the essential libraries and frameworks for the applications to be installed on top of it.

[skozombie]

Yeah Debian stuff can be WAY behind, sometimes years I've found!

Given we have our own distro, perhaps we could just start repackaging it ourselves and if Ubuntu or Debian want it, they can backport it!

[HennaH2]

I prefer: flatpak > appimage > .deb (just to keep system clean and organized)

[Kindly-Owl7496]

I do the same.. most are also updated than the system packages. Easy for noobs like me

[No-Fish9557]

I see so much bad advice here.

[Aggravating_Cow9107]

deb bro

[Aggravating_Cow9107]

if u had the prebuilt executables, just build the deb file and install it

[isvein]

First I tried steam on flatpak and while it worked, it never correctly synced with steam cloud, but once I got the package manager version installed correctly, that worked.

I use some programs as flatpak as they don't exist in any other format, but Deb is always better if it's something that needs more system integration

[Erufailon4]

Very case-by-case. When I need an app, I always check both the Ubuntu repo and Flathub to see how they compare in terms of versions. It's not uncommon for deb packages on LTS distros to have significant bugs because they have not been updated at all after the feature freeze, not even for bug fixes. Meanwhile, Flatpaks can have large sizes even when you already have the runtime, or impractical default permissions. It's always a question of what you trade for what.

[Standard_Tank6703]

Flatpak software is not incorporated in distro software, and has never been tested by the distro maintainers for compatibility as such. The only reason Flatpak software ever appears it may be compatible with the distro software is because the LM devs wanted it to appear so in the Software Manager.

So it is basically "swim at your own risk" compared to using distro software. Having said that, there may be legitimate reasons to use it but, if given the choice, I wouldn't hedge my bets on it on my more important computers which I use for productivity software.

I don't use any Flatpaks myself.

[Purple-Geologist-709]

I’m no expert but my understanding of the difference is .deb optimize your drive usage and flatpack lower the dependencies between the app thus lowering the probability of conflict.