Post #2054473
2026-04-21 10:46 UTC
The #AppImage "packaging" approach being embraced by many projects is just another poor approach. It does not really solve what it is expected to should solve: Dependency issues.
More and more .AppImage downloads now produce results like these:
/tmp/.mount_tumpa-Z5HMuu/usr/python/bin/python3: error while loading shared libraries: libcrypt.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
/tmp/.mount_activiXYBUA0/aw-qt: symbol lookup error: /tmp/.mount_activiXYBUA0/libQt6WaylandClient.so.6: undefined symbol: wl_proxy_marshal_flags
I dunno if it is due to incorrect packaging or a design artefact with AppImage.
I believe #flatpak is the only true sane way to go. At least if you don't want to frustrate users.
#linux #foss #opensource #packaging
Replies (3)
-
@drsheppard@social.linux.pizza 2026-05-06 01:28
@dazo@infosec.exchange U can try to build appimage via quick-sharun from https://github.com/pkgforge-dev/Anylinux-AppImages #anylinux_appimage #anylinux #pkgforge
-
@jarinks@mstdn.social 2026-04-21 11:00
@dazo@infosec.exchange didnt flatpak cave to age verification
-
@rodlie@mastodon.social 2026-04-21 11:41
@dazo@infosec.exchange It's just bad packaging. Most projects (that offer Linux binaries) don't know how Linux and libraries work.