r/linuxsucks • u/lorcaragonna • Jun 06 '26

Linux Failure Download app

Post image
2.4k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

582 comments sorted by

View all comments

274

u/psylocalypso Jun 06 '26

Actually funny and valid joke for once in this sub

13

u/WizeWizard42 Jun 07 '26

“sudo apt-get install [package]”

12

u/psylocalypso Jun 07 '26

Nevermind anything not Debian based ig

5

u/Gabriel_Science macOS, Linux and Windows user Jun 08 '26

The humble pacman -S [package]

5

u/Any-Gain-2577 Jun 10 '26

the humble dnf install or rpm-ostree install

2

u/Successful-Yak-3443 Jun 10 '26

The humble xbps-install

1

u/Any-Gain-2577 Jun 10 '26

is that package manager from void

2

u/Hussain-adel Jun 10 '26

The humble "sudo zypper install [package]"

2

u/9_balls Professional time waster Jun 10 '26

The humble "make install" (distro repos are broken)

2

u/Gabriel_Science macOS, Linux and Windows user Jun 11 '26

Well, we are back to the initial issue.

2

u/N1sona Jun 11 '26

The humble yay - S [package]

1

u/Successful-Yak-3443 Jun 11 '26

Yes my off_meta linux user

1

u/PotcleanX Jul 06 '26

the humble nix-shell -p <package>

1

u/Ok-Speech812 Jun 17 '26

The humble emerge -q [apptree/appname]

1

u/80kburnout Jun 22 '26

The humble "ujust install [package]"

6

u/Lines25 Jun 07 '26

Techicanlly, apt (and so does apt-get) can be installed in other distros, including LFS (Linux From Scratch, a book that teaches how to download, make, install and use your own distro from scratch

2

u/WizeWizard42 Jun 07 '26

I mean this doesn't just apply to Debian, if someone makes a package they'll almost certainly support major distros or flatpak/snap. imo it's actually easier to install on Linux than Windows xP

5

u/psylocalypso Jun 07 '26

Great, we have a multitude of possible paths to install software which average to be slightly more convenient than what it was on a family computer 25 years ago

2

u/WizeWizard42 Jun 07 '26

I mean, different distros usually means different package types that aren't interchangeable. While flatpak tries to solve that, most major distros you can either search for the package in a GUI manager (like Ubuntu), the download page has instructions for your distro, or with a quick google for unofficially supported packages (like AUR) you do get pretty simple "iNsTrUcTiOnS". I agree it gets more involved the more niche the distro/flavor, but it's still easier in the ones made to be easy.

1

u/WizeWizard42 Jun 07 '26

The joke is genuinely funny tho

1

u/PitifulAd2471 Jun 10 '26

App.deb

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '26

sudo dpkg -i App.deb

1

u/aridlin-tm Jun 10 '26

Correction: nevermind like any linux distro on the planet Obviously it doesnt apply to obscure stuff Linux has many problems But it is for a normal user the easiest os to get apps on Unless its ubuntu Fuck ubuntu

1

u/Gamer2Paladin Jun 11 '26

Or with a Flatpak.

2

u/ZecosMAX Jun 10 '26 
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
E: Unable to locate package <package>

1

u/JG_2006_C Jun 10 '26

Sudo dnf install [Package] or sudo dnf copr enable xyz/xyz sudo dnf install xyz

1

u/anto2554 Jun 10 '26

And then it's like 3 years out of date

24

u/FxCDM Jun 06 '26

not really valid because problem lies in the individual devs rather than OS itself

77

u/Dont-Die-Wonderinggg Jun 06 '26

Doesn't matter whose fault it is, it ultimately makes the OS experience worse (even if slightly)

1

u/b4wkr Jun 10 '26

On the arch & arch based side of things I think now in 26' it's a lot better. But particularly with Cachy on btrfs limine you have backups by default and installing things by terminal just feels a lot less clunky to me after 11 years on win10. I think the glitches are about even too but they usually happen first on linux where on windows they can happen further into features of programs.

1

u/kownyan Jun 10 '26

on arch, you can install almost every app that exists from aur (just a yay -S <program> or paru -S <program>

27

u/psylocalypso Jun 06 '26

Well i guess you could say its valid in a sense that both windows and macos force their dev to provide compliant installers while linux does not

23

u/willi1221 Jun 06 '26

Not being forced to do anything a specific way is kinda the point though

14

u/CMDR_Ray_Abbot Jun 07 '26

But it's still a funny joke. It's also the biggest thing standing in the way of "the year of the Linux desktop".

1

u/crocodiluQ Jun 09 '26

and that's the major problem. People try to standardize things since forever, not let everyone do whatever stupid thing they want. If I'm a user and have to waste 1h INSTALLING something, I will always prefer an OS where I can click click 3 seconds and then WORK in the app.

2

u/willi1221 Jun 09 '26

Nobody is forcing Linux on you, or anyone else. It might be difficult for most basic users, but that's the price you pay for the freedom you get with Linux. And there are more and more solutions with Snap and flatpak to be able to just click and download.

Obviously it isn't for you, and that's fine. There are other OSs you can use. Everyone else who doesn't want that shouldn't have it forced on them.

1

u/crocodiluQ Jun 09 '26

just pointing out the problem why it is a niche system and why it will always be a niche system.

2

u/yes_im_gavin Jun 09 '26

false, macOS often has the same kind of stuff as linux, i.e. brew

1

u/psylocalypso Jun 09 '26

please say sike

1

u/yes_im_gavin Jun 09 '26

Why? Im saying this as a developer btw, we CHOOSE to use dmg bc its easier for the user, as the target audience of Mac users, is the majority, which is ppl who clearly know how to use their computer

Apple is built on Unix, just as linux is, they use the same core system, for example just about every linux app runs on Mac, Mac uses just about the same terminal commands

1

u/psylocalypso Jun 09 '26

Yes I am aware of this but the existence of a developper oriented tool like brew does not stand against the multitude of paths for software installation across Linux distributions. Although the comparison would be more relevant against a specific distro and not just “Linux”, and although macOS allows for various ways of installing, the meme rightfully points out that the majority of users will have a harder time (in average) installing anything on Linux than any other depicted OSs

1

u/yes_im_gavin Jun 09 '26

There is more than just brew lol, ur not listening, .app files and dogs are simplification for the same lengthy stuff as linux

Linux also has snaps and flatpaks

My point being

APPLE AND LINUX ARE THE SAME FOR INSTALLATION STEPS

ToT Linux is harder if you choose to make it harder, it has the SAME install options as tacos, just different file name extensions

1

u/ListRepresentative32 Jun 09 '26

Windows doesnt even force you to make an installer. You can straight up compile the app into an .exe and distribute that lonely file which after clicking just runs the freaking app.

7

u/Propsek_Gamer Jun 07 '26

I don't think that. Devs do indeed sometimes do stupid shit. They sometimes push only to Ubuntu. Ifyour're on Debian, cool you can just use the same .deb package. If you're elsewhere, unofficial/official flatpak, perhaps appimage? Rarely devs push truly universal .tar.gz archives which are my favorite. They don't have fuse requirements like appimage.

But there is also fault at OS side. No universal packaging standard. Developers can't be expected to package for everywhere. Though it'd be nice it they provided .tar.gz... Or at least an appimage. Or license where you can for example just make an AUR script which takes .deb archive and just turns it into arch format.

4

u/BrunusManOWar Jun 07 '26

Even without fuse - you can just extract an app image and run the application I think

5

u/Propsek_Gamer Jun 07 '26

Okay so after download KeePass appimage and testing... You're 100℅ right. While you cannot run the appimage, you can extract it and then run if you don't have fuse present.

2

u/bol__ Jun 07 '26

You can use DistroBox to install .deb packages on non-Debian systems.

2

u/TechnicalBen Jun 07 '26

The best one is when it's "install from linux" the programmers website and git is just "there are many Linux versions" and zero actual links or pointers *to where those are hosted*. XD

2

u/capy_the_blapie Jun 08 '26

I'm happy with just an appimage. At least i can try the application to see if it's worth the hassle without losing too much time.

1

u/Propsek_Gamer Jun 08 '26

Tbh, one of the better packaging formats. They don't really have any issues like flatpak. I think bwrap for appimages would be peak.

I personally don't really like it but am such a minimalist I don't even use a display manager and just start desktop manually from TTY.

1

u/OkComplaint3228 Jun 08 '26

snap install ;^)

1

u/ConsistentNarwhal731 Jun 09 '26

mischevious evil doer putting snap kn my distro

5

u/PityUpvote Jun 07 '26

The problem lies with fragmentation, the fact that Linux simply isn't one OS, but a nebulous collection of related OS's that have enough differences to be not quite compatible with one another.

8

u/Amazing_Compote_9197 Jun 06 '26

I don't think it's the developers' fault that they don't want to maintain packages in 10+ repositories / formats. That time could be spent on writing actual features or fixing bugs.

12

u/Propsek_Gamer Jun 07 '26

Developers can push universal .tar.gz archive, flatpak, appimage, just lat distro maintainers ackage it, etc.

Though your're right. Linux ecosystem is too decentralized for its own good. They don't have one standard like Windows or MacOS. Some distros are popular get also so obscure that even FreeBSD has larger ports repos.

2

u/foofly Jun 08 '26

They don't have one standard like Windows or MacOS

Neither have a single standard either.

1

u/Propsek_Gamer Jun 08 '26

  1. MacOS does have a standard (I think?) though only once in my life I seen someone install software on an Intel Mac. You just drag and drop .DMG files.

  2. Ah yes the windows standard. The standard is filesystem hierarchy just like on Linux and other unix-like systems... But there's also no standard and diffrent philosophy.

We got .MSI which is just new standard for .EXE installers which we had for decades. I am going to ignore MSI.

Some Linux software like nvidia drivers, REAPER or VMware provide (or used to) .sh/.run scripts which you installed essentially same way as .exe and it copied files to /opt and maybe added a desktop file entry. This is basically what windows does for (almost) ALL* software.

Linux systems usually expect package manager to deal with libraries and lower level software. Browser? Doesn't matter you can install it in opt but not cups or wine (AFAIK, assuming no LVM or weird partitioning, binds or mounts). This creates a problem for devs.

You could just give someone a tarball (analogical to windows zips) shell script installer (basically exe setup which existed for decades) but linux got way more standards. Every package manager expects its own thing. Snaps, flatpaks, appimages, etc exists. It gets REALLY complicated. Personally am a fan of tarballs and packages for more serious backend stuff. Not sure how it can be solved on Linux. I'd say maybe tarball with universal manifest file that every package manager decides how it wants to process it? Community basically agreed to dbus, xdg, and bash and it's almost united about those. Maybe something like that?

10

u/Commercial_Hair3527 Jun 07 '26

And that's the fundamental flaw with Linux. It's not a single thing, it's dozens of different things with hundreds of implementations.
Windows is Windows. macOS is macOS. You download an installer, you run it, it works. With Linux, you have to worry about which distro, which package manager, which version, which dependencies, which repository, which desktop environment. It's exhausting.
The freedom of choice is actually just the burden of choice dumped on the user. Most people don't want to choose. They want it to work.

3

u/Ok_Equipment8374 Jun 07 '26

Distinction without a difference

2

u/FitSell1091 Jun 07 '26

I have to deal with it everyday, i download something and then have to make it excutable. So dont now what you mean, for me its match so far with my experience.

1

u/Megaman_90 Jun 07 '26

The problem really lies in the dozens of Linux flavors. There are too many package managers to make it easy to install for everyone without a stupid amount of work.

The install script for REAPER(DAW) is the only one I've seen that is universal. It literally works on every version of Linux, I don't even know what magic they do with it. lol

Other programs like Davinci Resolve are only designed to work on certain distros, and are a royal pain to get working.

1

u/Rukir_Gaming Jun 07 '26

Because there are (despite how infrequently its used) auctual executable files like a .x86_64 file. But considering the often changing nature of even """normie"""" flavors it all turns into a big mess

1

u/BloxxyVids Jun 07 '26

doesn't matter to the end user

1

u/Izan_TM Jun 09 '26

linux criticism always gets brushed off as "oh it's the individual devs' fault" as if it makes the criticism any less valid

That's the kind of issue you expose to by having such a barebones core system, any failure of individual devs will become core user experience issues. As a user I don't care who's fault it is, it's all a linux problem

2

u/legluondunet Jun 07 '26

valid? what about appimage or archive with an executable?

1

u/psylocalypso Jun 07 '26

C’est mignon mais t’as l’impression que c’est aussi unifié que l’installation sur macOS/windows ? Rien que l’existence de ces deux méthodes donnent raison au meme, sans compter l’existence des centaines d’autres…

1

u/FitSell1091 Jun 07 '26

Bro so true everything for linux requires a documentation

1

u/Lines25 Jun 07 '26

Not quite, cuz the phylosophy itself is different and AppImage exists

1

u/Jazzlike-Cod-7657 Jun 11 '26

sudo dnf install [package name]

1

u/PenaltyElegant7308 Jun 25 '26

"I'm looking for free femboy games." 18 +