Universal Packaging Format of the Year
 

A new category this year.

--jeremy

Snap is the only one I've used so....

Snap automatically loses for me because it requires systemd (AFAIK).

What about don't intend to use?

Then you don't vote.

LOL :thumbsup:

Didn't vote. I'm trying all 3 out and haven't decided yet whether I'll keep all, some, or none.

So far no preferences until I better understand advantages and disadvantages of each vs others and vs packages.

If, in any distro I use, they become default vs packages, or replace them, I'll likely go with the distro's default or choice at that time.

I might also try out 0Install, which you might consider adding to the poll next year.

Jeremy, were you changing poll choices after feedback while the polls were live? (I thought I saw that happening.)

If so, I don't thing you should do that - early voters then don't vote on the same choices, which makes the poll results messier. I get that the poll is for fun and discussion, but cleaner polls would give more meaningful feedback.

If not, feel free to ignore the question and call me a twit.

(Link to) Table comparing AppImage/Snap/Flatpak
 

BTW, here is a great tabular overview comparing the various properties of exactly the three formats competing here:

• AppImage Wiki: Similar Projects (comparing AppImage/Snap/Flatpak)

However, you shouldn't cast your vote just based on this table!

Better try the three package formats on your own system. Confirm (or not) for yourself if the checkboxes of that table are correct (or not).

In any case, this table's rows give a nice feature overview about the different packages' properties, strenghts and weaknesses. It's up to everybody how much relative weight to assign to each of these personally.

I can't install anything from an appimage, I see no clear instructions about how to do that in Xubuntu 17.10 (x386 version).

You just make it executable and launch it. No installation needed.

BRashley, if by "x386" you mean 32-bit, I already answered, for at least one of your tries, here
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...825/page3.html

If I misunderstood your comment above and you have 64-bit Xubuntu... I'm at a loss and can only suggest duckduckgoing (or googling) your error message

Okay; I guess then that they do not wish to make Joplin available for us nebbishes with "32-bit" systems. I cannot easily upgrade my system to the AMD-64 version, even though my CPU is in fact an AMD 64 dual-core.

Since it appears this category isn't as 'universal' as claimed (for some architectures, not others, and some initialization systems, not others,) I 'll say Linuxpackages (used to be on a website of that name since decades ago,) i.e., .tgz. That's the oldest packaging format standard (and for an entire family of distributions) so all later serious distributions have specific tools to try to install them... right? If not, one can often even do it oneself (just kidding... use 'tar xvf,') perhaps with a few changes (I'm not talking about other .tgzs just of source code, but ones that are packages with a tree of files ready-to-run.) I know .deb and .rpm are popular, but maybe not all of hundreds/thousands of distributions can install the other, but the oldest that uses (started?) .tgz has tools to try to use .deb and .rpm... so it's pretty clear which is universal in being around longest/first, used a lot, and having most time for support to be implemented.

Deb
 

I'd say deb is a universal packaging format. It's just not universally used, with the unfortunate growth of "universal package" formats that can now be observed...

I don't agree.

I specifically want to vote "I don't use no stinking universal package format", thank you very much.