I’ve been using arch for a while now and I always used Flatpaks for proprietary software that might do some creepy shit because Flatpaks are supposed to be sandboxed (e.g. Steam). And Flatpaks always worked flawlessly OOTB for me. AUR for things I trust. I’ve read on the internet how people prefer AUR over Flatpaks. Why? And how do y’all cope with waiting for all the AUR installed packages to rebuild after every update? Alacritty takes ages to build for me. Which is why I only update the AUR installed and built applications every 2 weeks.

  • SayCyberOnceMoreEnglish
    2·
    6 months ago

    It’s not like the AUR packages need recompiling after every update, so I’m using standard Arch repos + AUR and that’s it.

    Everything will be using the same (bleeding edge) dependencies, so if something breaks, I can find what changed and fix it and / or roll-back and / or report it to the dev.

    I’ve been down this whole scenario with Windows back in the day… DLL hell, InstallShield packaging, compiled zips, weird %PATH% sets for execution, the lot… and at the end, it’s always simpler to use common libraries and work with the devs to fix bugs - after all, they’re usually developing on a “normally” packaged system anyway.