Linux packaging strategy: evaluate AppImage vs Flatpak vs deb/rpm

[fbraz3]

Context

For Linux builds, we initially considered shipping distro-specific packages (.deb / .rpm).

During discussion, we identified that we should evaluate universal distribution formats first, especially:

• AppImage
• Flatpak

Problem

Maintaining multiple distro-specific packages may increase maintenance cost for a small team and fragment the release pipeline.

At the same time, we need to preserve mod/replay/data workflows and avoid friction with DXVK/Vulkan/OpenAL runtime expectations.

Proposal

Define and document a Linux packaging strategy in phases:

1. Create an AppImage MVP for GeneralsXZH.
2. Validate runtime behavior (DXVK + Vulkan + SDL3 + OpenAL) and mod/replay access.
3. Evaluate Flatpak as a second channel (permissions, sandbox, update UX).
4. Keep .deb / .rpm as optional follow-up if there is concrete demand.

Acceptance Criteria

• A documented decision matrix comparing AppImage vs Flatpak vs deb/rpm for this project.
• A working AppImage packaging pipeline for Linux ZH build artifacts.
• Smoke-test checklist for launch + main menu + skirmish map.
• Clear recommendation for primary Linux distribution channel.

Notes

Please avoid changing gameplay logic for this work; scope is packaging/distribution only.

[bahrom04]

Appimage is cool but is that legal to distribute via Appimg/flatpak for free without under EA name

[fbraz3]

Appimage is cool but is that legal to distribute via Appimg/flatpak for free without under EA

As far as I know the assets and brand are under copyright but the code and the executables generated are not since it’s released under gpl license.

Since the Flatpak/AppImage will be just a game launcher (the user will need to buy the original game and copy the assets from it) and I’m using different icons and naming just “GeneralsX” instead of “command & conquer generals” I hope will be enough for this legal questions.

[bahrom04]

Appimage is cool but is that legal to distribute via Appimg/flatpak for free without under EA

As far as I know the assets and brand are under copyright but the code and the executables generated are not since it’s released under gpl license.

Since the Flatpak/AppImage will be just a game launcher (the user will need to buy the original game and copy the assets from it) and I’m using different icons and naming just “GeneralsX” instead of “command & conquer generals” I hope will be enough for this legal questions.

understood, thanks

[PerAstraAdDeum]

Hi there,

Flatpak is rapidly growing and evolving, passing four million users and over two billion downloads in 2024, with currently nearing four billion downloads. On top of offering many security benefits, Flatpak makes the installation of an app trivial.

Therefore I'd like to request a Flatpak for your app. Ideally you'd have it verified, thereby adding another layer of trust to your app.

With regards to the original game files I'd propose implementing Innoextract. It's a tool that'd allow you for asking the user to point to the relevant files of an already existing installation, or have the user provide an installer from either a CD or GOG. (VCMI and OpenMW are good examples for this).

Combined, this would allow for a secure, easy and convenient way of enjoying Command & Conquer: Generals on virtually any Linux distribution.

I hope this helps!

Best regards

[fbraz3]

Hey @PerAstraAdDeum thank you for your comment.

I've tested both flatpak and appimage and I should say flatpack really catch my attention.

The current release is under appimage because i'm not able to make the flatpak works in time for this week's release, but I already have a branch to working into flatpak.

The current issue is the game hanging on the shellmap and sometimes crashing the host’s wayland when I triying to run.

I really have no flatpak experience so If you have some knowledge and want to help I will appreciate it a lot!