Or they could just provide an AppImage. It would be great if major distros added out-of-the box support for flatpaks and appimages. This would finally put an end to ISV saying that it is hard to package/distribute software for linux.

And by "out-of-the box support for flatpaks and appimages" I mean: run it inside a sandbox! If I didn't care about stability and security, I'd use windows.

There are many potential solutions, but the point is that Radarr is the one choosing not to make installation easier. It isn’t “Linux”.

I've looked into stuff like this and often it turns out the reason for a lack of [obvious solution] is:

1: Essential libraries fail

2: Documentation missing needed details

3: hostility to inquiry about problems from community

And on. The Linux community is so much better than it was when I first tried it, but the old guard (and new guard that likes gatekeeping) is still there causing a ruckus and getting in the way of people trying to advance Linux.

>Why are directing this complaint against Linux and not Radarr? They could choose to package it for various Linux distributions if they do wish.

You misunderstand my complaint. I am not blaming anyone. I am explaining why the user experience is bad. This is a common retort in the Linux community: "but they are to blame, not me!" As an end user, I don't care who is to blame. I just care that Linux is harder to use.

Well hopefully Radarr takes note and improves their users' experience when running on Linux. But in the end it's up to Radarr. Not all software is easily-installable on Windows. Not all software is easily-installable on Macos. Not all software is easy installable on various Linux distributions. I guess until Radarr decides to provide a better user experience for users of Linux, those users will either have to switch operating systems or deal with the difficulties themselves.