fpm vs install4j
| fpm | install4j | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | No |
| Free trial | No | Yes |
| Paid from | Free | — |
| Open source | No | No |
| Platforms | Linux, macOS, self-hosted | Linux, macOS, Windows |
| Target platforms | Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, CentOS, RHEL, Arch Linux, FreeBSD, macOS, Solaris | Windows, Windows ARM, macOS, Linux/Unix, POSIX-compatible systems |
| Output formats | deb, rpm, solaris, freebsd, osxpkg, pacman, puppet, p5p, sh, tar, zip, dir | native installers, MSIX, ZIP, macOS bundles, gzipped TAR, RPM, DEB |
| Command-line packaging | Yes | Yes |
| Free plan | — | No |
| Silent installation | — | Yes |
| Auto-update support | — | Yes |
| CI/CD integration | — | Yes |
Both are listed in Best Software Packaging Tools. On Inferse, fpm scores higher on our published basis.