this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
68 points (90.5% liked)

Linux

48207 readers
795 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've gathered that a lot of people in the nix space seem to dislike snaps but otherwise like Flatpaks, what seems to be the difference here?

Are Snaps just a lot slower than flatpaks or something? They're both a bit bloaty as far as I know but makes Canonicals attempt worse?

Personally I think for home users or niche there should be a snap less variant of this distribution with all the bells and whistles.

Sure it might be pointless, but you could argue that for dozens of other distros that take Debian, Fedora or Arch stuff and make it as their own variant, I.e MX Linux or Manjaro.

What are your thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (7 children)

So like... I understand the why behind flatpaks and snaps, but I'm an end-user, and more often than not they just make things more difficult, in my opinion.

They're really great for server setups for sort of keeping each individual application from being able to deeply influence other applications or the root filesystem.

But this means if I installed the Spotify snap (at least when I last tried a few years ago) I had to jump through a bunch of hoops to get it to be able to access my media files where all my music was stored.

So like I said, great for out-of-the-box-server setups where the everything is a little separated from each other (kind of like Docker, from what I understand, but at the app-level? I could be wrong here.) because it helps default security settings and interactions from getting confusing quickly.

However, for your casual end-user, it can quickly become a confusing nightmare if you actually do need your applications more easily interacting with one another because you're just trying to write an email.

Anyway, that's my personal opinion: The reasons they exist server-side are pretty solid, but the reasons they exist on desktops for the end-user are less compelling and often result in user frustration.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

They're really great for server setups

Please don't go anywhere near servers with either of those, that's what docker and alternatives are for.

the reasons they exist on desktops for the end-user are less compelling and often result in user frustration.

Try running a stable distro without them. If you want a program not to be years out of date, and don't want to compile everything manually, the only options are to use an alternative package manager (flatpak/snap/nix/etc.), distrobox, or appimage + some pm for updates.

However, for your casual end-user, it can quickly become a confusing nightmare

They're a lifesaver for casual users, especially when they're integrated into a gui (software centre and discovery for example). None of the other options are nearly as user friendly.

Permission issues are really rare and distro specific from my experience. Also there are tools like flatseal to make fixing them easier.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Try running a stable distro without them

Arch mentioned btw

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)