• MoondropLight@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Perhaps ironically, this is mocking a strawman. Flatpacks can be installed and managed using the terminal! Not only that but Linux-Distros have had graphical package managers for decades.

    The primary reason that distros have embraced flatpack / snap / appimage is that they promise to lower the burden of managing software repositories. The primary reason that some users are mad is that these often don’t provide a good experience:

    • they are often slower to install/start/run
    • they have trouble integrating with the rest of the system (ignoring gtk/qt themes for example)
    • they take a lot more space and bandwidth

    Theoretically they are also more secure… But reality of that has also been questioned. Fine grained permissions are nice, but bundling libraries makes it hard to know what outdated libraries are running on the systems.

  • limelight79@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    I “grew up” with Slackware, so I definitely understand the dependency issue.

    I like flatpaks (and similar) for certain “atomic” pieces of software, like makemkv. For more “basic” software, like, say, KDE, I want it installed natively.

  • Captain Beyond@linkage.ds8.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    Not a fan for a few reasons. Flathub (as far as I know) works on the app store model where developers offer their own builds to users, which is probably appealing to people coming from the Windows world who view distros as unnecessary middlemen, but in the GNU/Linux world the distro serves an important role as a sort of union of users; they make sure the software works in the distro environment, resolve breakages, and remove any anti-features placed in there by the upstream developers.

    The sandboxing is annoying too, but understandable.

    Despite this I will resort to a flatpak if I’m too lazy to figure out how to package something myself.

  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I need OBS on this new computer!

    Let’s install the flatpack!

    V4l problems

    Plugins Problems

    Wayland Problems

    I’m just going back to the .deb, thanks.

    • csolisr@hub.azkware.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      Flatpak being securely sandboxed by default is both its biggest strength and its worst point of contention. The XDG is still scrambling to replicate the permission requests paradigm from Android on the Linux desktop.

  • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Enter the calm and quiet room

    Pass out torches and pitchforks, guns and knives

    “Snaps exist”

    War erupts.

  • Bronstein_Tardigrade@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Just another tool in the toolbox. Use it or not, up to the user. I’ve even seen Slackware users who say they use Flatpak to ward off dependency rabbit holes.

  • a Kendrick fan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Size and gnome/GTK dependencies are main reasons why I don’t use Flatpaks (I have nothing against gnome though, it just pulls in too much and KDE is worse in this regards, which is why I use Sway and River)

  • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Enter the calm and quiet room

    Pass out torches and pitchforks, guns and knives

    “Snaps exist”

    War erupts.

  • Mahi@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’m a big fan of the idea of sandboxed apps. Flatpak is not great as it compromises sandboxing for compatibility (both with distros and apps) and also it’s quite stagnant now. But there are no other options anyway, so I use it.

  • arc99@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    While I wouldn’t want flakpak going deep into the OS I think the advantage of using them on the desktop is obvious. Developers can release to multiple dists from a single build and end users get updates and versions immediately rather than waiting for the dist to update its packages. Plus the ability to lock the software down with sandboxes.

    The tradeoff is disk consumption but it’s not really that big of a deal. Flatpaks are layered so apps can share dependencies. e.g. if the app is GNOME it can share the GNOME runtime with other apps and doesn’t need to ship with its own.

  • grimaferve@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Honestly? I’m a fan of Flatpaks where they make sense. I’m also okay with Appimages. Native is pretty cool. Whatever gets the thing to run really.

    I like to use the terminal to update my applications, it’s just faster. I have an alias to run an update for native packages and flatpaks. You can use your GUI of choice. Or not, it’s up to you. It’s that sort of freedom that I love about using Linux.

    In some cases, Flatpak actually helps, as in my case, with Prism Launcher. Some of my system libraries cause issues with a handful of mods, but the libraries distributed with the Flatpak get that working. Hopefully that’s not foreshadowing more future library-related issues.

  • Mahi@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’m a big fan of the idea of sandboxed apps. Flatpak is not great as it compromises sandboxing for compatibility (both with distros and apps) and also it’s quite stagnant now. But there are no other options anyway, so I use it.