this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
438 points (87.4% liked)

linuxmemes

20761 readers
1398 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
poopsmith@lemmy.world
zephyr@lemmy.world
438
I like both, but usually prefer Ubuntu (slrpnk.net)
submitted 1 week ago by tsugu@slrpnk.net to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
171 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You're just describing flatpack.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Snaps predate flatpaks though.

[–] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah but only in 2016 were they made available for other Linux distros. Flatpaks were available since 2015.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

So why would Canonical switch to another technology that came after what they made and doesn't cover their biggest use cases for snaps?

[–] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm not saying they would.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

But if flatpak doesn't meet the widest use case of snap, are they really describing flatpak?

[–] x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I replied to:

With snap they can release the package a single time, and it can be used across all of their releases. I think this is the main point of snap. Being able to use it across other systemd distros is just a bonus.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 5 days ago

Flatpak is not a solution for packaging a large portion of the types of software Canonical packages with snap, such as database servers, kernels and containerisation software like lxd.

[–] tsugu@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Flatpak can't run CLI apps. Also, they started around the same time. Flatpak in 2015 and Snap in 2016. This is like saying dnf shouldn't exist because apt is a thing.

Why would Canonical abandon their own solution because some people online complain?

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Install CLI packages with Nix. You don't need a proprietary system

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Nix on non-NixOS distributions would be great, if it would support installing apps into the users home directory instead of a global directory (without recompiling everything).

(When I looked into it, it wasn't possible, but if you made it work, please share.)

[–] jrgd@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The question that I have to ask: what category of CLI apps (or even some examples) exist that are too complex to maintain a few versions simultaneously as native packages but are not complex enough to just use an OCI container for them instead?

[–] lengau@midwest.social 2 points 5 days ago

Personally I use (and maintain) snaps for several developer tools I use, because the automatic updates through snap means I can have automatically up-to-date tools with the same package across my Ubuntu, Fedora, Arch and OpenSuSE machines.