Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

agnos.is Forums

  1. Home
  2. Linux
  3. Fan of Flatpaks ...or Not?

Fan of Flatpaks ...or Not?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Linux
linux
307 Posts 170 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • shrewdcat@lemmy.zipS [email protected]
    This post did not contain any content.
    bilb@lemmy.mlB This user is from outside of this forum
    bilb@lemmy.mlB This user is from outside of this forum
    [email protected]
    wrote on last edited by
    #298

    I use Aurora DX so most of my apps are flatpaks. Its fine.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.worksM [email protected]

      Enter the calm and quiet room

      Pass out torches and pitchforks, guns and knives

      “Snaps exist”

      War erupts.

      S This user is from outside of this forum
      S This user is from outside of this forum
      [email protected]
      wrote on last edited by
      #299

      SNAP BAD

      1 Reply Last reply
      3
      • shrewdcat@lemmy.zipS [email protected]
        This post did not contain any content.
        B This user is from outside of this forum
        B This user is from outside of this forum
        [email protected]
        wrote on last edited by
        #300

        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.

        1 Reply Last reply
        2
        • M [email protected]

          The one "good" thing about containers is that you keep your DLL-like mess localized. Just one or a few related apps run in the container and if they want / need some weird library version, they can have it without breaking other things.

          A This user is from outside of this forum
          A This user is from outside of this forum
          [email protected]
          wrote on last edited by
          #301

          Yeah but that’s a huge benefit already. I am not savvy enough in the development side to know whether that’s a reward that justifies any of the frustrations people have. Personally I don’t really mind varying methods to do any one job, as long as it’s well-documented, easily managed, and does not create a higher load on the system in any respect.

          M 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • A [email protected]

            Yeah but that’s a huge benefit already. I am not savvy enough in the development side to know whether that’s a reward that justifies any of the frustrations people have. Personally I don’t really mind varying methods to do any one job, as long as it’s well-documented, easily managed, and does not create a higher load on the system in any respect.

            M This user is from outside of this forum
            M This user is from outside of this forum
            [email protected]
            wrote on last edited by
            #302

            I view the delays during launch and the extra time spent during updates as a "load on the system."

            Also, it entirely depends on your deployment environment. I develop system images that go out on thousands of devices deployed in "Cybersecuity Sensitive" environments, meaning: we have to document what's on the system and justify when anything in the SBOM (list of every software package installed on the machine) is identified as having any applicable CVEs... soooo.... keeping old versions of software anywhere on the machine is a problem (significant additional documentation load) for those security audits. Don't argue with logic, these are our customers and they have established their own procedures, so if we want their money, we will provide them with the documentation they demand, and that documentation is simplest when EVERYTHING on the system has ALL the latest patches.

            The most secure systems are those that don't do anything at all. You can't hack a brick.

            A 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • G [email protected]

              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)

              S This user is from outside of this forum
              S This user is from outside of this forum
              [email protected]
              wrote on last edited by
              #303

              Naw fuck gnome and fuck GTK. Over invasive and controlling crapware.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B [email protected]

                flatpaks are fine and useful, i just wish we didn't move into a scenario where applications that used to be easily available in distro repos start moving away from them and are only available through flatpaks. distro packages are just so much more efficient in every way. flatpaks are easier on maintainers and developers but that comes at a cost to the user. i have about a dozen or less flatpak apps installed and already i have to download at least 2 gigs of updates each week. i run debian

                S This user is from outside of this forum
                S This user is from outside of this forum
                [email protected]
                wrote on last edited by
                #304

                Flatpacks a fucking insult to people with limited bandwidth.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M [email protected]

                  I view the delays during launch and the extra time spent during updates as a "load on the system."

                  Also, it entirely depends on your deployment environment. I develop system images that go out on thousands of devices deployed in "Cybersecuity Sensitive" environments, meaning: we have to document what's on the system and justify when anything in the SBOM (list of every software package installed on the machine) is identified as having any applicable CVEs... soooo.... keeping old versions of software anywhere on the machine is a problem (significant additional documentation load) for those security audits. Don't argue with logic, these are our customers and they have established their own procedures, so if we want their money, we will provide them with the documentation they demand, and that documentation is simplest when EVERYTHING on the system has ALL the latest patches.

                  The most secure systems are those that don't do anything at all. You can't hack a brick.

                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                  [email protected]
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #305

                  Hey, like I said, great info for me to learn because I don’t know. I was only saying that I don’t mind because my situation is fine with it. Thanks for the info, it’s interesting. I’m sure for any situation there’s a better and worse solution and I’m sure that for any solution, there’s a situation that either likes or dislikes the approach.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • muusemuuse@sh.itjust.worksM [email protected]

                    Enter the calm and quiet room

                    Pass out torches and pitchforks, guns and knives

                    “Snaps exist”

                    War erupts.

                    G This user is from outside of this forum
                    G This user is from outside of this forum
                    [email protected]
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #306

                    War with who? I'm posting this from Kubuntu and I'd happily agree with you that Snap should fuck off and die. (In particular, the backend being controlled by Canonical makes it objectively bad compared to Flatpak.) Even among people like me who tolerate Snap (for now...), I really don't think you're gonna find anybody who actually likes it, let alone enough to champion it.

                    Can't start a war when there's a consensus!

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M [email protected]

                      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.

                      G This user is from outside of this forum
                      G This user is from outside of this forum
                      [email protected]
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #307

                      As far as I know, I've only installed Flatpaks using the terminal. The most annoying thing about them for me is having to type out the fully-qualified name of the software (e.g. org.mozilla.firefox instead of just firefox), which is a very terminal-specific issue, LOL!

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups