Snap vs Flatpak

>being in denial
I love Linux as the next guy but someday you have to move on to acceptance

I wasn't going to believe you but numbers don't lie.
Then again this guy also has a point.

Obviously, you haven't really used Linux if you're complaint is unversality.

source tarballs

>Linux is so garbage that they are already fragmented on this

Or people who use non-debian based distros could just stop using obscure meme shit like arch and gentoo.

appimages are fine too

>.exe installers
>.msi packages
>nuget
>windows store

Appimage and Flatpak. Snaps are shit.

m-muh choice

>flatpak comes from the Desktop/Gnome world
Fucking dropped.

These are not packages. You can't pack a library with it, they are not modular or composable.

Wholey fuck just statically link your binaries you fucking retards. Why do we need another package system and more bloat for something so fucking simple? Jeezus fuck.

remember to also bundle and statically link the X server

I tried flatpak for something a while ago, I really don't like it. Had the nice experience of the application breaking after an update, downloading twice as much data I'd need if installing the package normally, and it's yet another repository to check for updates.
I like just using normal package managers.

Why can't all distros just use AUR with whatever front-end?

that was stupid user, you only need client, not whole server

flatpak because r*dhat refuses to use snap

Neither. It's both cancer.

So do snaps

Because AUR is shit.

No, Linux doesn't need a universal package type.

That said it's not a problem with these existing either, only ones getting riled up are the usual Gentoo-fags who think anything new is destroying their 'freedom'.

A sandboxed self-contained package is a good thing for certain kinds of software, basically proprietary stuff, development versions you want to run alongside stable versions, and non official repos.

It's not one or the other, it's simply a complement. The existance of self-contained packages does not spell the end of distro maintained packages, why would it ?

That said, the current solutions all leave a lot to be desired, I don't see any of them taking off in their current state.

Git.

Oh look. Another Hegelian dialectic tactic. You have a choice, Cred Forumsoyim! I choose neither.

/thread

>It's not one or the other, it's simply a complement
Tell the devs of various software.

there is already tar.gz. some distro maintainers just repackaged them.

>Tell the devs of various software.

What software is only available as snap/flatpak ?

>.app app
>brew cask downloader
bliss.

>openbsd is the future
I wonder what will be the next step in your edginess.

Just suck it up and install GuixSD already.

meanwhile microsoft shits out a new format with none of your input and you love it

ultimate cuck OS

I prefer snappy but use whatever works for you.

>Desktop/Gnome world
keked

dont appimage also package all dependencies, so it works no matter what, and regardless of distro?

tar.gz is cumbersome

This. I don't know why retards keep trying so hard to bring the most retarded stuff from Windows to Linux systems.

fpbp
/thread

Is there a repository for AppImages?

github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/AppImages
Although the bintray site is completely retarded and in most cases has outdated appimages (since it's 3rd party). There really should be a proper repository for appimages.

Flatpak. Snap fails for being a Canonical controlled walled garden, for inferior sandboxing, and for shitting up /etc/mtab with a loop mount for each individual snap you have installed. AppImage isn't sandboxed at all, and thus sacrifices universality.

Flatpak has the possibility for multiple repositories handled by a single tool (GNOME, Freedesktop, Flathub, etc.), requires no extra work on an application developer's part to support a new distro, and pretty much just works.
Now this doesn't mean distro packages go away. It means that Flatpak is what to use for desktop applications that can't or won't be packaged by distro maintainers. Think about how much duplication of effort there is on packaging Firefox or Libreoffice, for example.

Thanks

>linux should remain difficult to use
Great idea

They will coexist but snaps will be more popular since it's just one big repo and ubuntu is pushing it.

AppImage is the best technical solution (Linus Torvalds APPROVED).
Snappy is the most publicized.
Flatpak is a joke and no surprise knowing who is behind it.

>appimage isn't sandboxed
this is irrelevant for most software

I agree that most things should be packed into flatpak. It just makes more sense for non-system software that's supposed to target multiple distros.

/thread

if you want all your dependencies prepackaged, use Windows

the only reason this is an initiative is to be able to package proprietary software

Snaps is worse than flatpak. Hate on GNOME as much as you want, you're retarded if you think flatpak isn't good. See

>Linux needs a...
Make it yourself.
>...universal program package type.
Well thank God someone told us we have to use the same thing! We were under the impression that we didn't! Thanks for clearing that up!

Flatpak because it's sandboxed. Lot of options to run application however you want. You can say deny internet connection or deny access to your home folders on an application basis. Doesn't need systemd.

you can run appimages in firejail