undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjckahn4y ago0 comments

I think this comment demonstrates the parent’s point.

0 comments

sph4y ago

Before every distro had their own package management system and repository.

Then 99% went with Flatpak, except one, Ubuntu with their own proprietary solution called snap.

It's not the same thing. We have a decent (yeah not perfect, I'll spare commenters the effort of posting that same old tired flatpak rebuttal) cross distro packaging solution, but Canonical always wants to play different and not collaborate with the other standards. So here we are.

Spivak4y ago

You can also just install Flatpak on Ubuntu and never think about Snap ever again if you so choose. Someone putting forth effort to maintain their own bespoke repository isn't really that big a deal.

In 10 years the "Ubuntu Store" will be a pretty frontend on top of Flatpak just like Gnome Software, and just like every NIH Canonical product made before it.

Karunamon4y ago

Unless you want Firefox or some other apps where the deb package is a thin frontend around a snap install command.

1 more reply

forgotpwd164y ago

What 99%? Fedora, Mint, eOS, Pop use Flatpak. Ubuntu (and derivatives other than aforementioned ones) and Solus use Snap. In every other distro, including but not limited to popular ones like Debian, SUSE, Slackware, Arch, Void, Gentoo, both are optional. Neither Flatpak nor Snap is standard.

robert_foss4y ago

Well, no. The parent point was that Snap is a way out of this software packaging quagmire, but I am saying that Snap will never unify the linux distros.

BearOso4y ago

A snap has Ubuntu-specific package dependencies. That's totally not a cross-platform concept. The only thing snap solves is sandboxing, but there are better ways to do that.

everybodyknows4y ago

> Ubuntu-specific package dependencies

Could you briefly summarize those for us?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse