Originally posted by Steffo
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Ubuntu 18.04 LTS Policy Forming For Allowing Snaps By Default
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by debianxfce View PostDebian package can be very simple (you might need to change the whole directory structure to have a root permission before packaging: sudo chown -R root:root bluetoothtransfer-1.0):
Building a Simple Deb Package All of the hip kids today are into deploying packages and complex systems with thin...
Snaps, flatpaks etc add duplicate binary code to the system. I have tried a couple of flatpaks and they failed to run. Many Linux distributions are like win virus hoover,: resource hogs, slow, buggy and difficult to use and maintain. Modularity is they key to a good software quality.
By the way, phoronix spelling checker does not recognize the word modularity
For OSS, like LibreOffice I wouldn't consider flatpak either, but I'm quite looking forward to GOG and Steam shipping flatpak'd software as it would solve one of the biggest butthurt of end-user software vendors. Which in turn could mean better, more extensive linux support from these companies.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by treba View PostIf I get it right, snaps are better suited for servers and embedded systems. For example ubuntus live kernel patching daemon comes as a snap.
On the desktop, I see more potential in flatpak, for it's stronger sandboxing techniques
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spazturtle View PostAm I correct in thinking that Snaps are similar to apps on macOS which are fully self contained and do not require insatalation?
For apps that are self contained and don't need to be installed, look at appimage.
Comment
-
Originally posted by OneBitUser View Post
Although I agree with most of what you say, there is one other point to consider. Namely that for proprietary software vendors, flatpak and the like are a godsend... they allow cross-distro software support and complete control over the software's runtime environment.
For OSS, like LibreOffice I wouldn't consider flatpak either, but I'm quite looking forward to GOG and Steam shipping flatpak'd software as it would solve one of the biggest butthurt of end-user software vendors. Which in turn could mean better, more extensive linux support from these companies.
Nope, not interested, broken-by-design.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by debianxfce View PostSnaps, flatpaks etc add duplicate binary code to the system.
There are also more practical ways to control what software can and cannot do without the hassle of duplication or over exaggerating defensive security.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by MoonMoon View Post
The biggest problem for those software vendors, especially game publishers, though, is that they in many cases don't react to security problems in the libraries they use. Not a problem on a system with traditional packaging systems, since the distro developers will care about the problem, but an application in such a sandbox can potentially come with insecure libraries that get never fixed. When I then see packages that are not properly sandboxed by design because they need outside-of-container access coming as Snap packages, I see Linux going down the Windows way: a conglomerate of not trustworthy libraries lying around on the system for everyone to abuse.
Nope, not interested, broken-by-design.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment