I’ve gathered that a lot of people in the nix space seem to dislike snaps but otherwise like Flatpaks, what seems to be the difference here?

Are Snaps just a lot slower than flatpaks or something? They’re both a bit bloaty as far as I know but makes Canonicals attempt worse?

Personally I think for home users or niche there should be a snap less variant of this distribution with all the bells and whistles.

Sure it might be pointless, but you could argue that for dozens of other distros that take Debian, Fedora or Arch stuff and make it as their own variant, I.e MX Linux or Manjaro.

What are your thoughts?

  • the_weez@midwest.social
    169·
    8 months ago

    This is why I don’t love snaps, proprietary backend. I think snaps actually work great for the most part, and flatpaks don’t support cli apps, only GUI.

    • ZephrC@lemm.ee
      261·
      8 months ago

      I don’t know why people keep saying that flatpaks don’t support cli apps. They do. I know it’s awkward to type out flatpak run io.github.zyedidia.micro or whatever every time you want to use a text editor, but aliases fix that pretty neatly, and that example wasn’t hypothetical.

      • d_k_bo@feddit.de
        141·
        8 months ago

        You don’t even need to create aliases yourself. Flatpak creates wrapper scripts for every app that you install. Just symlink them into your PATH.

        ln -s /var/lib/flatpak/exports/bin/org.example.CliTool ~/.local/bin/cli-tool

        or if you are using a user remote

        ln -s ~/.local/share/flatpak/exports/bin/org.example.CliTool ~/.local/bin/cli-tool

        (Note: some lemmy clients render the the tilde in code blocks incorrectly)

        • the_weez@midwest.social
          3·
          8 months ago

          This is news to me! I’m honestly just paroting others with the no CLI support, I never did the homework. Shame on me I guess!