I use flatpaks mostly. Flatpak dependencies (runtimes) are stored separately from the host system so and don't bloat my system with unwanted libraries and binaries. App data and configs are stored separately and better organized. Everything runs in sanboxes. I use overrides extensively. All these are very convenient for me.
Linux
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Ah, so it is possible to customize the parameters of flatpaks set by the developer/packager? That could make it a lot more appealing.
I like containerization for server applications, especially when running different services on one box. For desktop use, native libraries are stable and usually the applications being used are single instance. I don't see a point in running desktop apps in containers.
I have been for awhile. It also all exists in my home directory, so when I format my root and throw a different OS on, all my flatpaks are ready to go without installing any native packages. It's just a more consistent experience using flatpaks.
Whoa. I had not considered backing Home that way! That is slick.
Honestly, reinstalling or moving to a new distro is such a bear precisely due to the time setting up my environment and all the software. I KNOW I can script all this, or at least have a list of packages I use, but it does not really work when different package managers use different naming schemes.
I haven't used any flatpacks, mostly because they don't seem to have a good solution for running terminal programs. (Also I don't like that the application developer chooses the permissions to expose rather than the user.
However, I have been using bubblewrap which is what flatpack uses under the hood to sandbox. This allows me to run both gui and non-gui programs, and I have the control of exposing the minimum required permissions that I'm comfortable giving an untrusted piece of software.
I try to always use flatpak because I can install/remove software is a simpler way without leaving dependencies installed on my system forever.
Obviously for critical stuff I use the native version
I feel like the distinction is pretty automatic. I don't know what critical stuff you can download from flatpaks.
I guess OBS for steaming?
As someone who uses Linux but only kinda, what advantages does flatpack offer over installing something with the provided package manager? (In my case that's apt)
For me it is having up to date packages. Debian is concerned with stability, so many packages are held back for testing, or just stop getting updates.
Another is that Flatpaks are sandboxed, so they won't be messing with your systems.
Yea that makes sense. Idk if it's necessaryly for me, but thank you for explaining it either way
Theoretically I like the idea but in practice too many bugs, too much disk space, not really clear how to change font size for example... and after all that, some apps are not in flatpak. It is not ready for me yet.
I must be lucky to not have run into drugs, but damn it is probably inevitable. Okay, I will find a better solution. Appimages are apparently the superior version of this concept.
On my main PC I use for gaming I run Arch and prefer native packages whenever I can use them. I'm quite happy to have this one computer by a hobby project, and native applications just make more sense on something as up to date as Arch when they're available. I have started to prefer Flatpak over AUR packages though. The AUR is pretty overrated, in my opinion.
On my laptop and anything else I install Linux on I usually just use LMDE, and I'll often prefer the Flatpak, just because it's way more up to date. There are some apps that Mint keeps up to date native versions of, and there are some apps that come preinstalled that I just don't care about having the latest version of, but for everything else I usually just download the Flatpak.