Recent searches
Search options
"Distribution packaging for #Linux desktop applications is unsustainable"
@lupyuen I have a bias as I have long benefited from the traditional Linux distro model, and I have never encountered "depdency hell" on Linux *except* when I attempt to install 3rd party software (whether built from source or as a binary) outside the distro's channels, which is not unexpected.
But I will not pretend there are not issues, or rather, tradeoffs made in that model. Flathub may help, but all those new packages feel a bit like:
@lupyuen Also, when extolling the virtues of sandboxed containers and explicit permissions of flatpaks, this seems like a *really* big caveat to not gloss over:
"It’s important to mention that many apps on the biggest Flatpak app store, Flathub, aren’t sandboxed particularly well."
@cstanhope @lupyuen Yeah, it's unfortunate. Many Flatpak advocates including myself characterize this issue as being part of a 'transition' in the Linux desktop: Many apps weren't built for the Flatpak sandbox, so they heavily demand permissions. With time, more will hopefully adjust their standards to comply.
I'll add an edit to the article that explicitly points out that while Flatpak has sandboxing capabilities and Flathub encourages people to use them, Flatpak itself doesn't mandate them.
@memoryfile That's awfully kind and considerate of you to constructively respond to a random person's comment. :)
@cstanhope Aw, I appreciate that 
Of course, it's good feedback!