I use Karch, btw.
Makes sense that it includes snap given that KDE officially supports their apps packaged as snaps, unlike Gnome.
If I recall correctly, aren’t they going for an Arch base? I assume they’re going to be enabling AppArmor so that the snap sandboxing is mostly working, except for the patches Canonical have failed to upstream so far.
Lame
I vote to kill snap
I don’t like Snap too, but it has some advantages over Flatpak. And unfortunately the most popular distribution still uses Snap. In example it is easier to create Snap packages and Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins ( Edit: my bad ) , but Snap does (something like grep in example). Also some may like it more that Snap relies on AppArmor instead using the custom solution of Flatpak.
All in all, its not like black and white which is better. I still wish only one of the formats would exist, because this is not the kind of fragmentation I wish to have. But both exist and the end user should decide which of them to kill.
the most popular distribution still uses Snap
Ubuntu is the most popular? On server maybe, on desktop I doubt it.
Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins
It is not true. You can install Neovim as flatpak, for example.
Also some may like it more that Snap relies on AppArmor instead using the custom solution of Flatpak.
It only means, that on distros without AppArmor you get almost no sandboxing of snap applications.
The only advantage snap has is the ability to package drivers as snaps. Other than that there’s simply no reason to choose proprietary-backed snap over flatpak.
EDIT: Typos.
Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins
Where does that misinformation come from? That’s not the first time I’ve heard it. Was that actually true at one point?
I am currently only on Linux on my Steam Deck and I do have two RPi’s (though I don’t actively use them) so I don’t have personal current knowledge of differences between Snap, Flatpak, and App Image beyond that A: Snap always brings up lots and lots of hate in comments and B: is from Canonical.
But is it possible that they might choose to use Snap for having more program options due to Ubuntu being such a “mainstream” distro? I know lots and lots of programs do release Flatpaks, but are there more of them or does Snap have more? Real question since I am aware of how heated some threads get with folks being really “fuck Snap” or “it is fine.” Mostly just curious since I am more and more likely to move my main PC to Linux as my main OS after Windows 10 is dead.
Snap doesn’t just bring lots of hate in comments it also brings a lot of bloat in your system which is a big no in Linux community. Another thing is canonical is going out of their way to force snap. In Ubuntu even if you do apt install it is installing snap packages.
I’m not sure if there are more snap packages than flatpaks or .deb/.rpm but most Linux users are competent enough to either add custom repos or follow simple build instructions to build from source.
Think of it as the Mac appstore VS the Windows App store. Mac apps (flatpak) are the same as desktop apps, but sandboxed, the store isn’t intrusive, and people found it convenient, so it was fine. Then the windows app store (snaps) launched and it did basically the same thing but slightly worse, except Microsoft (canonical) forced it down its users throats, so people hated it.
Both camps are right, from a technical perspective, snaps are fine, but philosophically, it sucks, and the Linux community cares way more about the latter than the former, otherwise they’d all be running windows.
What is so hated about snaps? I’ll admit I haven’t used Ubuntu since they started using snaps, but I don’t understand the hate about them in the Linux community.
Me using no systemd, no flatpak, no snap… I think I’ll pass
