3 ms·
I know - however these things are seldom demarcated on merit and more on ideology. I wish the next generation of linux has a single package manager :(
by sandGorgon 10y ago
I know - however these things are seldom demarcated on merit and more on ideology.
I wish the next generation of linux has a single package manager :(
- geodel 10y agoI think in case of Snap, it is part of money making server business. So it is less likely Canonical is going to give up on that.
- jononor 10y agoBut then you're competing with Docker images. Not that Docker is that amazing, but I just don't see why anyone would want to use Snap instead of Docker?
- mwj 10y agoContainers are for a completely different use case than system packages.
- wmf 10y agoCoreOS and RancherOS have shown how everything can either be built into the base OS image or running in Docker, with no system packages needed.
- darkr 10y agoI think this had been shown somewhat before the time of these whippersnapper distros (Slackware, LFS etc), indeed before the days of RPM, make && make install directly on production servers were how things were done.. and it was not good. Also; in the case of CoreOS, the base image is still built using a package manager (portage). Not sure about that other guy.
- geodel 10y agoI am not sure e.g. how docker image is better for openoffice or eclipse/intellij idea and so on for desktop. I think Snap fits usecase much better. May be multiple snaps combined to create a service/image for a server.
- moosingin3space 10y ago(Disclaimer: I don't work for Canonical, I just use Ubuntu for my work.) I think it will end up like so: * apt/dpkg will remain the base packaging software on desktop and server. They're well-tested and familiar. * flatpak will become the primary format for installing desktop software outside of repo. This'll be nice for some large open-source projects that cause grief for distro packagers, and will also give companies a single target for major Linux desktops. Flatpak is too narrowly-targeted to replace snap in all cases snap was designed for. * snap will become a mechanism for image-based application deployment, primarily IoT. * docker/lxd/whatever will be used to target immutable deployments, primarily servers.
- smilliken 10y ago> I wish the next generation of linux has a single package manager :( Package management used to be my biggest frustration with computers. A couple years ago, I switched to nix [1][2] and now use it across all my unix-like systems (not sure how well it works on Windows, I haven't tried). Most under-rated piece of software I use, I'm surprised it hasn't blown up yet. [1] http://nixos.org/nix/ http://nixos.org/nix/ [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10714102 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10714102
- sandGorgon 10y agoi have the greatest of respect for nix and 0install - however its an inexorable fact that I would like a mainstream, fully supported OS on my desktop - which is either Fedora or Ubuntu. Let me flip this question - what does nix have that snap or flatpak does not ? From what I have read, they are pretty much the same.
- smilliken 10y agoI run Ubuntu primarily, and forgo apt-get in favor of nix. I've never run NixOS before (some day..). I haven't used flatpak or snap before, but the comment I linked outlines a lot of the benefits I see with nix. Conceptually it's more like Make + a package manager, if Make were a (well designed) pure functional language and wasn't afflicted with grotesque generated code.