4 ms·
> For who? Distributions generally seem to like their own packaging processes. Me and the lack of software on Linux. I am talking about making it so that Linux
by baldfat 9y ago
> For who? Distributions generally seem to like their own packaging processes.
Me and the lack of software on Linux. I am talking about making it so that Linux can finally get some killer apps that we can't get our hands on.
Flatpak is the replacement for applications and not OS specific packages. You would still use a package manager for OS related packages and for flatpak/snap and then flatpak/snap installs and uninstalls applications. Much better system for everyone.
The complexity for deployment and its complexity and diversity is the number one issue with Desktop Linux and applications. This is why we don't have Adobe applications or many others. I use several commercial programs and to them deb = Linux and I use OpenSUSE so I constantly have to go through hoops until they start supporting rpm, which they normally will start doing if they get enough traction in Linux.
- cpburns2009 9y ago> Flatpak is the replacement for applications and not OS specific packages. You would still use a package manager for OS related packages and for flatpak/snap and then flatpak/snap installs and uninstalls applications. Much better system for everyone. Now this is the key difference I feel has been left out of the messaging surrounding flatpak. It's not meant for libraries and OS packages, just end-user applications? That makes more sense now.
- baldfat 9y agoSadly this is totally lost. Flatpak actually works with repos. If people would try them they would actually know what this is about