4 ms·
Other than being engaged by Canonical, is there a reason the Snap platform be preferable to the Flatpak one?
by robert_foss 8y ago
Other than being engaged by Canonical, is there a reason the Snap platform be preferable to the Flatpak one?
- teamhappy 8y agoHere's a very detailed comparison: https://github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-projects#comparison https://github.com/AppImage/AppImageKit/wiki/Similar-project...
- robotmay 8y agoI dunno if I'm doing it wrong, but I really don't like the .AppImage thing. I've never had it successfully add itself to my system, and I don't like that it isn't actually part of a package management system. I totally understand the frustration of developers wanting to release on Linux and balking at the faff of adding your app to ~n package managers, but AppImage seems to be the wrong solution to that problem. Snaps are quite nice though, from my experience so far. I've found the documentation a bit lacking, though it is improving. EDIT: I got confused thinking FlatPak == AppImage, so you can ignore most of the above! I'm gonna check out the FlatPak system, looks interesting.
- adsche 8y agoSnap does not even support systems where the home directory is not /home/$user (e.g., a lot of NFS setups) so I'd be very careful. It's a long standing bug and not even the (so far useless) error message has been adjusted. To distribute to Ubuntu users it's good though, due to being well integrated.