6 ms·

Unfortunately each has its own drawbacks and, in typical Linux Desktop fashion, it's 3 fragmented solutions to roughly the same problem with none of them being

Unfortunately each has its own drawbacks and, in typical Linux Desktop fashion, it's 3 fragmented solutions to roughly the same problem with none of them being standard or enjoying a particularly de-facto status. The end result being that you can't get everything in any one of them, and often can't get a particular application in any of them.

input_sh 5y ago
Can't say I've stumbled upon a lot of desktop apps (not terminal utilities) that are not on Flathub. The list is pretty long: https://flathub.org/apps/category/All https://flathub.org/apps/category/All From my experience, most of the popular proprietary ones (think: Slack, Discord, Spotify, whatever) are distributed both as a flatpak and as a snap, while more niche desktop apps are usually flatpak-exclusive (out of those options).
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  > Can't say I've stumbled upon a lot of desktop apps (not terminal utilities) that are not on Flathub. Perhaps you just don't use that many things that aren't really popular or well known? I can't find PuTTY and KeePass (though obviously there are alternatives in those cases), applications that both have Linux versions and that I use every day (and aren't even that unknown). Also, unfortunately the limitations of Flatpak mean even if what you want is there, say Wireshark, it often won't have full functionality because it is impossible to give it the permissions it needs. In Wireshark's case, it can't actually capture any packets. If you want to actually use it you'll still need to resort to a different installation method.
  - workerdrone451 5y ago
    Did you try flatseal for Wireshark? It abstracts the process of messing with permissions. That being said, unless the flatpak has some features your distro version doesn't, for trusted software package is always preferred. Flatpak is really for untrusted software/proprietary and projects that update with new features often.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      You misunderstand, Flatpak has no mechanism whereby the appropriate permission can be granted. At all. https://github.com/flathub/org.wireshark.Wireshark/issues/4 https://github.com/flathub/org.wireshark.Wireshark/issues/4
  - veeti 5y ago
    What is the use case for running PuTTY on Linux? I'm curious.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      It is what I use on Windows, so I'm familiar with it, and it supports serial comms.
    - orthecreedence 5y ago
      Window management. It's basically a way to segregate a general terminal (usually used for local stuff) from a window specifically for SSH. For me this was a much bigger issue when I was on Windows, but also in Ubuntu which groups programs together similarly to the Windows taskbar. I'm on i3 now mostly and just use a normal terminal for ssh, but for quite some time I was using putty on linux specifically for window management.
      - approxim8ion 5y ago
        Sounds like a use case for tmux?
        orthecreedence 5y ago
        No, not really. I'm talking about OS-level window management. Being able to open a specific window with a single chord.
marcodiego 5y ago
Hi AnIdiotOnTheNet! I really appreciate your comments against linux. I'm true. Since I don't have much knowledge about NT's strengths, the comments I like the most are the ones where you highlight advantages of the NT kernel over linux. It's been some time since I last read anything like that from you. Would you mind to comment if ebpf usage and the possible new futex2 syscall helps to close the gap between linux and NT with regards to async primitives?
horsawlarway 5y ago
As someone who's released commercial software on linux before - having only 3 solutions to target is actually pretty delightful (We still build .deb and .rpm as well, so 5 really, after snap, flatpak and appimage) Plus I find the general sandbox approach to be a LOT more stable - distro upgrades rarely causes issues, and dependencies are much easier to wrangle. Definitely still some hiccups, but overall it feels like it's moving in a direction that I find easier to work with - both as a user and a developer. Plus the markets are generally fairly large - sure I still dip into aur every now and then, but I mostly find the "Software I need at work" stuff available
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
  > As someone who's released commercial software on linux before - having only 3 solutions to target is actually pretty delightful I think that speaks to a particularly huge failure of Linux Desktop more than anything else.
  - beermonster 5y ago
    In what sense? If you mean the fact there are multiple solutions, I don't think it's anything to do with Linux Desktop. I don't think that's even to do with Linux. More the plethora of alternatives in general when using FOSS. But that to some is its strength, not failure.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
      I disagree. Now to ensure I can install software I need not just one package manager, but at least 2 or 3 (atp, flatpak, snap). Of course that doesn't cover all the bases either, I'm still occasionally going to have to compile something from source because the developer didn't even bother making a binary because they don't want to build it for 5+ different packaging formats, several of which will need constant maintenance. When it comes to platforms[0], you need to be able to depend on certain things being there and working a certain way. Fragmentation of a platform is bad, and Linux Desktop is so fragmented the various distros style themselves as entirely different OSs! [0] As opposed to applications. Part of the problem is that historically there has never been a clear delineation in Linux Desktop.

input_sh 5y ago

Can't say I've stumbled upon a lot of desktop apps (not terminal utilities) that are not on Flathub. The list is pretty long: https://flathub.org/apps/category/All https://flathub.org/apps/category/All From my experience, most of the popular proprietary ones (think: Slack, Discord, Spotify, whatever) are distributed both as a flatpak and as a snap, while more niche desktop apps are usually flatpak-exclusive (out of those options).

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
> Can't say I've stumbled upon a lot of desktop apps (not terminal utilities) that are not on Flathub. Perhaps you just don't use that many things that aren't really popular or well known? I can't find PuTTY and KeePass (though obviously there are alternatives in those cases), applications that both have Linux versions and that I use every day (and aren't even that unknown). Also, unfortunately the limitations of Flatpak mean even if what you want is there, say Wireshark, it often won't have full functionality because it is impossible to give it the permissions it needs. In Wireshark's case, it can't actually capture any packets. If you want to actually use it you'll still need to resort to a different installation method.
- workerdrone451 5y ago
  Did you try flatseal for Wireshark? It abstracts the process of messing with permissions. That being said, unless the flatpak has some features your distro version doesn't, for trusted software package is always preferred. Flatpak is really for untrusted software/proprietary and projects that update with new features often.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    You misunderstand, Flatpak has no mechanism whereby the appropriate permission can be granted. At all. https://github.com/flathub/org.wireshark.Wireshark/issues/4 https://github.com/flathub/org.wireshark.Wireshark/issues/4
- veeti 5y ago
  What is the use case for running PuTTY on Linux? I'm curious.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    It is what I use on Windows, so I'm familiar with it, and it supports serial comms.
  - orthecreedence 5y ago
    Window management. It's basically a way to segregate a general terminal (usually used for local stuff) from a window specifically for SSH. For me this was a much bigger issue when I was on Windows, but also in Ubuntu which groups programs together similarly to the Windows taskbar. I'm on i3 now mostly and just use a normal terminal for ssh, but for quite some time I was using putty on linux specifically for window management.
    - approxim8ion 5y ago
      Sounds like a use case for tmux?
      - orthecreedence 5y ago
        No, not really. I'm talking about OS-level window management. Being able to open a specific window with a single chord.

marcodiego 5y ago

Hi AnIdiotOnTheNet! I really appreciate your comments against linux. I'm true. Since I don't have much knowledge about NT's strengths, the comments I like the most are the ones where you highlight advantages of the NT kernel over linux. It's been some time since I last read anything like that from you. Would you mind to comment if ebpf usage and the possible new futex2 syscall helps to close the gap between linux and NT with regards to async primitives?

horsawlarway 5y ago

As someone who's released commercial software on linux before - having only 3 solutions to target is actually pretty delightful (We still build .deb and .rpm as well, so 5 really, after snap, flatpak and appimage) Plus I find the general sandbox approach to be a LOT more stable - distro upgrades rarely causes issues, and dependencies are much easier to wrangle. Definitely still some hiccups, but overall it feels like it's moving in a direction that I find easier to work with - both as a user and a developer. Plus the markets are generally fairly large - sure I still dip into aur every now and then, but I mostly find the "Software I need at work" stuff available

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
> As someone who's released commercial software on linux before - having only 3 solutions to target is actually pretty delightful I think that speaks to a particularly huge failure of Linux Desktop more than anything else.
- beermonster 5y ago
  In what sense? If you mean the fact there are multiple solutions, I don't think it's anything to do with Linux Desktop. I don't think that's even to do with Linux. More the plethora of alternatives in general when using FOSS. But that to some is its strength, not failure.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
    I disagree. Now to ensure I can install software I need not just one package manager, but at least 2 or 3 (atp, flatpak, snap). Of course that doesn't cover all the bases either, I'm still occasionally going to have to compile something from source because the developer didn't even bother making a binary because they don't want to build it for 5+ different packaging formats, several of which will need constant maintenance. When it comes to platforms[0], you need to be able to depend on certain things being there and working a certain way. Fragmentation of a platform is bad, and Linux Desktop is so fragmented the various distros style themselves as entirely different OSs! [0] As opposed to applications. Part of the problem is that historically there has never been a clear delineation in Linux Desktop.