4 ms·
I really don’t see how this comment is relevant to the conversation at hand. None of this is about sandboxing libreoffice. It’s simply about a delivery method
by jzb 3y ago
I really don’t see how this comment is relevant to the conversation at hand.
None of this is about sandboxing libreoffice. It’s simply about a delivery method of getting a libreoffice on a system. Nix is absolutely 1000% not a mainstream solution that’s better than Flatpak for this.
If your hobby is tinkering with Nix and marveling at its supposed technical superiority, more power to you. It is absolutely not relevant to this conversation.
- kaba0 3y agoIf I start up a nix shell with libreoffice installed within it, I will reliably get the same configuration the packager intended — so it is as relevant as it gets: if packaged correctly it will work on every system where tool X is installed. I just replaced X=flatpak with nix.
- jzb 3y agoI see the goalposts have moved again, now we're on "reliably get the same configuration...." The conversation is about Red Hat not packaging LibreOffice for RHEL. The options in scope here are RPM or Flatpak. Nix isn't even under consideration. You jumped in to complain about not being happy with Flatpak because it's not good at sandboxing. Nobody brought up sandboxing until you waded in about Nix. It's tedious how any conversation about anything remotely related to packaging or pretty much anything, somebody has to show up stanning for Nix.