3 ms·
> Though, other OSes are getting sandboxing for applications and Linux needs to not get left behind, so I'm glad it's being solved. It is an unquestionable mis
by Gormo 2y ago
> Though, other OSes are getting sandboxing for applications and Linux needs to not get left behind, so I'm glad it's being solved.
It is an unquestionable mistake to conflate packaging/distribution and runtime sandboxing into a single solution. These are different problems that fundamentally have nothing to do with each other. There are great solutions for sandboxing that don't care how an application is installed, and solutions for packaging that don't force a specific sandboxing solution on you. This failure to separate concerns is one of the primary disadvantages of Flatpack.
- freedomben 2y ago> This failure to separate concerns is one of the primary disadvantages of Flatpack. I would agree with you if there wasn't already RPM, debs, etc. But also given how flatpak is implemented on top of containers, it's basically "sandboxed by default" and any unsandboxing involves exposing/mounting things in from the host into the container. You can "unsandbox" any flatpak you want using flatseal (or if you know how, flatpak directly), so I think flatpak is actually pretty good in this regard.
- Gormo 2y ago> I would agree with you if there wasn't already RPM, debs, etc. No, these are purely packaging solutions that do not conflate their purpose with sandboxing. > But also given how flatpak is implemented on top of containers, Yes, this is the problem I'm referring to.