Funny, I would have said the same about voidlinux.
I think a common misconception about voidlinux is that it’s a distro solely used by people who have made it their lifegoal to tell people about how bad systemd is. I use void because it’s fast, and frankly because I like the way void does stuff. I feel like many people in the community are much more indifferent to systemd than people realize.
Windows NT 3.5 and later NT 4 had C2 security certifications - assuming the system was not connected to a network, and didn’t have floppy drives (this was before USB was a thing).
I know, and trust me, I hate Apple for essentially breaking my computer after an update. But I had my MacBook for 6 years now, use it daily, and have no hiccups other wise.
Yeah, back when I was playing around with terminal not having a package manager was a huge pain in the ass.
As a windows and Mac user who has tried to use Linux multiple times I can’t stand the centralized managers. They never have what I need and then it ends up out of date and not working.
Is there some hidden benefit I’m missing? Because sourcing from the developer seems like the much better way to do it like Mac and Windows.
Easy: Nothing beats the simplicity of brew install whatever or apt install whatever, and then having whateverjust work, in my experience, pretty much every single time.
I’ve not had that experience. I’ve had to go hunting down package names on google before I can install it using the package manager, when instead I could have just downloaded it from their website.
Apt, brew and whatever Arch has have all had the same problems for me. They almost never work out of the box and they’re a major reason I don’t like using Linux on desktop.
Security: if they leave checksums on their website I don’t see how it’s any more secure
Up to date: I definitely haven’t had this experience. Multiple times on arch I had issues where an outdated repo caused an app to not be able to boot
Convenience: That’s subjective. I’ve never really seen much convenience from an all in one solution for anything. I find it more of a hassle to find the distro specific manager that has a terrible UI rather than just downloading directly off a web page
I want to use Micro so badly but my fingers only know Nano’s nonsense shortcut keys.
Also I couldn’t figure out how to make it use real tabs instead of a bunch of spaces. Not great for Python scripts.
you can just download those via Microsoft’s website as vsix and import them to codium. and maybe add an issue/pr in extension’s repo so that it’s available on open-vsix next time. :)
I think they’re a good way to package apps. Superior to Flatpak for sure. I like Flatpak too and if Canonical abandoned Snap tomorrow, I’d switch my snap-packaged apps to Flatpak. The only non-bullshit downside of Snap is the proprietary server-side and the lack of multi-repo support. I don’t care much about either because I know implementing either is fairly uncomplicated and it will happen should the reason arise. If Debian wanted to start using Snap, it’d take them a month to get the basics working with their own server side. If the client side was proprietary too, I’d have had a completely opposite opinion on Snap. Finally Canonical supplies all the software on my OS. I use third party repos only when absolutely necessary. If Canonical ran a proprietary apt server side, I wouldn’t even know, apt doesn’t care. Some of the myriad HTTP mirrors could easily be running on IIS, or S3, or Nexus. The trust equation for snap is equivalent.
Because you can package and deploy OS components with it. As a result you can build an OS with it, do foolproof updates of it and …gulp, happy tear… rollbackcomponents without involving any other system like a special filesystem.
My bravery comes from being a software guy that’s been doing OS software development for over a decade so I believe my opinion is somewhat informed. 😂 I’m currently working on a software updates implementation for an automotive OS.
I think this is just a difference in the use case. Flatpaks are designed for desktop applications while Snap was initially designed for exactly the purpose you describe.
The initial use case for Snap, when it used to be called Click (circa 2012-13), was mobile apps for Ubuntu Touch. Those were the same as desktop Qt apps, just using the a mobile theme and layout. Canonical developers just had the foresight to create a design that isn’t limited to that use case. As a result Snap is a superset of Flatpak in terms of use cases. Flatpak can probably be rearchitected to match that if anyone cared. If that were the case I’d also be drumming it up.
The funny thing is, we wouldn’t be having any of these discussions over the merits of Snap if RedHat came up with it instead of Canonical and the server side was OSS from the get go. When RedHat was cool that is. In fact likely Canonical would have been using thet too. Just like they use PulseAudio, Systemd, and Wayland.
Tell us you don’t know why you need Single Source of Truth on package installation and content without using the phrase “dependency hell is self-inflicted”.
A single source of truth for software is one way to solve that. There are others with different pros and cons in active use that have shown pretty good results.
What’s your alternative? I’ve used OpenRC before and it was nice, but it didn’t take long to find a use-case that systemd handled easily but OpenRC made difficult. Also a few packages expect systemd to be present and either fail to install or partially install so I had to figure out how to implement the missing functions in OpenRC.
Had to nuke xdg-desktop-portal recently. AGAIN. Because they keep introducing a regression that causes all the GTK apps to run at a snails pace and totally ruins the desktop experience. I HATE xdg-desktop-portal. This has happened at least twice before. They can’t seem to get their shit together. I wish I could just be rid of it entirely.
While it is causing me a ton of headaches, I’m thankful that it gives the user a choice of desktop utilities… I just wish I didn’t have to hunt env variables and config files that may or may not be completely ignored.
But WhatsApp have a really good app on windows which can attend calls and stuff . I think recently in Mac too . I’m using WhatsApp inside waydroid container in Linux so that I can at least attend calls
Technically you could run an Android container on Linux like with Waydroid and get WhatsApp too, it’s just that there’ll probably be more Android users
Been using sway for years now. Not even thinking about it, it doesn’t jump to my face and works the same and never changes. Just what I need so I can focus on my work.
linuxmemes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.