I’ve gathered that a lot of people in the nix space seem to dislike snaps but otherwise like Flatpaks, what seems to be the difference here?

Are Snaps just a lot slower than flatpaks or something? They’re both a bit bloaty as far as I know but makes Canonicals attempt worse?

Personally I think for home users or niche there should be a snap less variant of this distribution with all the bells and whistles.

Sure it might be pointless, but you could argue that for dozens of other distros that take Debian, Fedora or Arch stuff and make it as their own variant, I.e MX Linux or Manjaro.

What are your thoughts?

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I think hate is the right word. Snap sucks for a long list of reasons, a few years ago it was pushed down everyone’s throats whilst still being broken (it would even break OS upgrades due to being broken, even if you didn’t even use it, fun times) and then canonical started redirecting apt to snap… Yeah, hate is the right word, same with systemd

    • coarse@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I definitely hate snaps.

      Moved my server from Ubuntu to Debian because of snaps and ESM.

      Ubuntu is intrinsically less-secure than Debian because they lock security updates behind paywalls. We really should stop recommending it as a community.