![]() Opensource is good, but we must reinvent it to our specifications to finally shut out all those old-timey anarchists. If not Google itself, this paradigm is responsible for so much bloat on those lovely Linux desktops, and (companies like) Google are actively pushing it with their PR bloggers: security is the holy mantra. To the point that they genuinely believe that Google are the good guys. And (companies like) Google are pushing this mindset with all force esp. Linux uses the concept of shared libraries and a packaging ecosystem based around that for both reasons of security and the lighter code-base.īut there's a whole generation of people who think that an open system cannot be secure, that every app must be sandboxed, like on Android (*). Snaps and flatpacks exist to solve the same problems that Arch's aur does. Installing a bunch of binaries from untrusted sources is never actually a good idea though, so I wouldn't consider installing anything this way unless absolutely necessary. Snaps and flatpacks fly in the face of this packaging philosophy but can solve certain problems that would otherwise lead somebody into a dependency rabbit-hole. This concept works well enough that it has been adopted by other packaging systems such as PyPI and Node, for python and Javascript respectively. Linux uses the concept of shared libraries and a packaging ecosystem based around that for both reasons of security and the lighter code-base. So you see them start to experiment with open-source solutions but they still bring the same mentality to their packaging ecosystem that created the problems in the first place. Microsoft would just love to get away from the freeware scene and all of its associated problems. nearly any app installed from third-party freeware sources.). The trouble comes in when people start packaging malicious or spyware binaries into the install apps (i.e. Install, then check out Visual Studio Code on Linux for an idea of how their packaging architecture goes. package absolutely everything you need to run the application into the install package. They use the same packaging philosophy as Windows packages, i.e. I really do not need Canonicals blessing. I don't care if it's a little slow during updates.Īnd lastly, what about proprietary app-stores? And centralistic. Or like the consistency of your system suddenly wasn't an issue anymore.Īlso, my apt/pacman/rpm doesn't have to be running all the time like a daemon, or to start applications. ![]() Or like paranoia wasn't a working requirement, too. You make it sound like snap/flaptpak was simple by comparison. If at some point in the future Canonical ditches apt packages, technology like snaps might be able to install multiple applications at the same time. ![]() That's why package managers like apt, rpm, pacman have a limit regarding how fast they can be, and why they don't install packages in parallel. After all, files need to be definitely written/unpacked at specific times and you need a lot of fsync() calls and paranoia to make it all work correctly, so you have a consistent system. Package managers are also a complicated business. I like everything to be deliberate on my part: I'll damn well check for a update if I want to. If I have the understanding correctly, the snap or flatpak isn't just an installation method, it phones home. broken like Windows" - confirms my impression. Thanks for that! "best thing since sliced bread. (*) Linux podcast fanboy community awesomeness proclaiming "The Year of The Linux Desktop" Or they don't have permission to acces files. There's already a number of threads in LQ, complaining that their new hexacore AMD threadripper slowed to a crawl because the whole desktop is installed in snaps. Totally forgetting that these containers have phenomenal overhead and introduce a slew of new restrictions and problems. will finally make do with bumbling newbs not getting how intelligent package management through repositories works, and provide the final cure to the ever-itching ShinyNewStuff syndrome. They make sense and provide a real solution for certain problematic situations.īut everybody (*) is talking about this like it's the best thing since sliced bread because it's "familiar" (meaning: broken like in Windows).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |