Welcome!
Forum users

Current releases
--MX-23 release info here
--Migration information to MX-23 here
--antiX-23.1 (Arditi del Popolo) release info here

Important information
--If in starting your system it boots to an unwanted Desktop, right click desktop, then select leave and logout. At the
login screen there is a session chooser at the top of the screen.

News
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- New Forum Features, Marking Solved and Referencing a User: here

Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

Message
Author
User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#1 Post by manyroads »

Just curious but... have others noted that Canonical producer of Ubuntu seems to have embarked on an extensive communication effort with respect to Snappy/Snap?

* https://goo.gl/6S4XMF

Thoughts on this? What do you think Snap/Snappy (or Flatpak for that matter) means to 'other' distros like ours? :popcorn:
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 10306
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#2 Post by richb »

Don't know about snaps but I stay away from flatpacks. They just bring in too many libraries. An option for flatpacks was added to MXPI for convenience. Our packagers are very good at re-packaging newer app versions for our repos. I prefer that model. Opinions will vary.

More on snaps in MX.
The problem: Snap packages, or more specifically the snapd daemon which manages Snap packages, relies on systemd.
And as you know MX defaults to sysvinit.

https://mxlinux.org/wiki/applications/s ... ages-mx-17
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

richb Administrator
System: MX 23 KDE
AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, 16 GIG Mem. Three Samsung EVO SSD's 250 GB

User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#3 Post by manyroads »

H richb, No for whatever reason I did not know. Is that true for flatpak as well?
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

skidoo
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:56 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#4 Post by skidoo »

ManyRoads, although I've read "no, technically, flatpak does not require systemd" I've repeatedly worried that debian's implementation might, or soon will.

Hey, can check easily enough. I did so just now, from an antiX17 system. Launch synaptic, click mark-for-installation flatpak, apply...
...its installation would add only 2 additional dependent packages ("libostree", and "bubblewrap") occupying 3.5Mb additional disk space.
So, nope, flatpak does not require systemd

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 10306
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#5 Post by richb »

skidoo wrote: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:45 pm ManyRoads, although I've read "no, technically, flatpak does not require systemd" I've repeatedly worried that debian's implementation might, or soon will.

Hey, can check easily enough. I did so just now, from an antiX17 system. Launch synaptic, click mark-for-installation flatpak, apply...
...its installation would add only 2 additional dependent packages ("libostree", and "bubblewrap") occupying 3.5Mb additional disk space.
So, nope, flatpak does not require systemd
That is correct no systemd for Flatpak. But when I installed Audaciuos and an icon theme via Flatpak I ended up with an extra 2 GB.
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

richb Administrator
System: MX 23 KDE
AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, 16 GIG Mem. Three Samsung EVO SSD's 250 GB

User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#6 Post by manyroads »

I tried both... of the two, I do like flatpak better; but the overhead for both seems large. I wonder though if the 'marketing' hype (for both) isn't going to become overwhelming. There are security issues as well that seem to be glossed over.
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

skidoo
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:56 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#7 Post by skidoo »

What do you think Snap/Snappy [..] means to 'other' distros like ours?
That's a broad question, and the topic is more suitable for discussion within a distro-agnostic venue.
You'll find plenty of well-reasoned (and no-so-well reasoned, but passionate) commentary here:
https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/search?q ... rict_sr=on
and
ycombinator, aka HackerNews

User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#8 Post by manyroads »

Thanks @skidoo, the reddit 'stuff' seems better. None of those seem to truly address how distros "not involved" in the development of these technologies might, or might not, want to "take advantage" of either snap or flatpak.

I was simply wondering if folks here have an approach, plan, disinterest or whatever.
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
asqwerth
Developer
Posts: 7180
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:37 am

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#9 Post by asqwerth »

Void Linux, which uses runit as init manager, has flatpak. So flatpak is not dependent on systemd. I've tested it and it works. But no graphical management tool so you have to use terminal commands .
Desktop: Intel i5-4460, 16GB RAM, Intel integrated graphics
Clevo N130WU-based Ultrabook: Intel i7-8550U (Kaby Lake R), 16GB RAM, Intel integrated graphics (UEFI)
ASUS X42D laptop: AMD Phenom II, 6GB RAM, Mobility Radeon HD 5400

User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Snap/Snappy... Flatpak & the future?

#10 Post by manyroads »

I apologize but because we are headed to an MX18 release, bear with me as I hypothesize a bit...

Let's assume we worry about where the Linux world is headed (especially the MX Linux chunk). What happens, when the bulk of our tiny Linux Desktop world:

* expects flatpaks or snaps rather than ‘synaptic’ and its kind?
* and these installs (flatpak & snaps) become pervasive as well as massive opportunity targets for “evil doers”?
* when “these things” don’t get updated/ maintained?

So some strategic questions that come to my mind… (whether we address them or not is up to others and not me)

* Do we (the MX Linux community) have a plan to address the delinquency of flatpak- snap updates?
* Should we warn our users of the risk?
* Should the greater debian community work with the Big Guys (IBM, Red Hat & Ubuntu) to address these issues so we are not blind sided?
* How do we protect our interests?

Or should we just sit back a take what they deliver and live happily ever after? :alien:

Back under my rock I go... :bagoverhead:
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

Post Reply

Return to “General”