So I know my way around Linux pretty well. However I never really got the gist of the difference between Snap, Flatpak and Native packages.
What exactly sets them apart?
Why does everyone seem to hate snap?
I have been using all of them, simultaneously on the same system and never really noticed a difference in the way installation, updates etc are handled (syntax ofc).
I hear snap sandboxes? Is that the main reason? Thanks for your insights…
Snaps are disliked because the store is closed-source and run by Canonical. Snaps are also disliked simply because Canonical is pushing them so hard, forcibly replacing native packages that exist and work fine. For example, there was a debacle a while back where running apt install firefox still installed the Snap version instead of the native version.
Flatpaks are disliked because they sometimes struggle to integrate into a system well. For example, Discord Rich Presence doesn’t work for the Flatpak version of Discord unless the thing you want Discord to detect is also a Flatpak, and even that detection is shaky.
Snaps and Flatpaks are both disliked because they contain frameworks and runtimes that some users consider bloat.
To further explain, when you use a native package, it and its dependencies get installed on your system. If any other package in the future requires one of those dependencies, awesome, it’s already there. But for Flatpaks and Snaps, each app has to bundle its own dependencies. Sometimes they can be shared with other Flatpaks/Snaps, depending on the dependency, but they still require at least a little extra storage space.
There are probably details I’m forgetting, but those are the main arguments. My advice is if you’re happy with the way your system is running, don’t worry about it. My personal preference is Flatpak first, native second, Snap never. I don’t have anything against native packages, but some software I use is exclusively distributed as Flatpak, so I switched most things over for consolidation.
Afaik snaps can’t share depending packages, making it store the same dependency multiple times. Flatpak can share the depending package+version, sharing it to every app it needs and store it once.
The Golden advantage I see is not having issues installing multiple versions of the same dependency, which would be kinda hard for a native system depending on the type of package an app is depending on. Like Python and Java could easy have multiple same versions on a native system, but other things may be too difficult to realize except you use Flatpak
Flatpaks are great for GUI apps, and have a sandboxing system that allow them to work well on any system that support flatpak. This allows devs to package once run anywhere, saving Dev time! It also has a portals system to allow for better system integration of the granular permissions needed for the app to actually work (nobody wants a truly isolated sandbox for every app).
Snap is less featureful for GUI apps, but work closer to how native packages do. The real issue is the proprietary app store required for it, making non-foss. If you want the same benefits of snap, check out Guix and NixOS both of which have a more cleaner design, and work better IMHO.
@lemminer @fruitywelsh
Appimage is OK but no auto update makes it download and forget type of deal - definitely not for every app
Flatpak - best for me but permissions on some apps make it unusable e.g. gpodder - command for player as flatpak is unable to access MPV installed from repo flatpak etc. - sandboxing (couldn’t fix it with flatseal mpv --profile=… not working)
- snaps people love to hate them… no love from me :-)
Repo if it works, is available - the best option
Flatpak is fast, lightweight actual open-source and provides security via isolation. Snap is the usual BS Canonical tries to get people to use, has a ton of bloat.
Personally I’ve had zero issues with Flatpak under Debian for desktop usage. It integrates nicely with the GNOME Software “store” and allows you to get the latest and best of everything you might need without polluting your system. Flatpak solves the usual complaints about Debian only having “old” software - allows you to run the latest and greatest while keeping a clean and rock solid Debian system underneath.
