• @HouseWolf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      751 year ago

      As a newer Linux user I really like flatpaks.

      I don’t use them for most things I install but proprietary apps I want sandboxed or programs that have weird issues with dependencies I grab the flatpak.

    • ayaya
      link
      fedilink
      English
      34
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      For me on Arch, Flatpaks are kinda useless. I can maybe see the appeal for other distros but Arch already has up-to-date versions of everything and anything that’s missing from the main repos is in the AUR.

      I also don’t like how it’s a separate package manager, they take up more space, and to run things from the CLI it’s flatpak run com.website.Something instead of just something. It’s super cumbersome compared to using normal packages.

      • @nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        181 year ago

        I also prefer to get my software from the distro’s repos, but for software from third parties, flatpak adds a security layer, making it more secure when compared, for example, to aur.

      • Mactan
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        fwiw those simple names exist, you just haven’t added it to your PATH

    • Pasta Dental
      link
      fedilink
      171 year ago

      Lemmy (and phoronix) people are generally extremely repelled by new stuff in the Linux world

    • @priapus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      Agreed, flatpaks are great for desktop apps. I use Nix for the majority of my packages, but I use flatpak for proprietary for the sandboxing.

      • Possibly linux
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        I honestly prefer Ansible. It can do lots of configuration and setup and install flatpaks.