Basically title.

I’m wondering if a package manager like flatpak comes with any drawback or negatives. Since it just works on basically any distro. Why isn’t this just the default? It seems very convenient.

    • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Using flatpak on low end devices (like Linux phones), I can tell you from experience, the speed liss is noticeable. Specially for application startup. As is the resource overhead.

      • GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        That’s a fairly good point. On mobile startup can be crucial because sessions are short in comparison to desktop where you have longer sessions and startup time is negligable (even the slow startup times of snaps could be ignored for e.g. a video editing session)

        Low specs shouldn’t keep the community from moving into newer technology.

        • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Precisely. I’ve been playing with Mobian on a One Plus 6 (works great) and while I really like the idea of using mostly sandboxed app much like things work on Android, right now it certainly negatively impacts the experience.

    • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      One thing I always wondered is whether libraries in memory would be duplicated or not. I have seen a lot of people talking about storage space which is cheap and shouldn’t really be the focus for desktops. But I haven’t seen anything about in memory usage.

        • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Me neither but I if we’re considering having all but the core of the distro in Flatpacks, this policy might mean Linux becoming less accessible to more modest configurations.

          Unless Flatpacks deal with it somehow like regular packages do. If two app packages contain the same library within (as opposed to packaged in a dependency), can Flatpack figure out they’re the same and share code memory between the two? For library packages with two apps depending on different versions of the same third party flatpack, does it assume the newer version can be applied to both, optimizing memory usage? If so, wouldn’t that break the premise of flatpacks?

          Can I convince my autocorrect that flatpacks and flapjacks are different things?

          Inquiring minds want to know.