I don’t understand what problem they are meant to solve. If you have a FOSS piece of software, you can install it via the package manager. Or the store, which is just a frontend for the package manager. I see that they are distribution-independent, but the distro maintainers likely already know what’s compatible and what your system needs to install the software. You enjoy that benefit only through the package manager.

If your distro ships broken software because of dependency problems, you don’t need a tool like Flatpak, you need a new distro.

  • Sha'ul@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    In that specific area, that’s where compared to each BSD operating system, Linux will forever be trash garbage.

    • flatbield@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In what way does BSD solve this issue? I would not consider limited number of distributions, small user base, and package count exactly a solution.

      That said, if BSD had been released as FOSS a decade earlier I imagine we would all be using BSD not Linux. Would have been an interesting twist of fate.

      • Sha'ul@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        BSD is FOSS, unless you are an idealogue.

        BSD does not have distributions, those don’t exist.

        • Yozul@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          BSD totally has distributions. Some versions of BSD are separate operating systems from each other, not distros, but things like GhostBSD or MidnightBSD are absolutely FreeBSD based distros.

            • Yozul@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              You mean like where immediately on the front page of the GhostBSD website it says that it’s built on top of FreeBSD code? Just because they don’t use the term distro doesn’t mean they’re anything different.

              • Sha'ul@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                You stuck in the cult of Linux and projecting your mentality onto other things without deciphering each on their technical marits. You look at all software in Linux terminology rather than making a distinction to articulate correct phrasing in a cohesive manner.

                • Yozul@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I call a spade a spade. If you can’t handle two binary compatible versions of BSD being called distros just because it’s a Linux term even though by every possible definition of that term that doesn’t include the word “Linux” they absolutely are distros, that’s your problem.

        • flatbield@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not sure. This is a container basically not a distribution format. Not sure how this is different from Linux containers though Linux has a bunch of options. Not sure which is most similar.

          • h3ndrik@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I think the BSDs lead the way with some things, like jails. But they’re not distribution formats. But jailing is part of things like Flatpak. And we have chroots and systemd nspawn. I think I misread the comment and it was more shitposting than anything of substance.

            • flatbield@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              That is the thing about Linux. Linux is so huge and has so many ways of doing things that the days of knowing everything are gone. Same with many of the important tools too. Python has gotten way vast too for example.

              • h3ndrik@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                This is kind of old people behaviour. I’m still not 100% sure if I’m getting more conservative, having difficulty with things changing, or if things really used to be better… They’re different, that’s for sure. And I have some valid criticism for some things, too.

                • flatbield@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Frankly I loved my Commodore 64. My Linux box is better in every measurable way but there was something to simplicity and a time where just making a sound and drawing on the screen with a computer you could afford was quite a thing.

                  Same with Python. Started using it about 1998. It was simple enough that I learned the language in a day. Now there is so much more. Then add packages for everything these days… lot of the work is understanding packages, venvs, how to deploy, not just opening idle or pywin and writing stuff. Sure Spyder or one of the other IDEs can do static checking, have doc at your fingertips, integrate a debugger, and have a graphical shell where you can do all sorts of stuff. Changes the feel of programming though.