• BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    You answered your own question. Arch and Nix solve the same problem Flatpak solves, but by using better dependency management. Flatpak’s main proposition is built-in sandboxing and convenience, but if you’re on an “expert” oriented distro like Arch (btw), you probably don’t care as much about those “freebies.”

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      In that case flatpak is basically a hack for OS’s with broken or improper dependency manangement systems. Either those OS’s should fix their broken systems, or ppl should move to OS’s that do it properly, as that’s one of the most important functions of your OS anyway.

      • frozenspinach@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Also pretty much everywhere you’re using flatpaks (or snaps or…), you are doing it on top of a Linux system that’s still getting its core system updates via traditional dependency management. And flatpaks, despite trying not to, make assumptions about your kernel, your glibc version, architecture, ability to access parts of your filesystem or your devices, that can break things, and doesn’t bother to track it.

        And the closer you get you tracking that stuff (like Snap tries to), you hilariously just get back to where you started, with traditional dependency management that already exists and has existed for decades.