LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - News > Syndicated Linux News
User Name
Password
Syndicated Linux News This forum is for the discussion of Syndicated Linux News stories.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-16-2016, 09:52 PM   #1
LXer
LXer NewsBot
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Posts: 96,937

Rep: Reputation: 102Reputation: 102
LXer: Goodbye rpm and deb. Hello Snaps!


Published at LXer:

Cross-distribution support for Snaps could turn the fragmented Linux desktop into one big platform and fix the Linux desktop mess.

Read More...
 
Old 06-17-2016, 10:46 AM   #2
lazydog
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: The Key Stone State
Distribution: CentOS Sabayon and now Gentoo
Posts: 1,130
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 181Reputation: 181
Sounds interesting.
 
Old 06-18-2016, 05:14 PM   #3
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 64-bit with multilib
Posts: 2,429

Rep: Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646
This is indeed an interesting idea, even though I use Slackware which compiles by source, if this did work well I wouldn't mind seeing it in Slackware, ...IF it works well.
 
Old 06-18-2016, 05:24 PM   #4
astrogeek
Moderator
 
Registered: Oct 2008
Distribution: Slackware [64]-X.{0|1|2|37|-current} ::12<=X<=14, FreeBSD_10{.0|.1|.2}
Posts: 4,625
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484Reputation: 2484
At what cost? Can anyone see what is lost by the all-in-one cluster-bang?
 
Old 06-18-2016, 05:48 PM   #5
Jeebizz
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 64-bit with multilib
Posts: 2,429

Rep: Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646Reputation: 646
If it can be added optionally I don't see a problem. Rolling your own packages would obviously still be an option for those who prefer it.

I actually see nothing wrong as long as it is not mandatory and if introduced differently not like how systemd was introduced and the outright tone that it was a requirement..

Last edited by Jeebizz; 06-18-2016 at 06:42 PM.
 
Old 06-18-2016, 06:19 PM   #6
ChuangTzu
Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix, FreeBSD, Mageia, Debian
Posts: 647

Rep: Reputation: 459Reputation: 459Reputation: 459Reputation: 459Reputation: 459
The problem with this movement is that dev.'s will only make the standard package with standard features. Distros will lose even more of their "unique" characteristics and Linux will move towards the options only being RedHat, Suse, Debian or Ubuntu. I suppose if the person does not like this and this is the future we are moving towards then source based distros could avoid it, in the same way that they do not use .deb or .rpm unless they choose to.

Will be interesting to see if RedHat comes out with their version ala systemd v. upstart or will they allow Ubuntu to take credit and take the lead on package design.
 
Old 06-19-2016, 08:39 AM   #7
273
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 6,970

Rep: Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021
This is worrying -- it sounds like the idea is to have Windows-style every application installs every library -- so one would end up with 18 copies of the same library all of slightly different versions taking up disk space.
Seems like something useful for, say, Skype or other third-party binary but a bad idea if every application were to be deployed this way.
The "containerizing" sounds weird also -- as if you can't access GIMP output files with image magic tools or something? Yes, I know that's an exaggeration but, really, it's not as though any old application run as non-root can modify the executables of any other application. If they mean that on installing one application one doesn't mess with the libraries of another then we're back to 18 different versions of libpango or whatever.

I really wish I could recall the name of the project I read about recently to add a layer of metadata to the packages of each distribution so that any distribution could read their contents, dependencies and the like. It seemed a much less radical approach.

Last edited by 273; 06-19-2016 at 08:41 AM.
 
Old 06-19-2016, 08:53 AM   #8
273
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Distribution: Debian Sid AMD64, Raspbian Wheezy, various VMs
Posts: 6,970

Rep: Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021Reputation: 2021
Sorry, I'll double-post rather than editing. I just recalled that this is already a thing -- it's called "Unzipping an application into /opt". Granted in that case most of the time the package is using system libraries but I have dropped .so files into application directories in /opt to resolve dependency issues in the past.
 
Old 06-20-2016, 12:08 PM   #9
lazydog
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Location: The Key Stone State
Distribution: CentOS Sabayon and now Gentoo
Posts: 1,130
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 181Reputation: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by 273 View Post
This is worrying -- it sounds like the idea is to have Windows-style every application installs every library -- so one would end up with 18 copies of the same library all of slightly different versions taking up disk space.
Seems like something useful for, say, Skype or other third-party binary but a bad idea if every application were to be deployed this way.
The "containerizing" sounds weird also -- as if you can't access GIMP output files with image magic tools or something? Yes, I know that's an exaggeration but, really, it's not as though any old application run as non-root can modify the executables of any other application. If they mean that on installing one application one doesn't mess with the libraries of another then we're back to 18 different versions of libpango or whatever.

I really wish I could recall the name of the project I read about recently to add a layer of metadata to the packages of each distribution so that any distribution could read their contents, dependencies and the like. It seemed a much less radical approach.
Yeah, after reading some more and thinking about it it doesn't sound like it is a great idea after all. Mainly because of all the lib that will be installed and how to keep track of them.
 
Old 06-20-2016, 12:31 PM   #10
Timothy Miller
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Arizona, USA
Distribution: Debian, Fedora, Arch, & GalliumOS.
Posts: 2,600

Rep: Reputation: 717Reputation: 717Reputation: 717Reputation: 717Reputation: 717Reputation: 717Reputation: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazydog View Post
Yeah, after reading some more and thinking about it it doesn't sound like it is a great idea after all. Mainly because of all the lib that will be installed and how to keep track of them.
Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the idea, although I admit the current state of packaging isn't the most ideal either.
 
Old 06-20-2016, 12:35 PM   #11
sgosnell
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: Baja Oklahoma
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,054

Rep: Reputation: 279Reputation: 279Reputation: 279
Snaps, or flatpaks. It depends on who wins, Redhat or Canonical. Both have serious faults, but both can probably be fixed eventually. Debs and rpms will certainly survive and be used for at least some packages, if not most. One problem with snaps and flatpaks is the size of the installation package. For instance, a snap for LibreOffice comes in at more than a gigabyte. Whether or not that is acceptable is way up in the air. So far, all we've had is marketing propaganda, because all this is currently market driven, by both Redhat and Canonical. Both want to win the hearts and minds of Linux consumers. Neither will take over Linux in the near term, and the long term is too murky to even guess at. But we'll get lots of propaganda for months, if not years.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Build your own DEB and RPM packages LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-07-2016 10:15 AM
LXer: How to convert packages between .deb and .rpm LXer Syndicated Linux News 1 12-21-2015 08:27 PM
LXer: Make your own DEB and RPM packages LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-06-2014 12:31 PM
LXer: How to convert from .deb to .rpm and viceversa LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 10-08-2011 06:50 AM
LXer: Converting .rpm Packages To Debian/Ubuntu .deb LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 10-22-2006 09:33 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - News > Syndicated Linux News

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:33 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration