Adopted? You mean "can use"
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| cjcox Jan 09, 2022 2:55 PM EDT |
Flatpak is a somewhat controversial format. The idea is to avoid "dependency hell" by using library (and other) replication. What this mean is high overhead and actually can encourage "bad package management". Sure, it makes things work, and if disk space is infinite, and you don't mind the replication of data (sometimes even in situation where it's not actually required), the I guess this is "good". But back to the premise. Just because an OS can handle flatpak installs (because, what would stop this?), that isn't the same as "adoption". You'll have to decide if you want to have multiple package managers on your system and the issue that may cause in addition to the overhead that flatpak incurs due to its intentional design. Dependency management can be a pain. It makes you have to think and it can even make you have to code/build better. Flatpak alleviates the need to think at all. Maybe that's "bad"? |
| jdixon Jan 11, 2022 12:14 PM EDT |
> Adopted? You mean "can use" Yeah, as far as I know no distro is using flatpak as their native packaging format. Ubuntu seems to be trying to move that way with snap, but that's another matter. And one of the many reasons to prefer Mint to Ubuntu. |
| frankiej Jan 14, 2022 11:47 PM EDT |
The closest I am aware of to full adoption is Fedora Silverblue. Flatpak is the primary way applications are installed. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!