There are multiple applications (e.g. Skype, Bitwarden) which aren’t officially available via arch repositories, but do have official snap packages. For me that sounds like the best way to get them (I like the fact it’s official packages, that I’ll be getting updates, etc). And I don’t think slightl…

Read this (under the heading snap); https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906

@ahershko , since this is not a help request, I hope you don’t mint it being moved to #lounge .

@Kresimir please, do what you do best… :frog:

[image] ahershko: do have official snap packages. The problem with Skype for example is that these packages are provided only as rpm or deb. Someone packages for arch on AUR, but you could also download,convert and install Skype locally using pacman. I don’t know if that is advisable though a…

[image] keybreak: please, do what you do best… :frog: Write proprietary in gothic? Or bash snap :rofl:

No problem. Thanks for moving it :slight_smile:

Skype and Bitwarden (to use two examples) have official snap packages, advertised on their websites. Sure - I can also install via AUR or Flatpak, but these channels aren’t maintained by the companies themselves (unless I’m missing something here), but rather by members of the community. So to use …

[image] ahershko: What’s so terrible about snap? Did you bother to read what @Kresimir posted above? [image] Kresimir: Here you go: KDE's August 2020 Apps Update - #10 by Kresimir That lays out the argument against using snaps (technically snapd). Whether you consider it acceptable o…

Thanks, I read it (after posting, oops). So if I understand it correctly the key objection is that Canonical collects data on how people use snaps. For me (and speaking just for myself here, of course) that’s not a strong enough reason to switch to (unofficial) AUR or flatpaks, as them being unoffi…

EndeavourOS

Why not snap?

Lounge

Kresimir December 22, 2021, 1:53pm 7

Here you go:

KDE's August 2020 Apps Update Plasma

Oh boy, where to even start? Well, with Flatpak, because it’s a much lesser evil of the two. In fact, it’s not really that bad. The only issue I have with the concept of flatpaks is that they statically link all or most of their dependencies and do not integrate well with the system. The obvious downside of statically linking dependencies is that flatpaks use a lot of disk space. A less obvious, but perhaps more serious disadvantage is that older versions of dependencies may lack securit…

show post in topic

Home
Categories
Guidelines
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy

Powered by Discourse, best viewed with JavaScript enabled