• ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Burn Snap out of there and I’m in.

    Edit: looks like they’re not putting much towards snaps, it’s mostly Flatpak and systemd-sysext. I’m good with that.

    • Corgana@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I like that snap support is included. You can’t easily add it to immutable distros and there is still some software out there only easily available via snaps.

  • Quail4789@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    Everybody’s bashing snaps but you can literally package drivers as snaps. If you don’t think that’s cool af I don’t know what is.

    • Blaiz0r@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      99% of people don’t understand anything about Snaps except from thinking they’re worse than Flatpak

      • Blaiz0r@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Probably not the purpose of this distro but using snaps in this way are a massive benefit for embedded systems

    • qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      So you’re telling me that if snaps take off and become a standard there’s a good chance I’ll have to use them just to get my drivers? Now I hate them even more!

      • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        No but you see the drivers will be (must be) approved by Canonical which surely makes things better :|

      • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        This is highly unlikely. Snapd is open source so you can just repackage the software for your distro of choice. I don’t think giving users the ability to use both Flatpak and Snap is bad. Though I would put Snap behind a disclaimer due to Snap Store’s history.

  • LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The distro is designed to be a bulletproof, highly user-friendly operating system that showcases the best of KDE technology—a system that KDE can confidently recommend to casual users and hardware manufacturers.

    So it looks like there will finally be a distribution that Windows, Mac, and ChromeOS users can jump to and just start using without having to learn much and with a much better and more familiar GUI than GNOME.

    • Corgana@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I think you’re exactly right, honestly I think this has potential to be huge. Whether we like it or not, in order for a lot of mid-level savvy users to feel comfortable switching over they need a “default” option (like joining mastodon.social) to get their feet wet. A distro specifically built for KDE I think could appeal to a lot of people.

      EDIT: Also for the people buying laptops in businesses and schools obv

    • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      What is so hated about snaps? I’ll admit I haven’t used Ubuntu since they started using snaps, but I don’t understand the hate about them in the Linux community.

      • d-RLY?@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        I am currently only on Linux on my Steam Deck and I do have two RPi’s (though I don’t actively use them) so I don’t have personal current knowledge of differences between Snap, Flatpak, and App Image beyond that A: Snap always brings up lots and lots of hate in comments and B: is from Canonical.

        But is it possible that they might choose to use Snap for having more program options due to Ubuntu being such a “mainstream” distro? I know lots and lots of programs do release Flatpaks, but are there more of them or does Snap have more? Real question since I am aware of how heated some threads get with folks being really “fuck Snap” or “it is fine.” Mostly just curious since I am more and more likely to move my main PC to Linux as my main OS after Windows 10 is dead.

        • Anna@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Snap doesn’t just bring lots of hate in comments it also brings a lot of bloat in your system which is a big no in Linux community. Another thing is canonical is going out of their way to force snap. In Ubuntu even if you do apt install it is installing snap packages.

          I’m not sure if there are more snap packages than flatpaks or .deb/.rpm but most Linux users are competent enough to either add custom repos or follow simple build instructions to build from source.

          • d-RLY?@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I wasn’t aware of Snaps being used in-place of regular installs with apt. Are they shown to be Snaps in the name of the program when using apt search? And if there is a Snap and a regular deb, do they both show up (again if using apt search)?

          • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            But flatpak also brings a lot of bloat. That’s the point of these 2 formats. You are trading bloat for portability.

            The question here is not which one but why not both[*]? Also the target audience for this distro doesn’t know how to add repos, that’s the point of it.

            [*] the answer is that Snap Store has had malware in it multiple times but that could imo be solved by a disclaimer

        • Arrkk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Think of it as the Mac appstore VS the Windows App store. Mac apps (flatpak) are the same as desktop apps, but sandboxed, the store isn’t intrusive, and people found it convenient, so it was fine. Then the windows app store (snaps) launched and it did basically the same thing but slightly worse, except Microsoft (canonical) forced it down its users throats, so people hated it.

          Both camps are right, from a technical perspective, snaps are fine, but philosophically, it sucks, and the Linux community cares way more about the latter than the former, otherwise they’d all be running windows.

          • d-RLY?@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I think that your example of the App Store and the Microsoft Store is helpful! I work on both systems at my job fixing computers for consumers. The only thing I dislike about the App Store is that it doesn’t let you install things without first signing in with an Apple ID (the spam levels of pop-up messages trying so freaking hard to make you sign in is infuriating). But the MS Store feels like all the worst parts of the Play Store and really fucks things up if it breaks. I will likely remember your reply the next time I think about Flatpaks and Snaps though. lol

      • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I don’t like Snap too, but it has some advantages over Flatpak. And unfortunately the most popular distribution still uses Snap. In example it is easier to create Snap packages and Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins ( Edit: my bad ) , but Snap does (something like grep in example). Also some may like it more that Snap relies on AppArmor instead using the custom solution of Flatpak.

        All in all, its not like black and white which is better. I still wish only one of the formats would exist, because this is not the kind of fragmentation I wish to have. But both exist and the end user should decide which of them to kill.

        • SatyrSack@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins

          Where does that misinformation come from? That’s not the first time I’ve heard it. Was that actually true at one point?

          • shapis@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            In think it comes from flathub not having many cli applications in it. I’d love to drop snaps for Flatpak only. But I can get so many snaps that aren’t on flathub it’s crazy.

          • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Maybe you are right. Its something I repeat it myself, after doing a research back when it was new. Given Neovim is available on Flathub, maybe its possible. Maybe it was true at some point. Good catch, I’ll make sure not to repeat that anymore, as I don’t want spread misinformation.

        • JustMarkov@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          the most popular distribution still uses Snap

          Ubuntu is the most popular? On server maybe, on desktop I doubt it.

          Flatpak does not support CLI only applicatoins

          It is not true. You can install Neovim as flatpak, for example.

          Also some may like it more that Snap relies on AppArmor instead using the custom solution of Flatpak.

          It only means, that on distros without AppArmor you get almost no sandboxing of snap applications.

          The only advantage snap has is the ability to package drivers as snaps. Other than that there’s simply no reason to choose proprietary-backed snap over flatpak.

          EDIT: Typos.

          • caden@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            I am pretty sure Ubuntu is still far and away the most popular desktop distro. For servers I would have guessed it was something like RedHat/CentOS or possibly Debian.

  • whaleross@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    I found out about this yesterday when searching for the KDE sources to make some alterations to the lock screen. I guess this distro is not for me.

    • Lemmchen@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      If it’s only there like in KDE Neon, I’m fine with it. I don’t want any of my distro apps to come as Snaps though.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah, Flatpak is far better. The most glaring issue: Canonical hosts the only Snap backend, you can’t host it yourself. Flatpak on the other hand is fully open.

        Don’t introduce proprietary crap just so companies can profit off of it.

        • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Don’t introduce proprietary crap just so companies can profit off of it.

          I agree but I think it’s the user who should be able to make the informed choice (ie. during installation)

            • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              This is a stupid argument. In FSF’s eyes even having nonfree repository (ie. for drivers) is bad so this is completely irrelevant for anyone considering flatpak or snap. Both have nonfree stuff in there.

              • JustMarkov@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                Both have nonfree stuff in there.

                But flatpak’s backend is open source and self-hostable, while snap’s is proprietary and not self-hostable. Flatpak is the lesser of evils from this point of view.

          • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Honestly, why enable this kind of behavior in any way? Any user is free to make an informed choice by installing it themselves.

            We all know how this goes. Once a critical mass is reached, enshittification begins to milk everything dry. By making it an installer option, you’re legitimizing it and supporting a worse future for the Linux desktop.

            • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Ok but KDE has official Snap packages so they already are “legitimizing it”. Also snap won’t be able to entshittify anything. Snapd is still open source, so you can just repackage the software for different package system.

              • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                My guy. There is no open backend for Snap. If Ubuntu enshittifies Snap, nobody can host an alternate backend for them. How does the client being open source help you?

  • eldain@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    This article is far too hypey. One dude has started this initiative and needs people to work on his concept to get it off the ground. I’m not opposed to a red-hat free immutable system, but this one is so far from maturity this article is selling a first drawing like an almost finished product. Remind me in two years how this went.

    • Justin@lemmy.kde.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      Harald, the main architect behind it is already running it as his daily driver. Many others (myself included) are already testing it in VMs and on spare hardware with only very minor papercut issues to be resolved.

      • eldain@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Sounds great! I’ll have a look once the user infrastructure is in place.

  • LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    I use Fedora KDE but this one sounds like exactly what I need. I primarily use Linux for software dev and web browsing and Windows for gaming and Office.

  • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Ehh to snaps. That would 100% be the first thing of support to drop if I were them. That said it cool to see more immutable distros experimenting, I wonder how much overlap there is the Kalpa since it is btfs based.

    Honestly there definitely still seems some good space for innovation in the immutable space before we “figure it out”, so the more smart people experimenting the better!

    • Corgana@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      I am not an expert but I don’t think Snap support can be added to an immutable distro after installation, meaning there is going to be some software that simply cannot be easily installed. Snap support is basically a legacy support feature at this point but I think it’s nice to cover their bases if they are trying to make something for widespread adoption.

  • Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Just curious because Distrowatch can be easily gamed; does anyone know how this might affect the linux consumer market? I’m using Mint and see no reason to switch to this. I used to nerd out about different distros but aside from the enterprise distros or Debian or Arch preferences I don’t see why people are using smaller distros anymore. Hobbyist i guess?

    • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      mainly hobbyists or some very specific feature. For example antiX for old hardware or Spiral Linux for the better installer, gaming specific distros for gaming etc. Also there are protest distros which advertise not having something - usually SystemD.

    • passiveaggressivesonar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Thanks for de-influencing me out of switching to KDE plasma, mint and ubuntu are the only distros I’ve tried and I’ve been thinking about trying something new

      New users (like me) that aren’t necessarily passionate about linux and just looking for a windows alternative can be easily persuaded early on

        • passiveaggressivesonar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          After bashing my face against the wall getting lutris to run StarCraft 2, I’m avoiding looking at my OS too hard

          I feel like I should try arch just once so I understand the memes

          • DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 days ago

            Arch is a make it yourself distro. It comes barebones and you install what you need (which in my opinion gives better knowledge about your system). And the packages are up-to-date which is good if you are gaming.

            If you don’t like to tinker then Arch may not be for you. Something arch-based could be a better fit. Like Garuda or EndeavourOS.

            • passiveaggressivesonar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              When you say you can install what you need, what does that mean exactly? Does that mean things like lib C or vulkan or drivers so my USB ports work? Seems to me like I don’t actually understand how a computer works at a fundamental level when I’ve never had to configure a sound card or manually install a driver and the explanations I get are too technical to practically apply

              I’d like to understand my PC well enough to use Arch but I’m finding a hard time figuring out what I’m missing exactly. Practically speaking, what does direct X or vulkan do?

              • DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                When it comes to Arch the wiki is your friend. It will tell you if additional configuration is required to get your packages working and what other dependencies can be installed. If something isn’t working properly then the wiki probably knows why.

                Arch comes with no drivers and additional packages by default. You need to install them manually. But you don’t need to install every package for your system manually. If you need glibc it will most certainly get pulled down as a dependency.

                You don’t need to know every part of the system to use arch but you need to be interested enough to learn how your system works if something is not working or you want to configure your system in a certain way.

                For starters I would recommend going with something Arch-based like Garuda or EndeavorOS if you want to learn Arch. I started off with my Steam Deck and later Garuda on my desktop. Once I was comfortable enough around Arch I decided to install vanilla Arch (manually, the wiki way) in a VM. When installing my system I wrote down every command I used and from that it snowballed in to my own install script for arch. That taught me a lot.

          • polle@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Do you know what the issue was? Iam on kubuntu with the flatpak version (important) of lutris and battle.net + sc2 just runs out of the box. With a normal installation of lutris it didn’t.

            • passiveaggressivesonar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Kept telling me I was missing Vulkan and lib C (I think) and I kept installing it wrong somehow. Eventually I downloaded steam and ran one game (potion craft) and it installed everything I needed automatically, lutris worked just fine after that

          • SuperSpecialNickname@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I too bashed my head with lutris on some games to the point that i gave up on Linux. Then i tried it again but this time using Bottles and it’s working really fine for me, almost flawless.

            • polle@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Did you try lutris out of flatpak? I don’t know why but this version has less issues. I compared lutris vs bottles and for me the performance of bottles was way worse. (Sadly). Because the bottles ui is much better

              • SuperSpecialNickname@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I didn’t try that version, I just transitioned to Bottles. I didn’t notice any performance loss though I might compare it just to see what it’s like.

                • polle@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  I still wonder what the difference made. I would image, it should be the same.

      • Allero@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        My switch to Linux started 1,5 years ago with Manjaro KDE - and since then, I am still a fan of KDE, which is kind of “Windows UI done right” for me. Ergonomic, configurable, consistent. I also find Pantheon, Enlightenment, and Budgie to be cool concepts, but from a practical side, KDE is a no-brainer for me.

        Mint comes with Cinnamon by default, and I guess that’s what you’re using. For me, Cinnamon is too old-fashioned, it’s like you’re back to at least Windows 7 timing. Some people like it, but for me it’s just old and out of touch with the progress of UI’s.

        GNOME used in Ubuntu is good with app theming (yay for adwaita!), it is unique and minimalistic, but its overall design is just…not for everyone, and customization is heavily tied to unsafe practice of plugins which has been exploited many, many times.

        With all that said, try everything out in a VM or something and see what’s good for you. There are really no wrong choices!

          • Allero@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            VMWare, GNOME Boxes, QEMU+virt-manager

            Personally using the latter, appears to have the best support and more configuration options compared to alternatives, as well as advanced options like GPU passthrough etc, though it has a bit more of a learning curve, and each alternative option should be fine.