Re: ubuntu/snap future

[riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com>]

On 4/7/21, Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> wrote:
> riveravaldez wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 6, 2021, Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>> > On Tue 06 Apr 2021 at 11:20:58 +0200, Yoann LE BARS wrote:
>> >
>> > I had occasion to install Zoom a few weeks ago;'snap install
>> > zoom-client'.
>> > Everything went smoothly and I quite like having this proprietary
>> > package
>> > strictly confined.
>>
>> Hi, I was under the impression that (besides being fully open) Flatpak
>> had
>> better confinement method that Canonical's Snap, anybody knows if this is
>> correct?
>
>
> "Two years ago I wrote about then heavily-pushed Flatpak,
> self-proclaimed "Future of Apps on Linux". The article
> criticized the following three major flows in Flatpak:
>
>     Most of the apps have full access to the host system but
>         users are misled to believe the apps are sandboxed
>     The flatpak runtimes and apps do not get security updates
>     Flatpak breaks many aspects of desktop integration"
>
>     -- https://flatkill.org/2020/
>
> (the article then says that they fixed some desktop integration
> issues)

Thanks a lot for the link and info, Dan, very informative.

I'm still with the doubt. Even considering all this: which has better
(or less-worse) confinement, Flatpak or Snap (or AppImage)?

Trying to decide which is less-worse in a scenario of unavoidable
use of some of these.

Thanks again!