this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
252 points (95.7% liked)

Linux

48741 readers
1340 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm not proposing anything here, I'm curious what you all think of the future.

What is your vision for what you want Linux to be?

I often read about wanting a smooth desktop experience like on MacOS, or having all the hardware and applications supported like Windows, or the convenience of Google products (mail, cloud storage, docs), etc.

A few years ago people were talking about convergence of phone/desktop, i.e. you plug your phone into a big screen and keyboard and it's now your desktop computer. That's one vision. ChromeOS has its "everything is in the cloud" vision. Stallman has his vision where no matter what it is, the most important part is that it's free software.

If you could decide the future of personal computing, what would it be?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

My boldest claim is that Flatpak is going to kill off the necessity for RPMs, Debs, APKs, etc. for most end-users.

No it isn't, until you can build a Linux system on top of only Flatpak. And guess what you have then? Yet another distro using a different packaging system with its own opinions, just like the rest of them. And there will still be other packaging systems because not everyone will agree with how it does things. Especially once developers start including questionable code in their Flatpak packages, because nobody is there to stop them, which distro maintainers are going to strip out in distro packages because it's harmful to users.

[–] gnuplusmatt@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

that's the beauty of distros, those that want traditional package structure can still use a distro that does.

Even the current flatpak first distros like OSTree spins of Fedora (Silverblue, Kinoite et al) provide mutable containers for using any package format you like.

[–] merthyr1831@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Flatpak is still not able to fully replace native apps in certain situations, sure, but that wont be the case forever. If Ubuntu believes they can replace debs with Snaps I believe someone can do the same for flatpaks given enough time.

Flatpak lets people host their own repositories, which is where I think we'll see distros becoming distinct if they DO choose to diverge from Flathub's selection, such as choosing to block non-free software. Over time, though, people generally all just add flathub if it isn't already available.

And, again, if you need something more finegrained than flathub, there's no reason why distro maintainers can't move to a nix-based infrastructure-as-code and you'll be free to host a repo with all of your distro's software packaged as code.

The power maintainers want over users is simply too much effort to justify as more apps begin to complain about packaging issues downstream, and apps become more complex to build. Users will inevitably bypass them. Devs will inevitably become hostile to downstream repacking.

[–] dino@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

because nobody is there to stop them, which distro maintainers are going to strip out in distro packages because it’s harmful to users.

I doubt thats really the case? Most distro maintainers mostly want to make sure a package works with their provides libs etc. If a package is malicious, it just will not become a distro package. At the same times this esoteric part about what distro maintainers actually do is so nebulous and at the same time "overrated" (debian).