I don’t understand what problem they are meant to solve. If you have a FOSS piece of software, you can install it via the package manager. Or the store, which is just a frontend for the package manager. I see that they are distribution-independent, but the distro maintainers likely already know what’s compatible and what your system needs to install the software. You enjoy that benefit only through the package manager.

If your distro ships broken software because of dependency problems, you don’t need a tool like Flatpak, you need a new distro.

  • Yozul@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    BSD totally has distributions. Some versions of BSD are separate operating systems from each other, not distros, but things like GhostBSD or MidnightBSD are absolutely FreeBSD based distros.

      • Yozul@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You mean like where immediately on the front page of the GhostBSD website it says that it’s built on top of FreeBSD code? Just because they don’t use the term distro doesn’t mean they’re anything different.

        • Sha'ul@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You stuck in the cult of Linux and projecting your mentality onto other things without deciphering each on their technical marits. You look at all software in Linux terminology rather than making a distinction to articulate correct phrasing in a cohesive manner.

          • Yozul@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I call a spade a spade. If you can’t handle two binary compatible versions of BSD being called distros just because it’s a Linux term even though by every possible definition of that term that doesn’t include the word “Linux” they absolutely are distros, that’s your problem.