The Future of GNOME Boxes

https://blogs.gnome.org/feborges/future-of-boxes/

15 points · 11 comments · view on lemmy.world

11 Comments

thenextguy@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 31d (7 replies)

shifting to a Flatpak-first (and only) model.

Boo!

bordam@feddit.it · 1 pts · 30d (6 replies)

What’s wrong with that?

bradboimler@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 30d (1 reply)

Not OP but I'd rather not deal with multiple application distribution methods. I'd rather package Boxes myself (I use NixOS BTW) than use Flatpak.

bordam@feddit.it · 1 pts · 27d

I do understand, NixOS is soo good, I hope it will be possible for packagers to package it for distros, although not as easily as before

thenextguy@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 30d (3 replies)

I don't like flatpak and don't want it on my system.

Dezorian@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 29d (2 replies)

Please elaborate why?

thenextguy@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 29d (1 reply)

It doesn’t solve any problems that I have. It adds complexity.

Dezorian@discuss.tchncs.de · 0 pts · 27d

Yeah so just subjective info, thanks for sharing.

bordam@feddit.it · 3 pts · 30d

Boxes is so goated. Every other VM software for linux seems unnecessarily complicated. We all know how a “good” VM is: hardware accelerated, optional host integration, optional GPU passthrough, easy way to connect to the network. This stuff should work OOTB, but it almost never works ootb in other software. Boxes is like UTM for linux

brokenwing@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 31d

Yes its needed. There are some serious bugs that needs ironing out.

harmbugler@piefed.social · 1 pts · 31d

Awesome, looking forward to trying the new version