GNOME Sandboxed Apps seems to be very similar to Ubuntu snap packages. What are the key differences between these formats?

Like, GNOME Sandboxed Apps requires Wayland and therefore is inherently more secure than snap package which doesn't require any protocol for graphics (ie snaps can run on X Server which is inherently insecure).

Are snaps just another case where Canonical has decided to do their own thing?


Moving to and fro between Snap and flatpack(Gnome follows this) will change the development philosophy.

Flatpak was laid by Leonard Potterhead, who broke too many POSIX decorums because he believed in fast Linux development process.

Following is sum up for the question, but the question is very broad, so trying to pick up few points.

  • Snap is has single corporate backup Canonical while Flatpak has many.
  • Snap is strictly following the POSIX philosophy.
  • Flatpak is no server process while snappy has [in most of cases].
  • Flatpak has library dependencies from Freedesktop,KDE,GNOME while snap has Base distro snap.
  • Flatpak cannot run without sandboxing, while snap is optional.
  • Flatpak is optimized for air-gapped (offline) machines (the kind Ed Snowden uses) but snap is not.
  • Flatpak is fully decentral without the central gatekeepers while in case of snap, it is no.(a single app store)
  • Flatpak allows application authors to self-host application with no functionality loss while in snap it does not.

Still researching on this question, fewer answers

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.