So something akin to flatpak/snap?
Isnt that the purpose and source of controversy vs distributing them the usual way of repositories?
Edit: Had some time to read the README.
Very interesting. But that sounds, like a vendor lock-in. Essentially devs are forced to use the Steam SDK to make it executable on Linux or face the issue of checking the compatibility of every distro, no?
No, the container environment uses default open source libraries. You don’t add any Steam dependencies to make software run in that environment. You can run it without Steam too. It’s just that Valve are the ones maintaining and updating this particular packaging of containers. When Valve releases new versions of their container (including updated default system libraries), you have to test compatibility with it or stick to using an older one. Similar to how Windows software versions would work best with different Proton versions.
You can use the Steam SDK when using it, and you can also choose not to.
Flatpack is a separate thing, which only handles Linux software within the regular desktop environment (a different method for packing software dependencies, managing system permissions, etc). The main difference is that Flatpack software can integrate with the regular Linux desktop environment, but the container based solution is fully separate from it (runs in gaming mode).
Sounds interesting and eases my concern about the dependency on large corporations.
PS: What I meant by comparing Flatpack with the packaging from the SteamSDK is the general idea behind it (e.g. containerizing and isolating from the OS).
So what if Steam stops development of the SDK or turns evil?
What other choices do devs have if they want to keep their systems compatible with all distros?
It looks to me as if you can either rely on proton/WINE or be stuck with the SDK if you run native.
So something akin to flatpak/snap?
Isnt that the purpose and source of controversy vs distributing them the usual way of repositories?
Edit: Had some time to read the README.
Very interesting. But that sounds, like a vendor lock-in. Essentially devs are forced to use the Steam SDK to make it executable on Linux or face the issue of checking the compatibility of every distro, no?
No, the container environment uses default open source libraries. You don’t add any Steam dependencies to make software run in that environment. You can run it without Steam too. It’s just that Valve are the ones maintaining and updating this particular packaging of containers. When Valve releases new versions of their container (including updated default system libraries), you have to test compatibility with it or stick to using an older one. Similar to how Windows software versions would work best with different Proton versions.
You can use the Steam SDK when using it, and you can also choose not to.
Flatpack is a separate thing, which only handles Linux software within the regular desktop environment (a different method for packing software dependencies, managing system permissions, etc). The main difference is that Flatpack software can integrate with the regular Linux desktop environment, but the container based solution is fully separate from it (runs in gaming mode).
Sounds interesting and eases my concern about the dependency on large corporations.
PS: What I meant by comparing Flatpack with the packaging from the SteamSDK is the general idea behind it (e.g. containerizing and isolating from the OS).
You don’t need to use Steam to run games though…?
So what if Steam stops development of the SDK or turns evil?
What other choices do devs have if they want to keep their systems compatible with all distros?
It looks to me as if you can either rely on proton/WINE or be stuck with the SDK if you run native.
Proton often works better than native Linux versions of the same game.
Just use Proton. Seriously, if you haven’t gamed on Linux in a long time, it’s mind blowing how well it works.
Like I mentioned: I am gaming quite a bit (lately more on it than on my regular PC) on my SteamDeck.