• Oisteink@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    10 months ago

    I still don’t understand flatpack on Linux. I see how it makes releasing binaries easy, but the cost and idea is contrary to basic unix principles.

    • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      10 months ago

      Not everyone values the same things you do. Flatpaks aren’t the cause of the fact that different applications don’t function correctly with different versions of libraries; they’re just the solution.

      Flatpak is better for normal people. It’s better for most advanced users who don’t want to micromanage compatibility issues. And it really doesn’t have an impact on people who do want to micromanage because all your alternative ways to install software are still there.

      • intrepid@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Flatpaks aren’t the cause of the fact that different applications don’t function correctly with different versions of libraries

        This problem has been solved by Nix and Guix. Nix is as popular among developers as flatpak is. Add bubblewrap to all applications, and you get nearly all the features as flatpaks. Flatpaks, meanwhile are huge and a bit slow to start - problems that Nix and Guix don’t suffer from.

        I do use flatpaks extensively. But they are probably not the best solution to the problems you mention.>

        • sudneo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 months ago

          Tbh, for me the value of flatpak is in the isolation (great for how easy it is to achieve), rather than the compatibility.

          For example, I run obsidian with no network access and fs access to just the path where my notes are stored. This is really reassuring considering I am not really sure what all the plugins might do. While it is not perfect, it’s much better than having it running natively in my box (I.e. root namespaces).

          • intrepid@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Isolation is easy to achieve. Flatpak’s sandboxing layer is bubblewrap. It’s an independent software. It wouldn’t be too hard to write a wrapper for bubblewrap that acts like flatpak and launches applications in a carefully constructed sandbox.

            • sudneo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              It’s also not too hard to cook a Dockerfile for it, or even write a systemd wrapper with security settings. However, with flatpak you get this out of the box and mostly in a transparent way, plus you get all the usually annoying aspects (like having GUI applications work in containers) taken care of.

    • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      10 months ago

      Are those principle still relevant? Particularly with GUI apps? I feel the sandboxing along is a good reason to switch to flatpak (or even snap if you know).

      • intrepid@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        If you’re interested in sandboxing, then you need just the bubblewrap - not the entire bubblewrap.

          • intrepid@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Flatpak itself is a layer of software. You could do that for regular apps too - to take away the hassle of having to manually set it up for each app. I already have two software that implements that logic in parts.

      • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Well, there’s the increased storage usage, and in some cases, more ram. There can also be issues with integration with your distro themes, etc.

        Many people will consider these as a small cost to the benefits of flatpaks, but I can understand the ones who aren’t sold on it.

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          10 months ago

          there’s the increased storage usage

          Considering how much it is in reality, this is for most users a non-issue. Big issue in embedded devices maybe, but not for desktop users.

  • Pantherina@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    Fedora Flatpaks…

    They have a unified build system. But it sucks that they duplicate even more libraries while not adding officially supported apps and also not many.

    • krash@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      I jumped ship from Ubuntu to fedora last year and fedora is awesome. Fedora has a bit newer packages and the default felt right (albeit I missed system tray plugin from Ubuntu). Some hardware work better OOTB on Ubuntu, so always try with a live distro first.

      • umbrella@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Is system tray plugin available on Fedora or do I need some kind of patch on Gnome? Why would hardware work differently on Fedora?

        Last I tried a couple deb packages didnt exist in rpm, how is package availability?

        • krash@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I see @joojmachine@lemmy.ml already answered some of your questions, but regarding “why would hardware work differently on fedra”, I assume it has to do with what kernel is being shipped, and what drivers that is also shipped with the distro by default. Sometimes drivers aren’t shipped due to legal reasons, and a distro can be shipped with a kernel that dosen’t have certain support for certain hardware.

        • joojmachine@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          You can always download it as an extension instead of a system package for the extension, but yeah, it’s available on our repos.

          Also, pretty good. It will likely never be as many packages as there are in Debian’s repos, but even without Flatpak there was never a package I couldn’t find either in our repos or on COPR.

    • joojmachine@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      As a contributor, I’m biased, but let me put it this way: it’s the distro that made me so comfortable using it and with a community so welcoming, I became a contributor 😅

  • DerpDerpingtonIsHere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I like how Peek hasn’t been updated since like 2019, not even being developed or updated anymore and they recommend it… IT DOESN’T EVEN WORK ON FEDORA!

    • joojmachine@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’ve literally used it to take the screenshot for it that you see on the banner, it works well enough.