Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Flatpak 1.5 Released With Version Pinning, Self-Updates In Portals

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Flatpak 1.5 Released With Version Pinning, Self-Updates In Portals

    Phoronix: Flatpak 1.5 Released With Version Pinning, Self-Updates In Portals

    Flatpak 1.5 is the newest pre-release for this Linux app sandboxing and distribution tech...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...k-1.5-Released

  • #2
    Nice to see usability improvements.

    For Flatpak to be a nice tool it needs to be:
    • near ubiquitous across popular GNU/Linux distros
    • easy to use
    • very secure by default. IE the user should have similar assurances for installing a Flatpak app as they do when accessing a web page. If greater permissions are required, the user should be prompted. Obviously a user running a Flatpak GUI app under XOrg can't expect those assurances. I'm thinking of a Wayland based OS environment.
    • a stable platform. IE you should almost always be able to run / install flatpak software regardless of your OS age or the age of the Flatpak packaged software. There are some reasonable exceptions: including software that has system OS requirements beyond the target OS (e.g. games that require a very recent OpenGL version).

    Comment


    • #3
      It feels like Canonical is holding back Flatpak by crippling Flatpak support in Ubuntu in favor of Snap.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by uid313 View Post
        It feels like Canonical is holding back Flatpak by crippling Flatpak support in Ubuntu in favor of Snap.
        How so exactly ? care to elaborate ? I use Flatpak on Ubuntu 18.04 with Wayland because I was tired of Snap Libreoffice horribly slow and crashing regularly and Flatpak solved it for me. Since then I have also switched to Flatpak for Inkscape, Digikam and Vlc and did not notice any crippling.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by uid313 View Post
          It feels like Canonical is holding back Flatpak by crippling Flatpak support in Ubuntu in favor of Snap.
          Wait... Ubuntu is crippling Flatpak? Maybe I'll try switching to Debian rather than completing my 14.04 LTS -> 16.04 -> 18.04 LTS upgrade.

          Parts of Snap's design offend me so I was already planning to track down a PPA for non-snap Chromium if what I've heard about it no longer being available as a non-snap officially is true.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ssokolow View Post

            Wait... Ubuntu is crippling Flatpak? Maybe I'll try switching to Debian rather than completing my 14.04 LTS -> 16.04 -> 18.04 LTS upgrade.

            Parts of Snap's design offend me so I was already planning to track down a PPA for non-snap Chromium if what I've heard about it no longer being available as a non-snap officially is true.
            You don't need to switch away from Ubuntu, you just need to install the flatpak plugin package for the Software Store. What I meant by crippling is that Ubuntu does not ship with Flatpak support out-of-the-box. So then many developers are not going to bother with Flatpak since Ubuntu is the most population distribution and it does not come with the support enabled out-of-the-box.

            Comment


            • #7
              Just like systemd vs. upstart, git vs. bzr (launchpad) and GNOME vs. Unity, the flatpak vs. snap choice will inevitably end with Ubuntu being the last to realise it's been betting on the wrong horse all along.

              This will obvously only happen a long time after everyone else have rolled their eyes at snaps and moved on with flatpaks.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by uid313 View Post

                You don't need to switch away from Ubuntu, you just need to install the flatpak plugin package for the Software Store. What I meant by crippling is that Ubuntu does not ship with Flatpak support out-of-the-box. So then many developers are not going to bother with Flatpak since Ubuntu is the most population distribution and it does not come with the support enabled out-of-the-box.
                If you use GNOME and care about native apps (which you should), Flatpak is going to be the better choice given it's heavy integration and adoption in the GNOME ecosystem.

                Michael its dbus-broker, not broken.
                Last edited by Britoid; 10-03-2019, 09:28 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cybertraveler View Post
                  Nice to see usability improvements.

                  For Flatpak to be a nice tool it needs to be:
                  • near ubiquitous across popular GNU/Linux distros
                  • easy to use
                  • very secure by default. IE the user should have similar assurances for installing a Flatpak app as they do when accessing a web page. If greater permissions are required, the user should be prompted. Obviously a user running a Flatpak GUI app under XOrg can't expect those assurances. I'm thinking of a Wayland based OS environment.
                  • a stable platform. IE you should almost always be able to run / install flatpak software regardless of your OS age or the age of the Flatpak packaged software. There are some reasonable exceptions: including software that has system OS requirements beyond the target OS (e.g. games that require a very recent OpenGL version).
                  The last point here is already the case.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Why are flatpak devs unable to use github to host their repositories? Is this a bit of trickery by RedHat to control developers by forcing hosting on flathub?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X