Fedora 33 Beta Released With Big Changes From LTO To Btrfs

[mroche]

if the FFF build doesn't use the Flat non-free codecs. Like I said, the Flathub one "just worked".

That’s what I was saying (I used the package name to refer to what was missing, not to install RPMs). Fedora does not under any circumstances ship anything that they themselves did not build, or is not completely free/open-source (or patent restricted). So they won’t be included in the Fedora flatpaks either, unlike the official Flathub builds.

After doing extra reading on the topic: just use the Flathub build. This problem with FFF will not be resolved anytime soon.

Cheers,
Mike

[skeevy420]

That’s what I was saying (I used the package name to refer to what was missing, not to install RPMs). Fedora does not under any circumstances ship anything that they themselves did not build, or is not completely free/open-source (or patent restricted). So they won’t be included in the Fedora flatpaks either, unlike the official Flathub builds.

After doing extra reading on the topic: just use the Flathub build. This problem with FFF will not be resolved anytime soon.

Cheers,
Mike

That's what I came up with after a bit of Googling and reading various Fedora forums.

Which is why I wonder why they bother with the Fedora Firefox Flat. If both that and the system package need layered packages from RPMFusion to offer full functionality and, therefore, not upset the average end-user, why offer the Fedora Flat in the first place? I get not shipping the Flathub Firefox and including the system Firefox -- traditional Linux proprietary reasons and how most people expect a web browser by default.

[RahulSundaram]

That's what I came up with after a bit of Googling and reading various Fedora forums.

Which is why I wonder why they bother with the Fedora Firefox Flat. If both that and the system package need layered packages from RPMFusion to offer full functionality and, therefore, not upset the average end-user, why offer the Fedora Flat in the first place? I get not shipping the Flathub Firefox and including the system Firefox -- traditional Linux proprietary reasons and how most people expect a web browser by default.

It's just to support Silverblue. The format of distribution doesn't change the licensing (or in this case, patent issues as well) requirements

[skeevy420]

It's just to support Silverblue. The format of distribution doesn't change the licensing (or in this case, patent issues as well) requirements

But why both? Why include the DNF/RPM version of Firefox with Silverblue and as well as include Firefox in Fedora's Flat repository just for Silverblue and not use it by default? Like I said, I get the patent/legal issues for Fedora provided software, but why not just include the Flat version? By using that, Instead of having to point people to RPMFusion, having them add layered packages, and break their immutable system, all they would have to do is change Flat repos and install Firefox from there for non-free content support. IMHO, using a different Flat repo over layering packages is more in line with the goals of Silverblue.

[RahulSundaram]

But why both? Why include the DNF/RPM version of Firefox with Silverblue and as well as include Firefox in Fedora's Flat repository just for Silverblue and not use it by default? Like I said, I get the patent/legal issues for Fedora provided software, but why not just include the Flat version? By using that, Instead of having to point people to RPMFusion, having them add layered packages, and break their immutable system, all they would have to do is change Flat repos and install Firefox from there for non-free content support. IMHO, using a different Flat repo over layering packages is more in line with the goals of Silverblue.

IIRC, the current content source for ostree images have to be based off of RPM. There were also kinks to iron out in the flatpak builds. tldr: this is all work in progress as is Silverblue itself. Eventually yes, desktop applications will be built out as flatpaks

[skeevy420]

IIRC, the current content source for ostree images have to be based off of RPM. There were also kinks to iron out in the flatpak builds. tldr: this is all work in progress as is Silverblue itself. Eventually yes, desktop applications will be built out as flatpaks

Yeah, that's what I figured after going through the various Fedora git repos for different atomic projects and not really seeing a hint of a package being added from Flats anywhere. Long term, is the goal to run as much of the base system from Flat as possible, to stick to using Fedora's repos, or somewhere in between? That's if you even know. I've been trying to read back up on it but there's only so much a person can do in a single night.

And thanks for the replies.

[RahulSundaram]

Yeah, that's what I figured after going through the various Fedora git repos for different atomic projects and not really seeing a hint of a package being added from Flats anywhere. Long term, is the goal to run as much of the base system from Flat as possible, to stick to using Fedora's repos, or somewhere in between? That's if you even know

FYI, you can read up discussions like

https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/dropping-firefox-from-the-base-image/21844/17

I haven't read up on the current status but I would expect that the base image to be sourced from RPM packages and have all the desktop level applications to be shipped as flatpaks. That way you are not mucking around with ostree RPM layering and leave the base system as immutable and can update things like Firefox to say a newer development version easily