Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Flatpak 1.3.2 Released - Now Makes Use Of A Custom FUSE File-System

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    So what? Any sandbox can be breached. Sandboxie is not over-engineered because it does one thing, and that's sandboxing apps.
    Before commenting again go read that CVE and see that the backdoor is a designed in feature being demand by Sandboxie developers. Its true over-engineered garbage to the point they have broken what a sandbox is meant to-do yet you were recommending it.

    There is a difference between being breached and being designed broken.

    Sorry they one thing Sandboxie does not do is Sandbox applications because its over-engineered.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by hreindl View Post
      but only for exceptions to get something built as long there is no better solution (openssl-compat is needed for some packages as example) and as soon there is a patch or update available at least on Fedora the compat-package is no longer needed and in a default setup also purged
      This behaviour is true of flatpak runtimes as well. Once you don't have any application requiring a old run-time that run-time is purged. You need to look at flathub sometime. Something you are missing Flatpak is building a distribution neutral repository system.

      Originally posted by hreindl View Post
      flatpak in case of manual downloads
      Bundles with flatpak are interesting they contain the source repo information so they can in fact check for updates even if you use the manual downloads path.

      I am sorry you have not looked into flatpak enough.

      Originally posted by hreindl View Post
      we all know how sloppy users are when it comes to update their systems
      Flatpak is designed to avoid this disaster you should try endless OS at some point.

      Originally posted by hreindl View Post
      whole point of a package management system versus windows/apple where users throw their randomly downloaded software all over the system and don#t care as long it seems to run
      This is something flatpak is designed to stop is Linux .run files and other solutions making the same mess as Windows/Apple.

      You really do need to try endless OS hrenindl you will see that Flatpak is usable as the primary package management solution. All the features of Linux distribution package management ideas are still in flatpak some done a little differently.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by hreindl View Post
        fine, but as long as "dnf upgrade" and "dnf distro-sync" don't do that transparently not for me
        There is something very interesting under flatpak its called ostree. So duplicate files shared between packages and runtimes don't in fact eat more space. Yes security auditing ostree is a lot more compact than one would think.

        Something that you miss is dnf functionality due to fedora silverblue is going to come for flatpak installed packages as well.

        https://blog.fishsoup.net/2018/12/04...dora-now-live/

        Long term we will see more distributions providing their own flatpaks so they don't have to backport packages. Yes this is when things will get truly interesting. In future you could have Like debian as core and applications from Fedora, flathub and other places.

        So its only a matter of time until flatpak is integrated into more package management solutions.

        Distribution neutral packaging is a nice fun double sided. Yes it allows third party applications to be installed safely it also allows distributions to allow users to install 1 or 2 selected applications from their testing branch without risking bring down the complete install.

        Flatpak is different to snap as flatpak was design with the idea of being integrated into distributions to solve their worse problems as well as making third party life simpler..

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by hreindl View Post
          silverblue / ostree have nothing to do with traditional setups
          Comes down to what you define as traditional.

          Packaging generations of Linux.
          Generation 0 before any Linux distribution was source only.
          Generation 1 slackware tar.gz with no dependency processing at all heck no install scripts either.
          Generation 2 your RPM/Deb/pkg stuff appears with dependency solving.
          Generation 2.5 is like you Nix stuff and support of file system snapshots..
          Generation 3 is appearing to be your ostree based and your flatpak and other containerisation.

          You have to remember one of the arguments against early RPM/Deb by slackware users was the extra disc space the dependency information this was the change from generation 1 to generation 2. Yes Slackware users against generation 2 distributions also claimed their package manager was over engineered as well.

          Basically most of the arguments against flatpak are basically duplicating what was said in history by people not considering why the change is required.

          The .2.5 distributions using snapshots run into issues this restricts the file systems you can install on. They are doing snapshots because the Generation 2 only allowing 1 version of a library and so on results in at times you system not being boot able into with complex process to reverse back to working. Yes people have complained about the disc overhead of snapshoting as well. Once you have a distribution that snapshots you end up with users needing to run old program X that will not work with new dependencies asking to run both current and historic snapshots at the same time.

          With rpm-ostree and flatdeb work we most likely will see generation 2 style packaging remain but with end users using generation 3 containerisation for compatibility.

          We have just stayed at 2 to 2.5 generation package solutions possible fair to long.

          Fuse file system will reduce the amount of disc writing using ostree causes of course if this turns out to be a successful overlay one day it could be simply a kernel feature so bringing roll back support to most Linux file systems. Yes ostree making large sections of the file system read only to everything bar ostree makes snapshot/backup of the system core simpler..

          https://ostree.readthedocs.io/en/lat...#system-layout Yes ostree is not the same as generation 2 package management in the same kinds of ways generation 2 is not the same as generation 1. But if you read the system layout changes required for ostree then notice the layout changes most distributions are doing they are moving in the direction of ostree. In a few decades we could be calling ostree based distributions traditional as well.

          Comment

          Working...
          X