What is you favorite Flatpak? For me is A Hat In Time

What is you favorite Flatpak? For me is A Hat In Time

Other urls found in this thread:


Filthy pirate...

I don't recall anyone talking about robing ships

See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement

Okay shlomo.

Steam coming soon, hopefully.

i looked at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak but can someone give me a sane explanation on what flatpak is? is it illegal, if so how, its linux....? is it some form of an emu?

It's a way to package applications on GNU/Linux so that they run on any distribution that has flatpak. So in the future you can get the latest libreoffice/firefox/steam instead of whatever outdated version your LTS distro has

It's basically GNU/Linux' version of .apk or .msi files

It only took GNU 30+ years to come up with a basic universal installer format. Well done RMS

Flatpak is not a GNU project.

It was made specifically for the GNU OS though. Unless some other recent-OS is using freedesktop.org paradigms

Flatpak runs on GNU/HURD? That's the only GNU OS.

Are you trolling niggah?
Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Gentoo, Arch.etc are all the GNU OS
Linux = kernel
Debian.etc = Distribution

You don't understand the maymay, you faggot.
No one calls GNU an operative system, but rather 'userland'.

There's nothing to understand, you're just fucking retarded

Ubuntu GNU/Linux
Ubuntu is a distro
GNU is an OS
Linux is a kernel
it's not that hard to understand.

It's only useful in corner cases and anyone replacing general package management with this nonsense is too retarded to live.
There's something else than apt an yum.

No thanks.

GNU is not an OS. GNU was supposed to be an OS, but never quite made it, because the HURD, after almost 35 years (!), is still in perpetual alpha.

GNU is a project, and created a collection of software that is often paired with Linux, but it is not an OS.

Flatpak is not a GNU project, has nothing to do with rms (as you previously insinuated), and, AFAIK, does not run on the failed GNU OS, GNU/HURD. It does run on Linux, though.


Note that that's Linux, not "GNU/Linux". In fact, "GNU" doesn't appear even once in that FAQ. Nor should it.

So it doesn't work on the BSDs :^)

"Linux" was always shorthand for GNU/Linux. Which makes both RMS and people like you autistic as fuck

cucked yet again ;^)

The GNU OS was born in 1983. The GNU OS has been an OS since that time making GNU a 35 year old OS.

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

It's just bloat. It's the equivalent of mac apps for proprietary software. Basically instead of sane package management with dependency on libraries, it bundles every library with the executable. It does help proprietary software though.

I can already imagine, grandma with 16 versions of chrome scattered across her desktop and home folder. Every user on that computer with the same. Having to debloat it for them every time they run out of disk space.

So flatpak is literally a meme?

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as GNU, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. GNU is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the Linux system call interface, memory/process management, and vital system drivers comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the Linux kernel every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU/Linux which is widely used today is often called GNU, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the Linux system, developed by Linus Torvalds.

There really is a GNU, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. GNU is the userland: the programs in the system that occupy the machine's resources while running. The userland is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. GNU is normally used in combination with the Linux kernel: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called GNU distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

Yes. And it also goes against the unix philosophy.
It's useful only for bloated gaymers.

I'm kind of lost on this..There's people that want 'Year of the Linux Desktop', but the minute something comes out that makes Linux the least bit user-friendly, then out come the gatekeepers. Shit, did it not occur to you that some people find compiling to be a total pain in the nigger to do?

That, and .deb files have existed for a while.

>There's (((people))) that want 'Year of the Linux Desktop'
Yes, but at what cost?
watch vid related

I tried installing a flatpak once. It took ages and an obscene amount of RAM during the process. Absolute garbage. Just give me a tar instead and I'll manage.


I know I'm not one of those people anymore because what it really means is to do stuff that on surface makes using Linux easier but on practice it just translates into bloated shit full of security holes and a bigger attack surface, basically transforming Linux into wangblows.
If I wanted wangblows I would just go and use wangblows, I don't need my Linux box to be turned into wangblows.


i dont want muh linux to be niggerfied like android

What are tarballs

Set off redlights for me, but I remember that everything in modern tech is shit..

You may not realize it, but package management is way more retard-proof than installing exes from the interweb. See how smartphones do it.

Really awful at doing what a .apk or .msi file does

Nigger, literally nothing followes the Unix philosophy to the letter. X11, Emacs, and even the Linux kernel itself ALL go against the UNIX way.

what wrong with a local overlay with handpicked 9999 ebuilds?

this, flatpaks could lead to much easier package management for things not in the standard repos, though

i don't think you're the target audience

Flatpack uses cgroups to provide application isolation. How exactly does this differ from docker?

Is it just that it doesn't have the docker filesystem?

You realize that for like 99% of the programs you'll want to install compiling is not required, right? sudo apt-get install op-gay-porn-viewer will result in the binaries for OP's gay porn viewing program to be sent to your computer and installed for you. And even if it's not in the official repos, lots of projects have .deb files you can download and/or third-party repos you can add. I actually cannot remember the last time I had to compile anything.

*16 versions of Electron/CEF

Here is another thing about Flatpak that not nearly enough people have considered: It's going to kill Arch.

Why do I say this? What is the main benefit to Arch these days? The fucking AUR. And with Flatpak, we might very well see a distro-agnostic AUR, where 90% of distros can use it in a similar fasion to the way Archfags use the AUR. Without the advantage of the AUR, why would have the people using Arch bother with it anymore?

I think there's still an argument for a up-to-date upstream focused rolling release distro that doesn't railroad you toward some particular window manager.

But I don't use Arch anymore; I use Fedora.

You have to admit though, the AUR is a major selling point for Arch atm.

Flatpak is pure shit. It whines about some file descriptor writing error and there not being enough space even though there is, after consuming 3.5 GB of RAM and 100% of a thread for ages. Fuck you Pottering.

Why do others not copy it then?

Pottering didn't develop Flatpak.

My dude, it's okay. Give this a read.

Its this retard again. Flatpak is made for proprietary consumer shit like steam, spotify, chrome discord etc. Its made so uncooperative software vendors can get around the distro maintainers that protect the users and abuse them to their hearts content. Everything else is FUD.

If you think Flatpak is only good for proprietary shit, think about how much easier they make life on a stable or LTS distro. Being able to have up-to-date OSS apps like Krita and Kdenlive make life a LOT easier.

Archfags are all about muh minimalism. Reinstalling the same dependencies over and over again because every fucking program you install has to have its dependencies packaged specially isolated from the rest of the system is the polar opposite of minimalism.

The only reason to install a flatpak is for gamez that are hard to set up in wine. Anything other than that is just unnecessarily bloating your system.

GNU's official package manager is Guix, and that thing is still in beta (and it's apparently the most powerful tool there is.)
GNU does not have an official package manager, hence why every big distro has it's own.

You're a fucking retard. GNU is an operating system.
GNU is supposed to be used under different kernels such as Linux or kFreeBSD.
Linux-Libre is an official FSF project and GNU/Linux-Libre distributions are endorsed by the FSF.

GNU is Not Unix.

Except if you want to install two versions of the same package. Or if you need an older/newer version than what's in the repos. Or if you need to roll back an update. Or if the new version has a dependency that cannot be met. Or if the new version depends on the new version of another package that would break your system if upgraded. Or if you want your programs to be sandboxed. Or if you need an older version of certain program installed, but maintaining it would require you to not update other libraries which in turn would make your entire system to be not-updated.
Packaging in GNU is broken. You either have a stable, outdated system (Debian, CentOS, SUSE, RHEL, Ubuntu LTS) or an updated, unstable and regression-prone system (Fedora, Arch, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed, Debian Still in Development, etc.)

Flatpak and AppImage are also good for having up-to-date OSS applications on LTS and stale distros.

Just add the up to date repos

I have used Arch as my main system on and off for about 5 years total. I have never installed anything from the AUR.

Looking at some of the most popular packages on the AUR, I see why.

Disgusting. At that point you might as well use Windows.

And break everything because newer versions of Krita requires newer versions of some libs, amirite?! xD

VSCode is FOSS.

Do you even read the amount of crap you write?
So? It's meant as a replacement and it's based on it.

The main advantage of Arch over other distros is it's cancerous community and the bragging rights of copying and pasting commands from the wiki.
OpenSUSE has a similar thing with Open Build Service. Ubuntu has a similar thing with PPAs. None of those things are safe at all since packages are not audited. Arch is not particularly leaner than other distros (a well-configured Debian install will always be leaner than an Arch install since Arch packages usually have more dependencies and are not split between binary, debug symbols and developer tools) and the bleeding edge is not important for productivity (hence why nobody in their right mind uses Arch for a server or a workstation.)
Arch is, and has always been, a hobbyist distro.

GNU does not have an official package manager *besides Guix. That's what I should have written.

They don't have to follow UNIX conventions and philosophies nor have they ever cared about such things. Coreutils and GCC do not follow the UNIX Way® because that's never been a goal for GNU.

There is no way to have portable programs on Linux right now. Want two or more instances of openvpn or tor? You're fucked, launch some VMs and bloat your system even more. The Qubes Way, just buy more RAM and new CPUs, goy!
Want to have different or older versions of graphics editor? Fuck you.
Want to play Super Tux Kart? Bad thing, latest version (only available in your distro's repository) requires OpenGL 3.0. Ha-ha, it' not like you're a poorfag with 8 year old computer right? Everyone can afford to spend shekels on new graphics card with OpenGL 3.0. Embrace the consumerism, goy! Free as in freedom, not as in "poorfaggotry", kiddo.
Some nigger maintainer decides to give up his keys to russian hackers before contradicting seijukku? No problem, shit happens. Instead of trusting software developers' gpg keys, you have to trust a bunch of literally who middlemen known as "distro maintainers".

This would have been an excellent post, but then you had to ruin it with all your jooposting.

And what do you think POSIX has been made for?

GNU is mostly POSIX compliant, but it adds more stuff on top. Hence why software written specifically for GNU/Linux will not run in other operating systems without requiring rewriting.

Most big distributions follow the Linux Standard Base which, again, takes POSIX and adds a bunch of stuff on top.

And no, by "the UNIX way" I meant the "do one thing and do it well" bullshit which has nothing to do with POSIX. MacOS and even fucking Windows 7 are POSIX-compliant without following that bullshit design philosophy.

I like most of the suckless philosophy and I use st and tabbed+surf daily, but static linking is retarded.

OBS is fucking garbage compared to the AUR.

Which is better? AppImage or Flatpak?

AppImage is basically like OS X .dmg files - an ISO9660 filesystem wrapped up as a single file. Flatpak is more like a mobile app - isolated, sandboxed, and with repository infrastructure.

Personally I prefer flatpack for general app distribution, while AppImage lends itself better for testing alpha&beta software.

The AUR isn't exactly all it used to be. I mean, there is tons of outdated and broken shit on the AUR atm.

And yet it's still better than OBS.

isn't it pretty retarded from a security standpoint to just install binaries from some random jackass?


Only if you use glibc and and other such bloated niggerware. Seems like you missed the whole point of the suckless ideology.

If GNU is an OS then is BusyBox an OS too?

AUR is not "binaries from some jackass", if you ever read PKGBUILDs, then you'd notice that "AUR packages" are mostly a wrapper that downloads binaries or source code from developer's website. You can even import GPG keys of said devs and then check binary integrity with them, AUR makes the Windows way™ easier with package manager-esque interface.

Horseshit. That's still mostly dynamic linking.

Yes if you are dumb enough to use glibc gnubloat.


can someone explain why is flatpak superior to snaps?

Ironically, Flatpak doens't rely on systemd.


wait really?, I thought that was optional, I've only used it once.

It is. You need an Ubuntu One account if you wish to install snaps from the Ubuntu repository in the Software Center.
If you use the CLI or another repository, you don't need an account.

literally who

Every single distro decided they didn't want to qc anything anymore (even debian is like that). So now getting everything straight from the source as a flatpak is probably going to be the only option to get software that works while keeping the system in a consistent state. Because nobody wants to dance and sing for weeks to get 7 versions of glibc installed side-by-side because of the version discrepancies of various packages in the official repositories, not to mention having to update the entire system to unstable crash-if-you-sneeze-on-it state if you need just a single, small unstable package with an otherwise stable system.

Well, it's either bundling dependencies with software or automatically prompting you to download ALL dependencies from archives. The third option was make the package management better, which hasn't happened on any distro and even if it did debian and fedora/suse are pretty much dominating the market and it's unlikely that the majority will move to something else soon. At least flatpaks don't need superuser to install.

You can have two or more versions of the same dependency/library without any issues. Download an older dependency manually and place it where it would usually be. You don't have to link them so they won't be updated through system updates. And in this case all software that depends on the older libraries will work as intended.


Where did you come up with that? It's completely false. The software searches for dependencies in specific folders, the kernel version doesn't matter here.


Most of the time when you need an outdated dependency you can solve it by simply creating a symlink with the old dependency name pointing to the newer version of the dependency.

That works if compatibility hasn't broken. And there is no telling when that will happen with some libs.

But instead of fucking around with that you can download the older dependency and place it in the corresponding folder. This won't break compatibility and will always work. You don't even need to make a symlink. The only problem with this is that you have to manually search for older dependencies.

Not true. Many software need access to the kernel source for a variety of reasons, not to mention drivers and specific kernel features.

See what the conversation is about. It's specifically about having two sets of the same library, with different versioning. Which will allow software that needs the older version run. Unless it's extremely outdated it will run no matter what kernel you use.

Actually it keeps track of dependencies and re-uses them if you have installed a package in the same tree (Flathub is a tree, for instance) that uses them as well.
No, I don't like this over regular package management, but get your facts straight so that you can criticize properly.

Have you tried not being clinically retarded?

That's just a side effect. It is true that corporations must be salivating looking at things like flatpak.
Distros won't be a thing soon, and the evolution of Linux will be in the hands of the big companies much more than it already is.

Except gentoo does not have this problem without having the flatpak cancer.

The fuck is wrong with you? Have you tried reading?

Have you tried getting a brain?


Deb and RPM are shit though. Listen, there is just some shit you wont find in your local repo; I'd rather that shit was sandboxed than not.