> install game with a single command just like plopping a Disc into a console
> all dependencies and matching, pre-configured wine version nicely packed up and sandboxed
> will still work 10 years down the road because everything is bundled up with a clean interface
I for one welcome our new Flatpak overlords.
2018 will be the year of the Linux Desktop!
(If you get a GPG Error, your version of flatpak is too old, get the latest one from flatpak.org
Other urls found in this thread:
tirania.org
flatpak.org
twitter.com
Looks promising, pity that it can't share libs so it'll use more room but storage is cheap now anyways.
What about Snap?
Snaps can currently run in Ubuntu, Arch Linux, Fedora, Linux Mint, CentOS and Gentoo. They are also used in Ubuntu Touch. They are designed for desktops, servers, phones, IoT and routers.
Flatpak has the same advantages as snaps. However, it uses SELinux instead of AppArmour for sandboxing. The main difference is that Flatpaks can both use libraries included in the package and shared libraries from another Flatpak.
The developer of Flatpak is the Red Hat employee Alexander Larsson. Flatpak software is currently available in Arch Linux, Debian, Fedora, Mageia, Solus and Ubuntu. It is focused on desktops only.
AppImages are developed by Simon Peter. As in snaps or Flatpak, the package includes all libraries neccessary to run the program. AppImage programes are not sandboxed and they don't require root rights to run. According to website of the project, AppImages should run on Arch Linux, Centos, Debian, Fedora, OpenSUSE, Red Hat Linux and Ubuntu.
>not snap
kys
You need to be root to install a Snap, Flatpaks you can just install as a normal user.
This is a major advantage imho.
I for one prefer AppImage, but if they can be converted between formats is only a matter of time this happen.
Year of the Linux desktop is coming!
> written by a red hat employee
there's a really high chance of being shit, for that thing
> just fuck my shit up with a metric ton of static dependencies
> it's going to be yet another episode of "why does my OS need 15 different versions of MSVCPP redistributable?" but ~10y later, on linux
oh, wait - it already is. Just like any equivalent pile of shit such as snap/appimage/whatever.
Haven't we learned anything from the past? What makes you think that the retards (more than half of Sup Forums) are not going to install random shit downloaded from the internet and then come here and complain about linux, exactly like they do on windows/android/whatever? Come on now.
The real solution to all that shit is nixOS - it's a real 'config and forget' solution, it offers a better packaging OOB and allows you to roll back in case of a fuck up.
And don't come up with that fragmentation bullshit, - every single relevant distro either uses .deb or at least has a way to install one.
Is this the electron of Linux?
No, is .exe for lignux
Worse, much worse. Remember Installshield?
tirania.org
We need to stop breaking shit with every update.
With Flatpak everything is nicely contained and archived, no more worries about distributions dropping dependencies.
worst comparison of all time
Yeah now you just have to worry about everything using outdated libraries with security vulnerabilities.
I don't care if my desktop app/game has security vulns as it never talks to the net.
This is what flatpak proponents actually believe
So you say it's better not being able to run software at all than run software that might have some bugs that won't get patched anymore?
>> it's going to be yet another episode of "why does my OS need 15 different versions of MSVCPP redistributable?" but ~10y later, on linux
The mistake was dynamic linking, but now that the choice has been made and software licenses depend on it, the only real solution are snaps and flatpaks.
>And don't come up with that fragmentation bullshit, - every single relevant distro either uses .deb or at least has a way to install one.
Does Oracle or IBM fork from Debian? Didn't think so.
Uh, yeah. That's why Windows is a steaming pile of garbage and Linux isn't. All of your software on Windows is statically linked shitware and when there's a vulnerability chances are something won't be updated. We don't need flatpaks, we need build scripts. Look at the AUR for an example.
You missed the point where Flatpack does sandboxing.
>All of your software on Windows is statically linked shitware
$ ldd explorer.exe | head -n 20
ntdll.dll => /c/Windows/SYSTEM32/ntdll.dll (0x76de0000)
kernel32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/kernel32.dll (0x76bc0000)
KERNELBASE.dll => /c/Windows/system32/KERNELBASE.dll (0x7fefce20000)
ADVAPI32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/ADVAPI32.dll (0x7fefeff0000)
msvcrt.dll => /c/Windows/system32/msvcrt.dll (0x7fefe140000)
sechost.dll => /c/Windows/SYSTEM32/sechost.dll (0x7fefd0f0000)
RPCRT4.dll => /c/Windows/system32/RPCRT4.dll (0x7fefe860000)
GDI32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/GDI32.dll (0x7fefd110000)
USER32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/USER32.dll (0x76ce0000)
LPK.dll => /c/Windows/system32/LPK.dll (0x7fefdfe0000)
USP10.dll => /c/Windows/system32/USP10.dll (0x7fefdf10000)
SHLWAPI.dll => /c/Windows/system32/SHLWAPI.dll (0x7fefe0c0000)
SHELL32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/SHELL32.dll (0x7fefd180000)
ole32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/ole32.dll (0x7fefe990000)
OLEAUT32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/OLEAUT32.dll (0x7fefe1e0000)
EXPLORERFRAME.dll => /c/Windows/system32/EXPLORERFRAME.dll (0x7fee5d70000)
DUser.dll => /c/Windows/system32/DUser.dll (0x7fefa9a0000)
DUI70.dll => /c/Windows/system32/DUI70.dll (0x7fefa9f0000)
IMM32.dll => /c/Windows/system32/IMM32.dll (0x7fefdff0000)
MSCTF.dll => /c/Windows/system32/MSCTF.dll (0x7fefeba0000)
No. The problem has always been dynamic linking without proper versioning.
Dynamic linking is the only sane way to do it. You don't need static linking if your software isn't proprietary malware. Just include a script to build from source.
Who gives a shit about their half-assed sandbox? Just use a chroot jail you retard.
I don't get the point of these. Big proprietary software like MATLAB is simply distributed via an install script that works on any distro. Just do that if you don't want to follow packaging conventions.
Those are both the same problems.
Which distribution let's you install multiple versions of a library?
You'll have though luck finding one that still provides qt3
Literally gentoo
> implying creating such an install script was an easy feat.
And unless you bring your entire distribution along (which is what flatpak basically does) you can still end up in dependency hell.
Not to speak of how to uninstall this mess again.
>will still work 10 years down the road
>(If you get a GPG Error, your version of flatpak is too old)
hmmm
>letting individual developers handle distribution
...and we're back to the Windows Way(tm).
Official distro repositories are excellent.
I for one like the windows way of not having to wait 1 year+ before a new version of a software is available in my distribution.
OP's error is not the flatpaks packages but with flatpak itself, are you dumb?
Using rolling release retard
I've used it before on mono develop.
Good idea and good desktop integration, offering dmg like simplicity, unfortunately I don't think it will gain any traction anytime soon because of the toxicity surrounding the Linux community lately,and also because there is no easy way (GUI) to determine if a package has an update available or an easy way to freeze a package
Almost every distribution, but not in the system repositories but nothing stops you to compiling it.
This kind of scripts also check if the libraries installed are compatible, so there's that, also those scripts are not designed to work in every distribution.
Build from source is just an impractical solution compared to the almost instant approach
Linux meme boy, how come you're do full of shit, this containers work exactly the opposite of what you've stated
In most cases I would agree with you but there are cases where you could benefit from having the latest or a specific version across distros without freezing the while update system.
For example an enterprise where everyone wants to use the same version of libre office because of compatibility but they don't use the same distro or version.
will this help me run msoffice
>freetards can't even agree on a universal format
LMAO
This is why loonix will always be shit.
Pirated yes, Microshit won't do it themselves, sadly.
Yes, someone only has to configure it once with a matching version of wine and pack it up, it will work for everyone with just one click, just like docker.
>impractical solution
Not really. I'm not talking about everything, just your faggot snowflake software that you want to distribute outside of the official repos. If you want instant then just make a fucking PPA or whatever.
What if you want everyone to have the same version inside an enterprise environment?
Why?
install gentoo
Red Hat drives the community, everyone else is a contrarian that tries to resist and ends up adopting what Red Hat did in the end anyway.
Why are you replying to obvious bait?
>t. freetard
You can do that with a deb file. Have you ever even made one before PR are you just jumping on the "replace existing software with memeware" bandwagon about shit you don't understand? Nothing is preventing your from creating a chroot jail filled with all of your software's dependencies and putting it in a deb file.
Red Hat is a NSA honeypot
But this is not what Flatpak is doing.
Having to compile n times the same software, opposed to just distribute one flatpak?
What if you have two, or three or n different distros? Are you aware not everything is a deb?
Also, just occurred to me, what if you need to have two or more versions of the same software?
This also
You're going to need to clarify because the title of the flatpak website is "the future of application distribution" so it's very clearly what they're trying to do.
>what if you need to have two or more versions of the same software?
Install gentoo
Totally agree with you user
>not everything is a deb
You're right you could even do with with a fucking Tarbell instead of their memery.
Please do a type gooder user why must you not type a gooder thank
I am both too lazy to get my laptop and too lazy to fix autocorrect's fuckups on my tablet, so no.
that doesn't even work in wine
This
Who the fuck wants to have an cumbersome installation?
I tried out snapcraft, I uninstalled immediately when I ran snap --help and "Buy" was one of the options.
Yes, they're literally going to sell packages.
This is their business model.
This new age central package manager shit is a hostile takeover of GNU/Linux and is potentially much more damaging than all of Poetterling and Red Hat's projects combined.
I never installed flatpak because their website is blocked by default in my browser because its a non https website. How should I trust people like that with my packages if they can`t even create a noob website. No thank you, unprofessional.
>Have steam
>Bumblebee doesn't work on flatpak
Maybe it is the future but we're not there yet
>snaps
>required to sign the canonical contributor agreement
>flatpak
>you don't have to do something that retarded
regardless of the feelings of corporations in linux, red hat has been far, far fucking better than canonical. they support and contribute far more. and, even ignoring everything else and how i think flatpak has some technological advantages over snaps (nothing that couldn't feasibly be changed at this early stage, though), that agreement is enough to say fuck snaps go flatpak.
>not AppImage
kys
I prefer appimages because they are simpler to use.
>offering dmg like simplicity,
only appimages do
This
The ideal linux distribution nowadays would use flatpak wherever possible. So the package manager is only used for updating system components and all kind of "user applications" are flatpaks. Finally a good and reliable way for developers to distribute linux applications. This could be a turning point for the linux community.
Also: snap will die. Screenshot this. They already switched to gnome which completely focuses on flatpak, and all the others like kde also do. I bet they already internally decided so but didn't make it public yet.
I won't argue flatpak/appimages are bringing the year of the GNU/Linux desktop, but I am switching to source based distros because is the future of conventional distros. I can install appimage if I want anyway.
to me it seems the main market for snap, flatpak, etc is application developers who desperately want to do an end run around distro maintainers. mainly because those distro maintainers tend to do things that are good for me as a user but inconvenient for the application developer, like not ship the very latest buggy development snapshot of the application.
>post is so true you can't handle it
>THIS IS BAIT XDDD
>The ideal linux distribution nowadays would use Nix wherever possible
FTFY
This. Distro maintainers don't tend to look kindly on malware and tracking shit.
I for one will avoid flatpak and similar technologies as much as possible.
Distros vary so much there needs to be an end run around the fragmentation.
>download a .sh file from gog.com
>drag it into the terminal
>installs and runs perfectly
Why does flatpak even need to exist?
>snaps
>you have to log into the Ubuntu store to access this snap app!
Fuck off with that garbage. Appimage and flatpak are superior.
>Distros vary so much there needs to be an end run around the fragmentation.
Give a motivating example, please.
People use Debian because they want a stable operating system.
People use Arch because they want a bleeding edge operating system.
People use distro package managers because of and , and additionally packages are usually signed.
Why should a user let you, the developer, override their preferences?
>linuxcucks still trying to play video games
>not just pirating windows 10 and dual-booting to get far better performance and compatibility than you will EVER get with wine
if you're playing singleplayer games (without DRM botnets like Steam) you can just disconnect the Windows partition from having any internet access so it can't possibly spy on you.
Why is fragmentation a bad thing? Fragmentation is why I can decide that I want Debian stable and you can decide that you want Arch. You'd be annoyed if you had to put up with a slow two-year upgrade cycle, I'd be annoyed if I had a rolling-release upgrade treadmill. There is fundamentally no way for one grand unified distro to make both of us happy at once.
Lazy devs don't want to do any work.
>Lazy
This shouldn't even be necessary work in the first place.
What work? You mean ensuring that you don't depend on exactly version X of a library, so that if the distro upgrades it out from underneath you, you still work? That most certainly is necessary work, if you're saying that snap and flatpak save you unneccesary work, what you're saying is you just want to ship it as soon as it sorta works and then give no fucks. You're saying that you don't care about reliability or the rest of the system or the user's security. Basically you're saying you want to be a Windows developer, because fuck everyone else.
>will still work 10 years down the road because everything is bundled up with a clean interface
>(If you get a GPG Error, your version of flatpak is too old, get the latest one from flatpak.org
lmao
Maybe it's only relevant for the end user. Backwards compatibility will work because that's one of the reasons why this is being promoted but I don't see forward compatibility (running a new package using an older version of flatpak) being a priority.
>Maybe it's only relevant for the end user
I thought the whole point of this was to make things easier for the end user?
Compared to the traditional way of installing applications, it already is. All you need is to keep your flatpak up to date and older packages should work as intended.
>Compared to the traditional way of installing applications
You mean using a package manager? So complicated. Or perhaps ./configure && make && make install? Way too long and difficult.
>99% of people
>ever using terminal
>99% of people
>ever using gnu/linux