197
What are your thoughts on Flatpak/Flathub?
(flathub.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
197 points (94.6% liked)
Linux
47764 readers
857 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
No. I'll use snaps before I start maintaining a bunch of aliases that I shouldn't have to. It's a flaw in flatpak.
Well okay. I agree that it's a flaw in Flatpak, but if you think adding a single line to your .bashrc is some kind of unbearable burden that you shouldn't have to endure and you're willing to make your own experience far worse just to avoid it, then I think you're being a bit silly. I mean, be as silly as you want. Don't let me tell you what to do. You are being silly though.
I'm making my experience much better actually? Stop justifying flatpak's flaws because you like flatpak. It's flawed. Deal with it.
I don't even like flatpak very much, I'm not currently using it at all, and I already agreed it was flawed right at the very start of the quote you cut off there. I was just trying to be helpful. Sorry. Won't happen again. If you want to make things hard for yourself and no one else as a weird self-defeating protest then don't let me stop you. Don't pretend I didn't do the thing I just did and you had to edit out of the quote though. That's a real dick move, frankly.
I'm sorry - but WTF? What part of me "doing something that is easier for me" also "making things hard for myself?" Talk about a "dick move"...
No snaps are insecure on other distros that Ubuntu, as they are only isolated using apparmor. Also they are nonfree by design, just no.
They're not insecure. No more so than when I install a package via apt. No more so than when I download some code and compile it. This is propaganda.
They are less secure than flatpaks and there was malware on that store
You think the unverified flatpaks which choose their own permissions are "safe"?
You have the option to add the verified subset only, and you can always check permissions before starting an installed app, and it will not start before.
I'm sure everyone does that.
Yeah with Snaps you also have unofficial packages, no apparmor at all and a mix of foss and nonfoss apps.
But with flatpak these things are accessible and Flatseal is very commonly used.
"Already perfect" vs. "Has the foundation to fix it easily" distros could easily allow to add the subset or improve the permission system.
Do... Do you think I'm claiming snaps are better or something? I'm saying they're much easier to use and I don't give a shit about walled-garden BS. I don't want my laptop to be like my phone. I want to install an application and I want it to work. Flatpaks are fine - they just made a really stupid decision about how to run them from the CLI which is 90% of the time where I launch programs from.
Do you have a better approach for running from CLI? Apps need exact names I guess, and the system is exact.
The way we've done it for like 30 years seems to work.
How would you prevent package duplicates when using flatpak and native?
The way it's always been done. Put them in different paths and set priority with the PATH variable.
Sandbox not working = insecure. Very simple
Indeed - if your understanding of "secure" is that simple then that definition works fine.
In the real world there is no such thing as "secure" and "insecure" - there are tradeoffs and levels of security.
Oh yeah for sure I’m just mentioning what it means in this context. Definitely means snap is more insecure off Ubuntu though.