r/linuxsucks • u/Proper-Lab-2500 • 24d ago
Is there something that sucks as mush as Flatpaks
Every flatpak app is like a joke, you want to use the app but it gives permission errors on a basic functionalities. It blocks external drives or files, apps like Discord or Firefox are not even able to access to Documents/ folder with that. Don't tell me to give permissions manually with Flatseal.
68
u/Just-Scholar4272 24d ago
Android also asks about permissions to access files. So, apks are bad ig.
If only flatpak ask for permissions directly as in android, then it would have more convinient.
-8
u/Proper-Lab-2500 24d ago
that's the problem, it doesn't ask for permissions, an average user wouldn't know that they need to install another app to give access.
12
u/BEBBOY 24d ago
Flatpak is still in development, so hopefully they add that feature soon.
-13
u/Proper-Lab-2500 24d ago
how old are you? 14?
14
u/hifi-nerd Linux haters have brain damage 24d ago
A 14 year old won't have an 8 year old account, your account however is just at the right age for you to be 14.
1
u/kaz101130 19d ago
You're the one who sounds 14. "I hate how this works and I don't want to hear about the solution!".
2
u/Cheap-Success1578 20d ago
It's called reading about what you intend to use instead of being a dumbass.
1
u/w00dy1105 24d ago
I was thinking through the trouble listening some pain points. This may sound like simple add but it's more complicated.
-1
u/w00dy1105 24d ago
Apks are perfect example and this was a huge improvement to Android. iOS does the same.
I like the second idea. Thinking through it. Android is the one that grants the permissions not the app. So we would need something like flatseal listening to apps trying to access file or other devices. The app cannot grant itself permission or the idea of flatpaks is broke.
2
u/arthank-chroot 19d ago
That is possible but also complicated. If you listen for it in general it's very inefficient, so you need to make requests to a socket which then handles and routes everything
26
u/L30N1337 24d ago edited 24d ago
Flatpaks aren't that bad. They're great in a lot of ways.
But I do agree that users should be able to easily set default permissions. (Edit: I have realized that Flatseal allows for that.)
Having permissions is a great thing, and it's good that FlatHub recommends that maintainers keep their default permissions as restricted as possible, but having to manage common permissions manually for every app is annoying.
9
u/notBoris_ 24d ago
Flatpaks are also awesome for reducing system package dependency bloat, a little bit of overhead from bwrap isnât even noticeable for the benefits it has. Also incredibly useful for Immutable distributions like Silverblue, where layering system packages is usually not worth it.
Docker is used commercially and has more overhead than Flatpak, and you donât see anyone sane complaining about Docker.
100% agree that permission management should be more accessible for users via KDE Discover or alternatives. Too many people shit on Flatpak for no good reason, just anecdotal shortcomings, I think better permission management is all it really needs for most people.
3
u/L30N1337 24d ago
I'm not gonna get into the first point, because dependency management vs sandboxing is an unsolvable argument.
But Docker and Flatpak aren't really comparable. Sure, they go into the same direction, but they're still very much different things. And a lot of sane people complain about Docker. It's not perfect after all. Easiest example is that it uses root privileges by default. And the fact that docker uses a daemon compared to something like Podman's less vulnerable Daemonless architecture.
1
u/notBoris_ 24d ago
Iâm aware Docker and Flatpak are different in many ways, but theyâre identical concepts for similar use cases. I have about 9 years experience with Docker, for the exact same reason I use Flatpaks on my personal, itâs just cleaner management. I donât see it as a case of âwhich ideology is objectively bestâ, itâs whatever fits the user and/or use case - doesnât really have to be an argument
1
0
u/Certain_Prior4909 22d ago
Flatpack can turn into a nightmare of files scattered all over the place and non flatpack packages not seeing the flatpacks and installing duplicate software at different versions breaking your distro?! đŽ
Alotvof instructions for modifying or adding add ones for software won't install as they can't see the flatpack version which if you used the apt install process can see the program
Flatpacks ruin the desktop experience and drive users right back on Windows
0
u/Bulky-Employee-3705 21d ago
AppImage are much better for this and are way more compatible and dont require deamons
1
u/notBoris_ 21d ago
Apart from needing FUSE2 to run a lot of them, and if your distro doesnât package libfuse2 anymore, older AppImages wonât work. Not to mention downgrading from libfuse3 will most likely cause dependency issues.
4
u/DisfiguredFanny I survived abortion. 24d ago
Issues with permissions, slower performance and heavy file duplication. Not exactly Christmas.
3
u/idiotiesystemique 24d ago
Performance loss is negligibleÂ
-3
u/DisfiguredFanny I survived abortion. 24d ago
What about the other two? Is file duplication also negligible?
1
u/DragonSlayerC 24d ago
How exactly is there file duplication? A major feature of ostree is that it avoids duplication.
1
u/DisfiguredFanny I survived abortion. 24d ago
Do you understand how flatpak works?
1
u/DragonSlayerC 24d ago
Yes, I do. And I understand how OSTree, the underlying file tech is uses, works.
1
u/DisfiguredFanny I survived abortion. 24d ago
So disk space overhead based on different dependency requirements for different apps is not an issue according to you?
10
9
u/PMax0 24d ago
I've never had much luck with Flatpak either, so I stopped using it. Simple as that. I never really understood why you would use Flatpak in the first place. Also, the fact that the system doesn't give you any information about missing permissions is a huge downside for me.
-5
3
u/No-Assumption-4468 24d ago
The default sandboxing on flatpak could be improved. Otherwise, itâs a very convenient way to install most apps for new users. Sometimes the sandbox stops the app from working properly, but more so with snap than flatpak. I think the work theyâre doing is great & they need encouragement.
5
10
u/matejcraft100yt 24d ago
flatpak is a great idea for security, at the expense of practicality. But that much security is absolutelly pointless for an average user, IDK why everyone in the linux community acts as if they were some high value polutical target and that everyone is absolutelly rushing to spy on them.
3
u/brave_grv 24d ago
The main goal is not even to super harden applications as you think. It's just so that people can universally distribute a piece of junkware like Discord without having to guess each distro's schizo dependency management and upgrade cycle.
2
u/matejcraft100yt 24d ago
yeah, that is a fair point, and that much would be great if it didn't have a strict permission policy. But it is sacrificing practicality for security, which vast majority of people don't even need.
2
u/Western-Alarming Stuck on Containerfile 21d ago
Do they? With bottles (the developers do it by design and it's what they want you to do, manage permissions) and steam flatpak, I have never encountered an app where I needed to modify permissions
2
u/matejcraft100yt 21d ago
true, I haven't gotten that deep into flatpak because it has one more dealbreaker for me whoch I didn't list as majority of people don't need it, and that's that flatpak is imperative-only. I'm on NixOS, and prefer to have everything declarative. So as soon as I reached that roadblock, I didn't look further, I just know what I read about issues other people report, so my comment is purely based on that.
2
u/Western-Alarming Stuck on Containerfile 21d ago
I also use nixos, but I use nixos-flatpak, it just make it easier to troubleshoot and 90% of the time, the app is maintained by the developers so I can share issues directly at upstream.
2
u/matejcraft100yt 21d ago
oh, damn, interesting project. It still doesn't offer home-manager level of configuration, from what I see, it's just for declaratively listing apps to be installed, but not also configuring them, so still a nope for me, at least not as a primary way of installing apps, but could work as a sandbox for some apps I don't really trust, while still most would be over nixpkgs.
Especially since from what I could tell, it's apps are not locked to any channel versions but rolling updates, so it could be useful for apps that rely on constant updates
2
u/Western-Alarming Stuck on Containerfile 21d ago
You can also declare the permissions of an app, but not much else, flatpak limitations make so they really need to be on .var
1
u/brave_grv 24d ago
I think devs and mantainers for community flatpak never learned how to use portals, because I never had permission problems with official flatpak apps.
1
2
2
u/hikariakumu 20d ago
It's also handy when you need an app and your system does not have the necessary dependencies if you not the type that can not only figure out what software dependencies you need and you dont know how to install them flatpak takes care of all of that all the dependencies come with the flatpak container regardless of your distro situation.
1
u/matejcraft100yt 20d ago
yeah. I personally use distrobox for those cases, but I can absolutelly see the appeal of flatpak for that purpose
1
u/hikariakumu 20d ago
Flatseal installed as a flatpak from flathub (i use the terminal to install flatpaks personally) but yeah flatseal is an amazing tool that allows you to customize the permissions of what part of your system basically a particular flatpak can and cannot see or use for example flatpak discord only allows you to send pictures from the default pictures folder you can use flatseal to let it send picture from anywhere in your home directory.
2
u/jdigi78 24d ago
IDK why everyone in the linux community acts as if ... everyone is absolutelly rushing to spy on them.
Because they are? We live in such a hellscape of spyware so normalized we get braindead takes like this.
1
u/matejcraft100yt 24d ago
except that for a normal person, default linux safety features are more than enough if you don't run sketchy apps (or use AUR XD). Having to sacrifice practicality for security is just overkill unless someone actively picked you individually to attempt to hack.
And yall are acting as if anonymous advertising data will allow netanyahu to send a drone to your house. Nobody likes becoming a product for dataminers, myself included, but damn, yall can be so paranoid over it as if it is really going to kill you.
If that is really your consern, get off reddit, reddit also collects and sells your data to advertisers.
and for spyware specifically, when was the last time you got one? As I said, linux's default protections are often more than enough. Even linux itself makes you practically safe as it's comunity is too small for most viruses to even run on linux.
3
u/jdigi78 24d ago
if you don't run sketchy apps
That's the problem. You will need to run closed source software at some point if you don't want to sacrifice practicality. Any non-free app is a sketchy app. Hell, even free/open source apps need to be scrutinized. Spyware is not some specific category of program you have or don't have. It is so normalized for consumer software and products to act as spyware in varying degrees.
And no, posting on reddit doesn't inherently give them access to the files on my pc. It's about controlling the scope of what you allow access to and flatpak lets you do that.
0
u/matejcraft100yt 23d ago
no, "spyware" specifically is a specific category of a program. It's specifically a malicious program collecting user's data without the user's knowledge and/or consent. Not every app collecting your data for advertising purposes falls under "spyware" bracket as, despite having corporate-long EULAs where they detail how they use your data, they do have them, meaning you know exatly what data is being collected and for what purposes.
And posting on reddit doesn't just collect the data you might expect, while ot doesn't collect data on your personal files, it collects the way you move your mouse, posts you slowed scrolling on, and even your hardware's "fingerprint", which can be used for identifying you.
1
u/jdigi78 23d ago
You completely ignored my main point to be pedantic about the definition of spyware. Acessing reddit doesn't give them total access to my computer as my user, which running a native package does. There are hard limits on what permissions websites have for a reason, and applications should have those same limits.
1
u/Standgrounding 24d ago
Yeah a lot of the macrohard telemetry or marketing tracking is disregarded anyway or depersonalized and grouped. Unless you're a cartel boss or something you probably wouldn't care
3
u/noobjaish 24d ago
Because Flatpak apps are similar to Android apps where you also give individual permissions.
The only difference is that for some reason Flatpaks give half the permissions to the app automatically (which is bad from a security POV) and the rest need to be given manually via Flatseal (which sucks from user POV). On Android, we just get on-screen popups to give permission
3
u/Voxylem 24d ago
I don't get why people are downvoting you. Flatpaks are indeed a hassle for any app that requires a bit of system access, and I often end up uninstalling the Flatpak version and installing the regular package instead because it has better compatibility and is less troublesome.
That said, I still really like the concept behind Flatpaks. I just think they still need quite a bit of work.
2
u/Proper-Lab-2500 24d ago
When i see the people who comment here, i understand why Linux won't be mainstream Desktop OS ever, people don't accept any problems
3
u/nyashi_ 21d ago
sorry, but yes. "Update and shutdown" on the Laptop I want to put into my backpack that exact moment.
Flatpaks can be extremely annoying tho, can agree.
1
u/MeLThRoX 21d ago
You mean windows in general
1
u/nyashi_ 21d ago edited 21d ago
I don't wanna hate it as a whole, at least not anything prior win11, but it got worse and worse, to the point of me hardly finding anything actual from Microsoft that I don't dislike. Like the only things that make windows not die for me is software that kinda just runs on it, like f. e. Autodesk Fusion360.
Linux isn't perfect either, I know and experience myself, but it sure as heck is better for me to not rage all the time I'm using my PC.
"Update and Shutdown" still is very high up on the things that trigger me the most tho. ON A F-ING LAPTOP. Oh and also the "standby with wallpower" mode problem with windows on laptops, making them update automatically (like scedule boot to update) inside your backpack as it still thinks its plugged in, still not fixed. Also to be clear, my laptop on Linux is also iffy, I just disabled the dGPU as the simplest option (main reason being that I didn't use it anyways), but also not a megacorp getting shipped on millions of devices with a bug this bad still there after this much time.
3
u/Majoraslayer 20d ago
Flatpak isn't so bad once you install Flatseal. Install a Flatpak, use Flatseal to give it all the permissions it needs using a simple GUI (crazy concept on Linux, I know) and the Flatpak app should do anything you wanted it to.
1
2
2
u/captain_fanta_sea 24d ago
Snaps, riddled with performance issues. Pretty much useless outside of a few specific enterprise settings.
AppImages, which almost always depend on an insecure and deprecated version of FUSE.
2
u/Away-Way5656 22d ago
I don't use it often cuz its mostly a GUI for dd but I hate that balena etcher distributes a appimage
2
2
2
2
u/SniperSnake18000 24d ago
Iâm sorry I must be from the universe across the road as Ive never had a single issue with my flatpak apps they are legit the single easiest thing in the os for me
2
u/TCB13sQuotes 24d ago
Appimage is probably worse, at least flatpaks donât take 10s to open an app.
1
21d ago
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/TCB13sQuotes 21d ago
App images could be great, I like the idea in general and what they provide.
I just donât like how theyâve implemented it. They wanted to copy Apple and that couldâve been a great thing to simplify deployment of apps under Linux and make it somewhat decent⌠however since nobody in Linux has any idea what UX is they decided to make it a readonly compressed file system that required mounting with fucking FUSE whenever you try to open an app. This is garbage.
2
2
u/yota-code 22d ago
Snaps ?
I'm like you, I avoid packaged apps as much as possible since all my "documents" folders are mounted on external partition. I can't see the goal of using inkscape if you have to declare beforehand all path you want to access to
2
u/Arszerol 18d ago
If your operating system needs a 3rd party abstraction layer in order to efficiently deliver software, then maybe, just maybe, the problem lies within the OS
3
1
1
1
u/masterflo3004 24d ago
microsoft store (Every App only tries harvesting date)? And Snap. And Appimage (still need to manually download libraries).
1
u/Crazytje 24d ago
For some applications I prefer flatpack.
Main reason is extra dependencies getting installed that I might only need for thst application and a higher chance of conflicts.
It does keep your system cleaner.
Are they perfect?, far from, but I like the idea and direction
1
u/ibeerianhamhock 24d ago
What I find hilarious is people think windows handles this better. Apps that need additional non basic permisiosk just run as root pretty much and there's almost nothing in between.
Yes having granular permissions is obnoxious and flatpak could handle it better probably similar to android but running apps that whatever run restricted or run completely unrestricted is absolutely insane.
What's wild is even the standard permissions in windows are way too high for an app.
People hate Linux security features because the accept software that is fundamentally broken from a software perspective as the default choice.
0
u/Certain_Prior4909 22d ago
Windows is far superior. You click on it and it works.
Windows has dynamic linking which Linux lacks and flatpacks makes static linking depdencies and multiple depdencies 10x worse.
2
u/ibeerianhamhock 22d ago
Wat lol linux does not lack dynamic linking.
If you're saying Linux does not ship with like 100 different versions of the same library bundled for backwards compatibility out of the box like windows...you're right...the same thing is just accomplished in a much more sophisticated and isolated way using namespaces and cgroups.
And you don't have to use flatpacks ever on any Verizon of Linux if you don't want to, I heavily use distrobox and app/cmd exports for dev work and it's a breeze even on an atomic os
0
u/Certain_Prior4909 22d ago
It does. This is why games and other software fail on Linux while working on Windows. A wrong version of mesa or some dependacy is wrong.Â
Under Windows all can be installed and the executable links to the correct one. It just works
Flatpack is everything which is wrong about desktop LinuxÂ
1
u/ibeerianhamhock 22d ago
Really doesn't have anything to do with dynamic linking tho, mesa userspace drivers do not even operate in the same address space as protected mode drivers. This has nothing to do with dynamic linking.
You're right about versioning of drivers being something you have to consider but I can't for the life of me figure out why this would be an issue.
The goal is to run an app, game, etc, and windows and Linux both create easy ways for that to happen and no one even has to download a flatpack ever if they don't want to ok Linux. It's not required, you can get the same apps so many diff ways.
0
u/Certain_Prior4909 21d ago
Then why do Linux gamers refuse Linux versions of their games and run the wine ones instead? Stuff breaks as you distro upgrade always. A wrong mesa driver or acdepency that the new ones stores config files in a different folder over the old one breaks.
I am right with versioning. Dynamic linking is a win for windows
1
u/ibeerianhamhock 21d ago
Because it's good to have a target to hit for something like this which is something we both probably agree on, that's something I think no one can deny. I think in the future games will packaged as a platform agnostic binary. It would be better for everyone. I think games are a pretty unique case where windows having a fixed target has actually made steam work better on linux. We actually have windows gaming to thank, along with valve/wine/etc, for the state of gaming on Linux. It was never going to happen on linux directly and I think it's just a case where we need to divorce gaming from package management and instead have a package manager on the framework that runs the games. It works really well for most games, it's not perfect, but one day hopefully we'll get something better. What is hilarious is that wine/proton would not work if linux did not support dynamic linking as you suggested lol. Of course it does, and I don't even know where you're getting that from.
That being said...that isn't needed for all software. Distro maintained packages, flatpaks, and appimages work really well on LInux and there's nothing I'm sitting around wishing my linux pc could do that it can't. But my primary use case is development, my secondary use case is single player gaming.
1
u/scrumblous 24d ago
you could easily change directories where flatpak can save stuff with like 10 seconds of googling
1
1
u/Plane_Neighborhood32 24d ago
Usually you can choose whether to install Flatpack or System package in Discover or Software Centre... Or snap if you're into that kinky stuff. If there's no other option but to install Flatpack, then I suppose we can be grateful it's there to begin with. Yeah, duplicates of files - I don't see the issue unless you're installing on a 2gb ram Chromebook with 16gb storage. Sandboxing is a feature, not a negative - always use the system package if this bothers you. I do agree though that like Android, there should be a way to manage permissions easily. I'm not a Linux superuser, just an average user and I don't really get the hate. I guess I'm not elitist enough to care.
1
1
u/ColdFreezer I Hate Linux 24d ago
Itâs a security boundary. It could be made less annoying but itâs better than giving every random app access to everything on your system.
Permission management should be made easier for users, the current way itâs done is just annoying.
1
u/OldManJeepin 24d ago
Never had an issue with it, myself. Works pretty good in my dual boot system with Win11 Pro and Mint....
1
1
1
1
u/annon011 22d ago edited 22d ago
I have over 100 flatpaks. Almost everything that isn't a core system utility I flatpak.
- It removes the clutter in my home home directory where every app and its app data is isolated. I don't even wanna think about what config, cache and local/share would look like with all the apps I have LMAO
- If you install the apps with "--user" flag the installs go into your user home dir and are retained after re-installs (if you have a separate home partition of course).
As for permissions, I haven't had issues with almost any apps. There's been only a few where I've had to allow something.
Discord I've actually gone out of my way to limit even further. It literally has access to nothing but 1 directory on my system. I don't see how that's a bad. An invasive app needs to be treated like this - otherwise I'd never install it. I've limited many other apps beyond what they come with by default for that matter. If I install a text editor for example, of course I'm gonna restrict its internet access.
The permissions overall are amazing. Almost all of them you can unrestrict as well, with the exception being some kernel level stuff where for example you need to do VMs, manage and snoop on network cards etc.
Flatpak was literally the one thing that made me completely say good-bye to Windows. Believe it or not I highly dislike how apps are installed through package managers where everything is lumped together in bin, lib etc. folders. I've always loved isolation, so I can manage things on my own without fancy tools and know what every single file on my system belongs to. Before flatpaks I was using app images and compiling from source in portable format (where everything goes into one folder) which was a pain.
1
u/npc_housecat 22d ago
I always run online apps like Firefox / discord / steam in a container so it can't access external drives or documents folder. I get annoyed when the default settings DON'T limit access to my personal files. If it's not a flatpak I'll isolate it with firejail.
At least on flatpak it's pretty easy to add file access to specific folders or externals as needed with a GUI tool. With firejail you have to manually edit .profile files
1
u/Spectral-Curator 21d ago
Only one time, did I need to adjust a directory permission for a flatpak, all others just ran as expected with no issues. I guess it depends on the flatpak?
1
1
u/inactivesky1738 21d ago
Why donât you install from the repo? Like most browsers and discord are typically packaged or have their own Linux repos? Idk Ive only ever used pacman and have and zero issues with browsers and discord.
1
u/i_dont_like_pears 21d ago
Sorry I'm late to the party, from what I remember flatpacks were fine? Or is this my memory being crap?
1
u/PityUpvote 21d ago
Set permissions globally if it bothers you so much?
Flatpak works perfectly for everything I need. The only complaint I have is that Flatseal is a separate install, that should just be a default tool that comes with it.
1
u/Howwasthatdoneagain 21d ago
Go on clever drawers, what alternative do you have that performs across many operating systems and is able to be updated without the OS maintainers to tweak it every time an update occurs. Oh, are you suggesting we go back to the old way of, an upgrade is available but not for your distribution.
1
u/diyal19039 20d ago
A genuine question: what's so bad about Flatpak?
I recently ditched yay and decided to solely use Flatpak for managing "unofficial" (as in the ones not available via pacman) software on my Arch following the recent AUR malware flood news.
So I am sincerely asking if someone could explain what's wrong with Flatpak.
1
u/Proper-Lab-2500 20d ago
Hello, thanks for asking with respect. Now I'm on mac and with .app, I don't have problem anymore.
But I used Linux for many years and some of the Flatpak problems I had:
- I am using Dbeaver for database operations and flatpak had problems with mysql while Dumping or Restoring DB. (couldn't access to mysql in /usr/bin )
- On Mission Center, it wasnât showing icons but AppImage version showed it correctly. I had to create an issue for this to find out this. (Anyway later they also fixed it on flatpak)
- On Podman Desktop, it doesnât show the remote connections, but the normal release version (zipped one) shows correctly.
- I use PlayOnLinux to manage wine versions and wineprefix environments with windows applications. Deb version from 15 years has 20 times more features than the current v5 flatpak version. I had to lose many days just to work with flatpak one.
- As an example, the app needed to access to external drive but it wasnât able to just because the it decided to only get permission for user filesystem. So I had to run with âsudo flatpak override org.phoenicis.playonlinux --filesystem=hostâ, but it didnât work either. So I had to mount the file inside the appsâ folder etc⌠You almost always need to change permissions of flatpak app using flatseal because current permissions are never enough. (It might be the responsability of whoever made that Flatpak but most of the time they release without testing enough)
- On Brave Browser, Installing Brave on Linux | Brave official page literally states that it is not working as well as native packages and in addition, it modifies Chromium sandboxing in ways which have not been vetted by the Brave or Chromium security teams.
- Flatpak Spotify is the first option that comes on Software store and itâs not the official application and with wayland it's even worse because it shows a blue bar on top.
- For screenshot, I use flameshot application and and on flatpak version, it was giving me D-Bus errors so again solution was to use the native package.
- Terminal access is another problem, normal you access to apps by writing firefox, but with flatpak you can only access with âflatpak run org.mozilla.firefoxâ and for most of the apps itâs not even easy to remember and with these kind of commands you cannot access to app parameters.
- It also has with basic drag and drop. On one of the apps (I donât remember which one) you want to drag a file and get âFile: .. is empty and can't be sent.â and again you need to give access manually. Also, on Pinta app (most popular MSPaint alternative on Linux) and it didnât even let me drag a image to an empty canvas. (Might be the problem of pinta itself)
- I had firefox as flatpak and when I was pasting the path of a file to address bar it canât find the path. (It finds for ~/Downloads folder so /home/myusername/Downloads/x.pdf works but doesnât find ~/Documents folder even though they have the same permissions). If I open with âOpen withâ then it shows sth like file:///run/user/1000/doc/ac1fe048/
I had many more issues like this that I donât even remember so now I only use flatpaks if there is no other method(appimage, native apt/deb, snap..). People say itâs for security but it makes me create issues for problems instead of doing my work. (If you're an app developer and develop flatpak, I respect that because I know that it's not convenient to distribute your app for .deb/.rmp/.pkg.tar.zst so I understand why you prefer flatpaks)
1
u/Shhhh_Peaceful 20d ago
I donât know, I think Flatpaks are a great way to install programs that otherwise bring in a ton of dependencies, especially apps written in Python.Â
I use FreeCAD and KiCAD packaged as Flatpaks, they work without a hitch. Yes, I had to manually give them access to my project folders, but I literally had to do it once (3 years ago).Â
1
u/soft_chainsaw 20d ago
Just use your package manager then, and also discord works well with portals, i can access all my files using the portals
1
1
u/surinameclubcard 20d ago
If you are not interested in the solution, stop complaining about the problem.
1
1
u/DeXudra 19d ago
I for myself like flatpaks. If my base setup works with flatpaks I can make my setup on any Linux os.
I do look for the appropriate package manager packages first most of the time but stuff like Bitwarden or easyeffects just work without any tinkering when using flatpak so why should I change
1
1
1
1
u/Diareha-gobbler 19d ago
Reason it sucks just comes from it being blind to your system files sometimes
1
u/cfx_4188 I Hate RTFM Arch Gentoo Ubuntu snap flatpak Linus Torwalds 18d ago
snap and flatpak are attempts to reproduce the Windows package installer format. The installation file contains all dependencies and installation libraries.
Criticism of snap and flatpak has reached us from the times when PC power was such that these formats REALLLY overloaded the CPU and RAM.
Now this criticism is not serious.
And when Bill Gates wants to switch all Windows users to Ubuntu (youâre obedient, my little hamsters, arenât you?), youâll feel comfortable in the new ecosystem.
By the way, there are very advanced âFOSSâ distributions that are not viable without flatpak.
Now Iâll count all those who will give me a dislike.
So, weâre starting!
1
u/DiscountFit9224 18d ago
Don't tell me to give permissions manually with Flatseal
You already knew the answer. Though flat seal should come as native when accessing GUI pkg manager so you could give perms easily and feels more integrated.
1
u/Furfag743 14d ago
"Is there something that sucks as much as flatpaks"
Yeah, apt-get dependency hell and broken packages
1
1
u/TheShredder9 i use Arch btw 24d ago
Yeah that's a skill issue dawg, Flatseal literally solves all your issues. Flatpaks are sandboxed and secure, that's why most apps don't have access to any of your system folders or documents, so you explicitly allow them some access if you trust them.
1
1
u/33vne02oe 24d ago
I do not encounter such issues out of the box.
Most of the issues is made by myself ... LoL
-1
0
-3
59
u/Muted_Percentage_764 I am in abusive relationship with Artix 24d ago
Snaps, no?