5 ms·

Recently Flathub was posted here on HN. It looks like a decent attempt to inject some life into desktop Linux. https://flathub.org https://flathub.org

by city41 5y ago

smoldesu 5y ago
Flathub is it's own can of worms, as is Flatpak. There's a number of "next-gen" Linux users who love to demonize people who are critical of new tech like Wayland, GNOME and the like, but I'm the most critical towards Flatpak. Linux doesn't need more hack-y ways to get bad software running: we need more robust ways to get software running well. Flatpak is a shotgun approach to getting an app working, where someone said "your app doesn't run? let's just containerize it!" Needless to say, this is not a great idea in concept, practice, or it's current execution. I think a much better idea would have been to copy what NixOS does. Yes, your developers have to do a little more work, but you can finally have reliable builds, fix your dependency graph, and actually run your software natively. I'd love for a more uniform "AppImage" style of installation, but Flatpak is definitely not it. Too many sharp edges.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  Containers are a native technology in Linux. The issue with Flatpak is that it comes with its own bundles for underlying desktop components that add some duplication and overhead (in memory use and disk space) compared to what's provided out of the box, but that's a requirement if you want genuinely portable applications.
  - criddell 5y ago
    Which points to the root problem - unlike macOS and Windows, Linux has no native GUI. Ultimately, I don't think the options that you get with Linux help it.
    - deno 5y ago
      Linux is a kernel—like NT or Darwin. Better comparison is with KDE and GNOME and they both have native UI toolkits as well as look&feel and design guidelines. Only major Linux-based system without native UI is Chrome OS, but that’s rather intentional.
- codedokode 5y ago
  NixOS might solve dependency issues but it doesn't provide isolation. Currently in a one-user system every app has access to all of user's data and hardware serial numbers. And Linux was not built with a principle of minimum privileges in mind, so for example a PDF viewer can read browser cookies or stored passwords.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    This is a problem that also exists in many Flatpaks: plenty of applications get carte-blanche access to the OS filesystem, and "breaking out" with symlinks or chained attacks has proven trivial over the years. There are so many of these exploits that they simply stopped patching them after a certain point. Isolation is much better provided by other tools like Firejail.
criddell 5y ago
I don't think yet another way to install things is going to suddenly trigger a wave of new, native desktop Linux development.
rubyist5eva 5y ago
Flatpak itself is kinda jank though, thing like: asking for root multiple times during installation, spewing out a bunch of CLI output I don't care about, not having ways to configure app permissions without using Flatseal. I'll probably catch a lot of hate for this, but Snap is a much smoother experience and is well integrated with Ubuntu, even if the snap store kinda sucks...gnome software is worse.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  Snap truly is awful. That's why I'm completely dumbfounded that the Flatpak developers found a way to make package management somehow more of a hassle...

Recently Flathub was posted here on HN. It looks like a decent attempt to inject some life into desktop Linux. https://flathub.org https://flathub.org

by city41 5y ago

Recently Flathub was posted here on HN. It looks like a decent attempt to inject some life into desktop Linux. https://flathub.org https://flathub.org

smoldesu 5y ago

Flathub is it's own can of worms, as is Flatpak. There's a number of "next-gen" Linux users who love to demonize people who are critical of new tech like Wayland, GNOME and the like, but I'm the most critical towards Flatpak. Linux doesn't need more hack-y ways to get bad software running: we need more robust ways to get software running well. Flatpak is a shotgun approach to getting an app working, where someone said "your app doesn't run? let's just containerize it!" Needless to say, this is not a great idea in concept, practice, or it's current execution. I think a much better idea would have been to copy what NixOS does. Yes, your developers have to do a little more work, but you can finally have reliable builds, fix your dependency graph, and actually run your software natively. I'd love for a more uniform "AppImage" style of installation, but Flatpak is definitely not it. Too many sharp edges.

zozbot234 5y ago
Containers are a native technology in Linux. The issue with Flatpak is that it comes with its own bundles for underlying desktop components that add some duplication and overhead (in memory use and disk space) compared to what's provided out of the box, but that's a requirement if you want genuinely portable applications.
- criddell 5y ago
  Which points to the root problem - unlike macOS and Windows, Linux has no native GUI. Ultimately, I don't think the options that you get with Linux help it.
  - deno 5y ago
    Linux is a kernel—like NT or Darwin. Better comparison is with KDE and GNOME and they both have native UI toolkits as well as look&feel and design guidelines. Only major Linux-based system without native UI is Chrome OS, but that’s rather intentional.
codedokode 5y ago
NixOS might solve dependency issues but it doesn't provide isolation. Currently in a one-user system every app has access to all of user's data and hardware serial numbers. And Linux was not built with a principle of minimum privileges in mind, so for example a PDF viewer can read browser cookies or stored passwords.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  This is a problem that also exists in many Flatpaks: plenty of applications get carte-blanche access to the OS filesystem, and "breaking out" with symlinks or chained attacks has proven trivial over the years. There are so many of these exploits that they simply stopped patching them after a certain point. Isolation is much better provided by other tools like Firejail.

criddell 5y ago

I don't think yet another way to install things is going to suddenly trigger a wave of new, native desktop Linux development.

rubyist5eva 5y ago

Flatpak itself is kinda jank though, thing like: asking for root multiple times during installation, spewing out a bunch of CLI output I don't care about, not having ways to configure app permissions without using Flatseal. I'll probably catch a lot of hate for this, but Snap is a much smoother experience and is well integrated with Ubuntu, even if the snap store kinda sucks...gnome software is worse.

smoldesu 5y ago
Snap truly is awful. That's why I'm completely dumbfounded that the Flatpak developers found a way to make package management somehow more of a hassle...