3 ms·

I don't want to be negative but Flatpak is a container runtime specifically designed for GUI apps and Docker isn't.

by wmf 2y ago

razemio 2y ago
I think this depends on your use case. As a dev I would take dockerized gui applications over flatpak all day, as it allows me to quickly add additional packages and networking for example. The possibilities would be endless while all can reside in a small docker-compose stack right in the repository.
- mariusor 2y ago
  You can always build your own flatpak image with whatever else you need. I think the only thing you're losing is the layered architecture of OSI images.
- kccqzy 2y ago
  Your perspective is understandable. When you say "as a dev" it sounds like you really want to be a docker dev but not a flatpak dev: you are used to writing docker files and docker-compose files but you are not interested in writing flatpak apps. That's okay because docker is focused on developers whereas flatpak is more user-centric.
  - razemio 2y ago
    I am not (only) a docker dev but a developer using docker tooling for my development environment. Feature wise docker and flatpak are not even comparable IMO. Just wanted to make a point, why flatpak is not (yet) an option for some people, and projects like this are very welcome.
ximm 2y ago
This is a nicely written description of some of the things that flatpak does under the hood for people who know docker. Of course, flatpak does a lot more (e.g. filtered dbus access). I personally think that flatpak is not the end of history and we should continue to experiment with different approaches.
dylan-m 2y ago
Another thing to look at is bubblewrap (https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap), which is what implements the sandboxing in Flatpak. It's handy if you want to run a command from your host in a particular sandbox as kind of a one-off, or if you just want to understand more about how that sandboxing works :)
dnndndej 2y ago
But doesn't flatpack offer much deeper system Integration by default? Like being able to access the home directory by default and being able to talk to dbus? To me flatpack looks like a way achieve application compatibility not security
- TingPing 2y ago
  By default a flatpak has no permissions. It exposes ways to add permissions both statically and dynamically. So security varies.

I don't want to be negative but Flatpak is a container runtime specifically designed for GUI apps and Docker isn't.

by wmf 2y ago

I don't want to be negative but Flatpak is a container runtime specifically designed for GUI apps and Docker isn't.

I think this depends on your use case. As a dev I would take dockerized gui applications over flatpak all day, as it allows me to quickly add additional packages and networking for example. The possibilities would be endless while all can reside in a small docker-compose stack right in the repository.

mariusor 2y ago
You can always build your own flatpak image with whatever else you need. I think the only thing you're losing is the layered architecture of OSI images.
kccqzy 2y ago
Your perspective is understandable. When you say "as a dev" it sounds like you really want to be a docker dev but not a flatpak dev: you are used to writing docker files and docker-compose files but you are not interested in writing flatpak apps. That's okay because docker is focused on developers whereas flatpak is more user-centric.
- razemio 2y ago
  I am not (only) a docker dev but a developer using docker tooling for my development environment. Feature wise docker and flatpak are not even comparable IMO. Just wanted to make a point, why flatpak is not (yet) an option for some people, and projects like this are very welcome.

ximm 2y ago

This is a nicely written description of some of the things that flatpak does under the hood for people who know docker. Of course, flatpak does a lot more (e.g. filtered dbus access). I personally think that flatpak is not the end of history and we should continue to experiment with different approaches.

dylan-m 2y ago

Another thing to look at is bubblewrap (https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap), which is what implements the sandboxing in Flatpak. It's handy if you want to run a command from your host in a particular sandbox as kind of a one-off, or if you just want to understand more about how that sandboxing works :)

dnndndej 2y ago

But doesn't flatpack offer much deeper system Integration by default? Like being able to access the home directory by default and being able to talk to dbus? To me flatpack looks like a way achieve application compatibility not security

TingPing 2y ago
By default a flatpak has no permissions. It exposes ways to add permissions both statically and dynamically. So security varies.