I’d say the main bad part of systemd is how it’s used and now expected everywhere.

If you search for some Linux guides or install something complicated or whatnot, they always expect you to have systemd. Otherwise, you’re on your own figuring how things work on your system.

This shouldn’t really happen. Otherwise, yes, it’s great, it integrates neatly, and is least pain to use.

Thanks!

Lol

Interesting, thanks!

Guess it’s the same kinda thing as amd64 on Intel lol

Why does default config check Mozilla specifically?

{
"name": "generic-browser",
"user_agent_regex": "Mozilla",
"action": "CHALLENGE"
}

Guess that’s why I’ve seen Anubis check screen quite a few times.

Gigabyte - sure, but it’s not typical for a flatpak to bring so many heavy dependencies.

Huh?

Either it did something it shouldn’t, or the system updated Nvidia drivers every time for no apparent reason. I have an Nvidia GPU, running proprietary drivers, and haven’t ever witnessed anything of the kind.

Wow that’s actually big difference, thanks for bringing it up!

Good news, though, is that you are free to install Gimp as a native package, and use Flatpaks for the rest.

Yay!

Yay!

Can’t it automatically be renewed?

Please clarify, what option do you mean? Flatpaks are supported on any Linux system, it doesn’t matter what distro or hardware. Or if you mean sparing some megabytes - typically yes as well. The smallest amount of memory I’ve seen on a laptop is 32gb, and typically it’s no less than 250gb.

If it’s not present in you distributions’ app store, you can either enable it somewhere or download another app manager like Discover, GNOME Software, or pamac if you’re on Arch.

If installation of some app incurs a few gbs of downloads, it is likely that your system updates packages alongside installing your app. Typical Flatpak app takes 10-150 megabytes.

It would take 1,01gb

Dependencies typically take 5-80 megabytes of space.

Mostly because of detailed and easy permissions, and also because I have other distibutions on my other computers and want my programs to be consistent everywhere - same programs, same version.

Snap is cancer, and what Canonical does is insane.

In any case, it is unlikely someone will make an exclusive Flatpak for what doesn’t work inside Flatpak. But I understand it means a lot for user choice and ability to compile programs they way you want, so I fully support shipping Flatpaks alongside classical packages and source code.

All these applications will never work in flat pack.

They don’t have to! Flatpak doesn’t remove all other ways to install software. But for 95% of use cases, it will do just fine.

Firejail is good, but it only solves sandboxing part of the equation, and there’s so much more to Flatpaks than that. Also, it’s more painful to configure and is more sysadmin-oriented.

F I N A L L Y

Now tell me it supports IPv6 and I’ll be the happiest man alive

Permissions are also set by the packages developers

True, and I don’t think it is healthy not to let them to. But it would be nice to either have some vetting on the matter, or ask user about which permissions they agree for when they install Flatpak.

Appeared 2 years ago

Ого, то есть примерно когда я сам здесь очутился. Никогда не слышал о ру инстансах, хоть и искал. Теперь, кажется, нашёл)

Берёте человечка на борт? Не обещаю сделать Рекабу главным инстансом, но всегда полезно быть по обе стороны Чебурнета, а то последнее время с забугорными беды бывают.

I’m not saying Flatpak is perfect, but it appears to be the best we have.

I absolutely agree more needs to be done to explain permissions and have sane defaults. Flatseal in particular could introduce more warnings, and this is where non-technical users set their permissions.

In my experience, most Flatpaks do not request full home folder access by default, and making Flatpak access everything everywhere typically requires user intervention.

Native apps, meanwhile, just run with full system-wide access; I get it that they’re more vetted and more properly updated, but this is an unhealthy and insecure arrangement.

Fair criticism!

However, the extent of the damage is limited by flatpak and whatever permissions you have set, and, if I understand it correctly, you cannot attack one flatpak through the other unless they share access to some files.

Also, I haven’t seen this kind of attack in the wild (maybe I’m not informed enough?) as opposed to rogue maintainers injecting malware into packages.

On an unrelated note: apparently, there is finally some Russian Lemmy instance? That’s a welcome change.