>>108906172Not entirely because of permission issues, but I've been growing anxious about unverified Flatpaks that aren't distributed by the developer.
>>108906172flatpack? i just double click the executable bro what kind of an operating system did not solve basic software installation yet?
>>108906172OBS
>>108906245Even if you don't use a package manager, the software still needs to install dependencies. Unless the program you're installing is very simple, it will not be just a single executable - unless it has been statically compiled, in which case it will take a FUCKTON of space on your disk.
>>108906274>it will take a FUCKTON of space on your diskgigacope, dependancy hell is worse than a few mb extra for each software that just works
>>108906279Sure bro make a Linux From Scratch where every single binary is statically compiled. Then come back and tell me how much space it used :^)
>>108906241Same. I wonder how the fuck is that possible. Basically anyone can do that. Containerized malware does not sound too scary until you realize it has access to whatever your containerized app was supposed to have access to.
>>108906172>>108906241What are the permission issues ?
>>108906241Thankfully Mint disables unverified Flatpaks by default, you have to opt-in in the settings to install them.
>>108906241Why? The manifest & commits are all public & viewable on Github
>>108906322lmao so people cant install chrome on linux from an repo?
>>108906329...and under the flathub account. But they (as most people) are retarded and think that these are some obscure schizo pet projects hosted on their private vps.
>>108906241>unverified Flatpaks that aren't distributed by the developerThat shit should not be allowed in the first place.
>>108906318https://flatkill.org/
>>108906395isnt it the same for every app format? even from apt, apps still have access to homeand snap is just worse
>>108906511Windows already fixed that issue with restricted permissions to program files and to appdata
steam
>>108906172Apparently browsers? I've been too lazy to move to nixpackages or homebrew for them.
>>108906241I started packaging my own flatpaks for the packages not on flathub or in official repoat this point its just for easy sandboxing but not that difficult to do
>>108906172I have never installed a flatpak, unless that happens behind the scenes on some distro and I didn't notice.
>>108906395portals fix that problemunfortunately some apps ship with old frameworks that don't have good portal support but you can always manually tune it, just tedious
>>108906172I don't use flatpak unless absolutely necessary as a last resort. Flatpak is bloat.
>>108906172File managers and terminals
>>108906172> FlatpakI don't use garbage like that at all
I actively avoid Flatpak, there's just no benefit to using it
>>108906241>package maintained by a community maintainer:O>flatpak maintained by a community maintainer >:(
>>108906172
>>108906322>>108906241"verfied" just means that a developer is ok with it being distributed, it doesn't mean that a developer does the distribution.It's a worthless label. At the end of the day, your software comes from a random dude on github, who has no other history whatsoever and whos name you don't know.. but he sent an email "hey, is it ok to add this to flatpak?" to a dev once five years ago.
>>108906172Lot's of cope in this thread. I'm up to my eyeballs in Flatpaks. It's all I use. The great thing as well is I can just toss them and it's as if my system was never touched.
>>108909004>bash: flatpak: command not found:)
>>108906395>Almost all popular applications on flathub come with filesystem=host, filesystem=home or device=all permissions, that is, write permissions to the user home directorydevice=all doesn't grant access to the home directory and Steam doesn't have permission for the whole home folder so that website should get their facts right if they want to shit on the only user-friendly sandboxing solution on Linux.
>>108906241How do you determine which flatpaks are from the developer and which aren't?
>>108906274>fuckton of space on your diskThis isn't the 90s anymore grandpa. Storage is cheap. We have 2tb ssd's now.
>>108909656>Storage is cheap
>>108906172Faugus Launcher, unironically. Because we all know the use case for Faugus, but the Flatpak permissions are so awful, that I just don't install it. Like if you publish a flatpak, you should be forced to give every single permission it needs, instead of the whole fucking home/host path.And I don't even want to tweak the permissons, because the dev clearly doesn't give a shit about the flatpak. It's still a VERY good application, but the permissions are way too permissive.
>>108911003>didn't buy TBs of storage before prices spikedPoor people shouldn't use computers. You had years to do that.
>>108906395This old ass spam website. Yes, they have a point, but compare a flatpak with ""PROPER"" permissions to an App, that you install with sudo into your root filesystem. There is a reason why iOS, MacOS, Android, ChromeOS and every other company backed OS that is sold to customers is sandboxed by default.
>>108909522>com.discordapp.DiscordThe syntax sucks, but it works.
>>108906172Waterfox and keepassXC.
>>108906172I install whatever the fuck i want to, in my configuration i have both flatpak binaries and their user generated data on a dedicated, separated partition (with strictier fs mount options), plus i micromanage their bubblewrap permissions, basically veting everything unless I (and not the flatpak conf) need it to access something specific out of their cuck confinement.
