Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 624 posts

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#81

Post by dikei »

minimaul wrote: post #74
YawningAngel wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely, `pacman -Syyuu` doesn't complete reliably without user intervention, which is far from ideal. I say this as an Arch user - the expectation that I'm going to manually attend to package upgrades in practice leads to me using outdated packages

I'm genuinely curious about this, as I see people say it a lot but it's not my experience at all. I have an Arch Linux desktop (KDE + AMD), I update it every few days, and it's always fine. I also have a shell VM that runs IRC etc that often isn't updated in months, and I run `pacman -Syyu` and everything works fine. I've never had the infamous 'Arch updates are unreliable' issue. Is it certain packages that are more…

Yeah, `pacman -Syyu` works fine most of the time, except when you use a lot of AUR `devel` packages, which can break because they often do not have strict dependencies definition.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#82

Post by scbrg »

colonwqbang wrote: post #26
londons_explore wrote: post #3

Can we go back to just shipping apt packages? They worked fine, and I don't feel like having multiple types of containers and update methods and mounted image file systems really made anyone's life better.

Building apt packages isn't the issue, libraries is. Debian ships very old libraries, forcing applications to run in docker. Or bring their own copies of system libraries. Look at Arch Linux, we just write a short AUR script and the package is integrated. Once the script is written, everyone can use it. This is possible because Arch always ships recent libraries.

Without having looked closer at how to build either of snap and flatpack; if you can static link or bundle libraries with your snaps/flatpack packages, what stops you from doing the same in a .deb?

It's just a convention not to, no? IIRC the Steam .deb comes with pretty much everything statically linked. Works fine.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#83

Post by dagw »

creshal wrote: post #34
colonwqbang wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building apt packages isn't the issue, libraries is. Debian ships very old libraries, forcing applications to run in docker. Or bring their own copies of system libraries. Look at Arch Linux, we just write a short AUR script and the package is integrated. Once the script is written, everyone can use it. This is possible because Arch always ships recent libraries.

Ubuntu has a much more aggressive 6 months release cycle, it's not nearly as outdated as Debian sometimes can be.

But that means I have to update my OS and my application when I want a new version instead of just my application. Say what you want about Windows, but I can download and run the latest version of all my applications on Windows 7 without it missing a beat.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#84

Post by bombolo »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #67
creshal wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of a distribution is that this job is done by the distributors, not the authors.

Hot take: package distributors are 'fake jobs' that don't need to exist, or exist only for the make-work of packaging. Tools like flatpak, snap, appimage, containerization, etc. have made the need for adapting software to different distributions unnecessary.

I don't want debian to be like the android app store, where there are thousands apps that work badly and overflow me with ads.

I much prefer the f-droid model, of having curated repositories to keep crap outside.

Also, I can't understand why people on the internet think that upstream developers are omniscient. They make lots of mistakes and errors. Distribute maintainers fix a lot of things, and send the fixes to the authors.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#85

Post by zelphirkalt »

noobermin wrote: post #28
snovv_crash wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

apt install firefox still works?

I think it does, why wouldn't it work? That's installing it via aptitude, not flatpak.

I think you now need to add a PPA in order to get new versions or ESR of FF on Ubuntu.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#87

Post by minimaul »

dikei wrote: post #81
minimaul wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm genuinely curious about this, as I see people say it a lot but it's not my experience at all. I have an Arch Linux desktop (KDE + AMD), I update it every few days, and it's always fine. I also have a shell VM that runs IRC etc that often isn't updated in months, and I run `pacman -Syyu` and everything works fine. I've never had the infamous 'Arch updates are unreliable' issue. Is it certain packages that are more…

Yeah, `pacman -Syyu` works fine most of the time, except when you use a lot of AUR `devel` packages, which can break because they often do not have strict dependencies definition.

AUR packages are not part of the distribution though, so that's understandable - they're explicitly user contributed packages and are very much "here there be dragons" and "if it breaks, you get to keep both pieces".

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#88

Post by bayesian_horse »

Klonoar wrote: post #51
wongarsu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original model is that software developers don't package their software for distributions at all, at best they provide helper scripts that the distribution maintainers can use to do that. That's why distributions are typically either giant volunteer-run organizations like Debian or companies like RedHat or Canonical.

This model doesn't necessarily work for software that developers don't want others shipping for them .

Or that distributions don't want to ship. Or don't want to ship/maintain as frequently.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#89

Post by chupasaurus »

wongarsu wrote: post #31
bayesian_horse wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are really saying is you want all software developers to publish Debian packages (no such thing as "apt" packages) compatible with your particular Debian distribution, even though they might be using a different Debian based distribution, a completely different altogether, maybe even a different architecture, even though that compatibility isn't their primary concern.

The original model is that software developers don't package their software for distributions at all, at best they provide helper scripts that the distribution maintainers can use to do that. That's why distributions are typically either giant volunteer-run organizations like Debian or companies like RedHat or Canonical.

> That's why distributions are typically either giant volunteer-run organizations like Debian or companies like RedHat or Canonical

Quite a few maintaining teams are the exact same people in Debian and Ubuntu.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#90

Post by bayesian_horse »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #67
creshal wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of a distribution is that this job is done by the distributors, not the authors.

Hot take: package distributors are 'fake jobs' that don't need to exist, or exist only for the make-work of packaging. Tools like flatpak, snap, appimage, containerization, etc. have made the need for adapting software to different distributions unnecessary.

There is a very good and strong use case for a "distribution" of packages working well together. But those packages need to be selected carefully.
Post reply on HN