this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
397 points (95.6% liked)

linuxmemes

21263 readers
506 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     

    Background-Story: I did a "flatpak update" on a remote client and every package wants the PW for downloading and for installing again. I had to enter the password like 30 times or more.

    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    Given the shortage of people working on FOSS apps, I'm all in for anything that makes their lifes easier, so tgey can focus on the programming part and don't have to care about packaging. That can be solved with community packaging like AUR, but that has it's own problems.

    [–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    But Flatpak is one of the technologies that explicitly has the developer deal with packaging, something they are usually quite bad at because they don't do it very often, unlike distro maintainers.

    [–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    Yes, but developers can create only flatpak, where they make sure it works and they officially support it, and then completely stop caring about other formats and community packages. Just like Bottles project does.

    [–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    where they make sure it works and they officially support it

    Citation needed

    completely stop caring about other formats and community packages.

    That seems to be the case every time developers package software in any way. Sometimes even if they don't package it at all.

    [–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

    I'll try to reword it so it's clearer what I meant: I think developers shouldn't have to maintain more than one package format, and I think flatpak is the best format to be the one supported by the developer officially. Many developers officially support only .deb for example.