this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2024
173 points (93.9% liked)

Linux

48395 readers
768 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Basically title.

I’m wondering if a package manager like flatpak comes with any drawback or negatives. Since it just works on basically any distro. Why isn’t this just the default? It seems very convenient.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Snoopy@jlai.lu 72 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

There is some drawback. The main one : app can't communicate with each other.

Example firefox and his extension keepass. As keepass can't communicate with firefox, you have to open both apps and switch their windows.

You can use flatseal to manage communication between apps but that's not an easy process and may prove a security issue if you don't understand the technical jargon.

[–] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 39 points 9 months ago (6 children)

You only need flatseal on GNOME. KDE has it baked into the settings

[–] Snoopy@jlai.lu 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Thank for the information. i didn't know since i use vanilla os :)

[–] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago

Kde has many things baked into the settings that gnome hasn't. GNOME is just more beautiful (and has PaperWM which is why I have to use GNOME)

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml 61 points 9 months ago (2 children)

1- It takes a lot of space. jUsT bUy a bIgGeR dRiVe --stfu I'm not going to spend money for you to waste it

1- a) Everyone assumes you're an American with 20Gbps symmetrical fiber optic. My internet can't handle 2+ Gb downloads for a fucking 50 Mb app bro

2- Duplicate graphics drivers. Particularly painful with Nvidia

3- It puts a lot of security work with distro library trees straight into the shitter

4- Horrendously designed system for CLI apps (flatpak run org.whocares.shit.app)

5- Filesystem isolation has many upsides for security but also it can cause some pain (definitely nitpicking)

[–] robojeb@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Where in America is there 20Gbps symmetrical fiber? Everywhere I know tops out at 1gbps if you are lucky that your ISP isn't shit, and lots of areas are still on slow cable.

In my area my options are 200mbps cable or 100mbps ADSL (which inexplicably costs more than the cable Internet)

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] shapis@lemmy.ml 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

All of this. Plus often it just doesn't work.

And no. I do not want to blind fiddle with the permissions to fix it.

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 53 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (6 children)

Yes, I love it and don't get me wrong but there are many downsides and they all result from poor planning and/or bad decisions around how flatpak was built. Here are a few:

  • Poor integration with the system: sometimes works against you and completely bypasses your system instead of integrating with it / using its features better. To me it seems more like the higher levels are missing pieces to facilitate communication between applications (be it protocols, code or documentation) and sometimes it is as simple as configuration;
  • Overhead, you'll obviously end up with a bunch of copies of the same libraries and whatnot for different applications;
  • No reasonable way to use it / install applications offline. This can become a serious pain point if you're required to work in air gapped systems or you simply want to level of conservation for the future - it doesn't seem reasonable at all to have to depend on some repository system that might gone at some point. Note that they don't provide effective ways to mirror the entire repository / host it locally nor to download some kind of installable package for what you're looking for;
  • A community that is usually more interested in beating around the bush than actually fixing what's wrong. Eg. a password manager (KeePassXC) and a browser (Firefox/Ungoogled) both installed via flatpak can’t communicate with each other because developers seem to be more interested in pointing fingers on GitHub than fixing the issue.

Flatpak acts as a restrictive sandbox experience that is mostly about "let's block things and we don't care about anything else". I don't think it's reasonable to have situations like applications that aren't picking the system theme / font without the user doing a bunch of links or installing more copies of whatever you already have. Flatpak in general was a good ideia, but the system integration execution is a shame.

[–] beejjorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The double-edged sword of isolation.

On the one hand, poor communication between apps and waste of storage.

On the other, relative safety from malicious applications, or from otherwise-safe applications built on top of a thousand libraries none of which have been audited by the dev.

I don't know how it's going to go down, but I suspect something will come along to address these issues and snatch the market away from Flatpak.

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

but I suspect something will come along to address these issues and snatch the market away from Flatpak.

I believe it could only be fixed by a team from GNOME or KDE, they're the one in a position to develop something like Flatpak but deeply integrated with the system instead of trying to get around it.

For what's worth Apple did a very good job when it came to the isolation and containerization of desktop applications, but again only possible because they control both sides.

Apple enforces a LOT of isolaton, they call it sandboxed apps and it is all based on capabilities, you may enjoy reading this. Applications get their isolated space at ~/Library/Containers and are not allowed to just write to any file system path they want.

A sandboxed app may even think it is writing into a system folder for preference storage for example - but the system rewrites the path so that it ends up in the Container folder instead. For example under macOS apps typically write their data to ~/Library/Application Support. A sandboxed app cannot do that - and the data is instead written beneath the ~/Library/Containers/app-id path for that app.

And here's how good Apple is, any application, including 3rd party tools running inside Terminal will be restricted:

I bet most people weren't expecting that a simple ls would trigger the sandbox restrictions applied to the Terminal application. The best part is that instead of doing what Flatpak does (just blocking things and leaving the user unable to to anything) the system will prompt you for a decision.

I believe this was the best way to go about things but it would require to get a DE team to make it in a cohesive and deeply integrated with the system. Canonical could do it... but we all know how Canonical is.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 44 points 9 months ago (2 children)

For me it's lacking in user friendliness. Go easy on the downvotes if I'm doing it the hard way.

  • Flatpaks aren't really single-executables. You have to use to the flatpak command to run them.
  • I can't just say flatpak run firefox, I have to use the full app-id which could be quite long.

Yes, I could make this simpler with scripts or aliases but how hard would it have been for Flatpak to automatically do this for me?

[–] Miyabi@iusearchlinux.fyi 15 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I'm using KDE and when I download a flatpak it automatically creates a .desktop file. I think gnome does this too if I'm not mistaken. I do have to restart or relogin for it to put the file there but that's not that bad IMO.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] danielfgom@lemmy.world 30 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's HUGE. That's the biggest downside for me. I'm always use a deb/native package first because they are way smaller.

[–] hornedfiend@sopuli.xyz 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Of course they are. they share dependencies with other software. flatpaks bundle all dependencies,which is great for sandboxing,even though some sort of break the rule and share some,they are still sandboxed.

Unless you "firejail" or "bubblewrap" your software, security is much better OOB for flatpaks.

[–] soFanzy@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's a myth. Security of flatpaks depends entirely on the given permissions, and since most flatpaks just set their own permissions on installation, or require filesystem access to work, there is no meaningful difference in security OOB.

[–] wisha@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

Flatpak apps cannot set their own permissions "on installation". If flatpak tells you some weather app uses only the network permission then that is all the app is going to get.

For an app to be able to change its own permissions, it first needs permission to the flatpak overrides directory. Any app that does this gets an "Unsafe" designation in gnome-software.

Also about most apps requiring filesystem access to work: I have 41 flatpak apps on my system (Silverblue so everything is flatpak). Only 6 have access to my home or Documents directory. (11 apps requested full filesystem or homedir permission, but 5 of these work perfectly fine after I turned off their permissions in Flatseal).

Notably, "large attack surface" apps like Thunderbird or Firefox don't have access to my Documents. File uploads and email attachments go through the file picker portals.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kugmo@sh.itjust.works 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (7 children)
  • overly verbose way to launch them in terminal
  • can sometimess not even respect your gtk/qt theming
  • sandboxing/permission system can lead to you trying to figure out which directory you need to give access to when you want to save file if it wasn't preconfigured
  • uses its own libraries and not system libraries, want to play the hit new AAA game with steam flatpak? get fucked it requires a mesa commit that was merged 8 hours a go and you're stuck on 23.0.4 and can't use the git release.

Flatpak probably has it's specific uses like trying to use one piece of proprietary software that you don't trust and don't want to give it too much access to your system, or most GUI software clients having an easy way to install Discord on your Steam Deck (no terminal usage, Linux is easy yay), but native packages 99% of the time work better.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] rotopenguin@infosec.pub 28 points 9 months ago

The worst part of flatpaks is that they don't get to see the actual path of files that they open. Instead, they get a /var/run/1000/blah proxy. The proxy is forgotten after you reboot, so any flatpak that memorized that path is holding a bunch of dead links.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 24 points 9 months ago

Startup time and disk space.

[–] SethranKada@lemmy.ca 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's great for user apps, gui apps, and sandboxing. It's terrible for cli apps, libraries, development, and integration.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] aberrate_junior_beatnik@midwest.social 20 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think its biggest weakness is also its biggest strength: isolation. Sometimes desktop integration doesn't work quite right. For instance, the 1password browser extension can't integrate with the desktop app when you use flatpak firefox.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jerrythegenius@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Some people don't like it because it uses a bit more storage and can start a bit slower, (I think) they can't be used for system packages, and I've also had some issues with theming

[–] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

This should be pinned somewhere https://blogs.gnome.org/wjjt/2021/11/24/on-flatpak-disk-usage-and-deduplication/?ref=ypsidanger.com

Edit: the speed shouldn't be a real issue. You may measure a difference but that's not an issue as it was with snaps until they improved upon it.

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Using flatpak on low end devices (like Linux phones), I can tell you from experience, the speed liss is noticeable. Specially for application startup. As is the resource overhead.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ouch@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

No proper estimate of download size.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

It ruins single source of truth for apps and their installed state. It hides installed state from standard enterprise tools.

[–] Ullebe1@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago

That seems like a shortcoming in those tools, that I'd expect them to fix as Flatpaks are pretty commonplace.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 14 points 9 months ago (6 children)

For me, the question is why I should add an extra layer of complexity. If the things I use already work well using apt, and if most things are bundled in the default distro install, then my life is already good.

This all depends on your software needs, if course. Some people are using a lot of new stuff, so the above setup leads to annoying situations.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Pantherina@feddit.de 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)
  • no OS level components
  • duplicate libraries as some core apps (editor, filemanager, Desktop) cannot be flatpaks (yet?)
  • old runtimes etc. dont force developers to keep them updated. Often thats because or 3rd party packagers though
  • complicated packaging, I heard that the Flatpak builder is better for certain languages.
  • theming issues I heard (on Fedora Kinoite Wayland it just works, and I can also force themes per app)
  • bad permissions by default (best we have though)
  • bad run commands (this could easily be fixed, and I have a script for it)

For OS components / packaging every part, Snaps may work, but for GUI apps they seem subpar and nobody really cares.

Nix may be way better for installing just anything compartimentalized, but there is no permission system (thats why packaging is easier).

But Flatpaks are really great overall, Bubblewrap, KDE Settings / Flatseal, Portals, official app support. Its really really important.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 13 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I’ve had my first downside with flatpak.

VSCode’s flatpak version won’t let you use certain packages because they’re installed on the system and flatpak is a sandbox with no access. You need to enable some stuff but I’m far too lazy to troubleshoot that shit.

I got the Snap version so I’m ready for the hate.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] clemdemort@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

IMO yes but it might not be an issue for you, flatpaks work like windows standalone executables where each app brings all their dependencies with them, the advantage is the insane stability that method provides, the downside is the huge size the app will ultimately take, flatpaks are compressed and they don't really bring all their dependencies with them (because they can share runtimes) but the gist of it is a flatpak is usually much heavier than a system (.deb .rpm .PKG) package.

If you are ok with tweaking I recommend nix pkgs as they work on any distro and only take slightly more space than system packages. I have a terrible connection and low disk space, flatpaks aren't something I can use on the long run.

Oh and if you're wondering flatpak >>>> snap > appimages (IMO)

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

Yes. It is not pacman

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 12 points 9 months ago

Why isn’t this just the default?

One may notice that for every new method, the old ways stay around, possibly forever. It is not the default because there were things that worked prior to flatpak. The distros that from before flatpak have likely added the capability, but won't likely change their default for another decade, or more.

[–] jro@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 9 months ago

the main drawbacks I see are related to the sandboxing of apps, e.g. that several firefox addons that I just, such as the KeePassXC connector don't work in flatpak packaged firefox, because they require native messaging support which is unavailable in flatpak. There is a three year old bug report on this at github, and an even older bug report in the Firefox bugzilla. Unfortunately, there seems to be no capacity to solve this or this is not a priority, although this problem affects quite a few users. I have similar issues with the Flatpak packages Nextcloud client: Do to the poor system integration, neither autostart works not integration with Nautilus or other file managers, unless you do some manual tinkering (which isn't particularly difficult, but with native packages it will just work™ out of the box.) These issues have been known for many years, yet there seems to be no activity to solve them.

[–] therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 11 points 9 months ago

They dont integrate well into your system like they should, (theming, bookmarks, storage, etc), and to fix that you gotta do some work arounds that should be done automatically

[–] art@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago (3 children)

There's still a few edge cases that Flatpak is not great for. The Flatpak version of Kdenlive video editor can't see Whisper, which it uses to generate subtitles. The Appimage and native builds work flawlessly.

I'm assuming these problems will be addressed eventually but it takes time.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kixik@lemmy.ml 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Bloated and unnecessary if freeSW or openSW. That's what system shared libraries are for. If sandboxing is a thing, then firejail is availble, which can be combined with apparmor if looking for extra MAC security.

[–] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It is the default on atomic distros. And many people who got to know flatpaks use it as a default on traditional installs as well.

But there are still bugs and quirks with some apps. Not all apps have all the functionality as a traditional install. E.g. dolphin or terminals.

It is up and coming and gradually replacing traditional installs. You rarely find an app that you can't install via flathub.

There are theming issues with older flatpaks.

Edit:

I have no idea how to view logs in the terminal with flatpaks.

You can't easily run flatpaks by their common known names. You have to use the reverse flatpak name which is annoying and difficult.

[–] someacnt_@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

I believe it's the packaging process. It favors the standatd procedure of builds, and does not take account of various build systems (Seems C-centered). Seems this is why many apps end up providing AppImages instead.

[–] reallyzen@lemmy.ml 9 points 9 months ago

All that was said here, plus sometimes they don't work. I've reported a bug where the kdenlive flatpak version doesn't render titles or fades - and that's on Debian Testing, Arch, and Asahi Fedora. Native version works perfectly, but forces me to download an untidy amount of KDE stuff on my gnome installs ; flatpak would've been a cool solution to that.

I am yet to report another where Ardour nukes pipewire, at least on Asahi, but on Arch it was misbehaving also. Native, distro-provided version works perfectly.

I don't trust flatpak because no one single publisher can test every possible config, and I'm afraid distros become "lazy" and stop packaging native versions of stuff since it's a lot of work.

[–] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Endlessly reading on social media that is not a good from Linux "gurus". LOL

It's been great for me, but I wish it had a official gui for permissions management.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Flat pack install OBS? works awesome! Try to install plug in afterward not so much.

[–] twoshoes@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I've used flatpak for a while because it's the default ob Fedoras GUI Software Center, but I've recently switched back to dnf and native packages where I can.

The thing is, that I have a shitty 500GB SSD with a shitty 50Mbit Internet connection (which is closer to 30Mbit because my house still has lead cables instead of copper). So downloading 300+ MB of libraries for a 2MB Program is just not feasible for me.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BaalInvoker@lemmy.eco.br 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

As everything in life, yes, there is downside. Major downside is that it can occupy more space in your hd or ssd.

However I think the downsides are not that bad to justify all the hatred some guys have.

Flatpak positive sides are way more relevant then the downsides

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gamma@programming.dev 7 points 9 months ago

Others have mentioned disk usage and desktop integration. There is some truth to them, but shared runtimes keeps disk uasge down (although worse than native apps). Desktop launchers now search /var/lib/flatpak/exports/share/applications by default, but I'm still having issues with themes in one or two niche apps.

Trust is the big one. The benefit of your distro's packages is that they are maintained by a limited number of maintainers. Flatpaks have a much, much larger number of maintainers, which is where sandboxing comes in. Flathub now marks apps with lax permissions as "potentially unsafe", which is a huge step in communicating this to the average user.

Most desktop apps can get away with having next to no access, as long as they support the appropriate XDG desktop portals.

Ultimately, your mileage will vary, as there are many classes of application which are ill-suited to being sandboxed. Program launchers, programming languages, IDEs, file managers are a few.

[–] burgersc12@mander.xyz 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

Take a look at this site that goes into the details of the shortcomings of Flatpak, its from 2020 but I'm sure some of this is relevant still

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›