Its even worse when you force Firefox to use wayland its icon doesn’t even show.

Edit: Oh since everyone now is confused; I only have the flatpak version of Firefox installed yet it doesn’t use the pinned icon and doesn’t even use the firefox icon under wayland at all.

        • xyz@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yes. I do have some applications installed as flatpak. What’s the problem?

          • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            27
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s the whole problem, don’t use flatpak. It’s the worst way of solving a problem that’s already solved.

            • BlueBockser@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago
              • What problem?
              • How is it already solved?

              This comment chain feels like talking to a brick wall. It’s just “don’t use flatpak” over and over again but with different words.

                • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Almost all popular applications on flathub come with filesystem=host, filesystem=home or device=all permissions

                  So if I checked the permissions with flatseal and that statement isn’t true for any of my flatpacks…where do we go from here?

                • igorlogius@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  The problem with dependencies, that’s the only reason for people to look at flatpak.

                  no, not really, flatpak is a distro agnostic way to build and distribute packages, which is HUGE for developers and distros, since those dont have to waste time to repackage (built+test) software to work on their systems and instead use that time to deal with other issues.

                  flatkill.org

                  The author should really take that site down. AFAIK, all the points are now invalid.

                  • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    The point is still that you distribute a OS with your application, that’s just silly and lazy.

            • λλλ@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I just feel like you could have provided alternatives? How is it solved? Genuine question…

              • orcrist@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Package managers like apt or rpmn(or whatever for your distro) are the standard way to install software. If there’s a good reason to avoid them, OK, but no good reason was stated here.

                • zbecker@mastodon.zbecker.cc
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  @orcrist @lambda

                  There definitely is a problem that flatpak is trying to solve. That problem is dependency hell.

                  This most often (or rather most famously) occurs with python packaging. Sometimes you can have one package that requires a version that is incompatible with another version that another package requires. That’s why people use python venv these days (or just use pipx).

                  IMO a better way of solving this is with nix. With nix, it doesn’t require a container, it just builds in isolation.

                  Thing is, this will probably end up a VHS vs Beta Max.

                  • λλλ@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    I am very impressed by nix. I have tried nixOS and it was very nice. But, I might have to try the package manager as a standalone to see how I like that.

              • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                11 months ago

                Basically you install the application inside a little OS with dependencies each time you install a flatpak, that OS is rarely updated with security patches and most of the time has full access to the host OS. https://flatkill.org/

                This is a lazy and insecure way of distributing applications with no real benefits.

                • Hovenko@iusearchlinux.fyi
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Exactly. The QA of flatpaks is done in “trust me bro” framework. You can just go back to windows at this point.

                  If I install a package on my distro I know it went through a shitload of testing and I can be sure I am not installing some crap on my system.

                  • λλλ@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    I don’t know what distro you use, but packages in their repos have “maintainers” that are usually volunteers. Downloading from repos from the distro is trusting whoever the maintainer is there. I don’t see how that is any better than a flatpak… At least with Flatpak many packages are maintained by the developer. I believe that would be more secure.

              • zbecker@mastodon.zbecker.cc
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                @lambda @BeigeAgenda

                Imo a better alternative to flatpak is the nix package manager, but as I said to the other guy this’ll most likely end up a VHS/betamax situation.

                Both things are trying to solve dependency hell in different ways. Flatpak just builds and runs everything in a container, where as nix sets up virtual environments and builds things in isolation with per package dependency trees in an effort to make builds entirely reproducible (to the point that no matter what system you compile on, you will get the same hash).

                Edit: as the other guy said, just use your systems package manager unless it doesn’t exist in the repo and you can’t be bothered to package it yourself. It’s the standard recommended method.