Conversation

Relegating GLibC as a Container Runtime

2
0
4

bro if i was blogging my titles would go do hard

1
0
2
@fiore mfw alpine with an arch bwrap chroot for gaymering
1
0
1
@fiore

if free desktop org nazis allowed me to use itbas a general container or allowed me to sandbox apps painlessly without packaging then or something or ya know allowed me to give the RT access to /usr/share/icons
1
0
1

@coolbean @meeper yea actually lmfao its just kinda nicer to use flatpak for steam than to mantain your own bwrap chroot i suppose

2
0
2
@fiore @meeper god knows im having a horrible time with it personally (it broke. it fucking broke. i did nothing and it just broke)
1
0
1
@fiore @coolbean

only :usecase: for flatpaks is that your pristine clean desktoo space isn't ruined by dirty dotfiles.

Sadly there are a few issues, Id ratger have it disable a runtime for rxample and only provide a homedir isolation for stuff like steam (it provides its own runtime) also the stuff I previously said.

Make it more a flexible tool, but if you ask them they will likely hit you with the :uaecase: stare
3
0
1
@fiore @meeper nuh uh this is fedora bullshit
2
0
1

@meeper @coolbean i wish bwrap had more desktop usage than being just The Flatpak Thing . its just the better way to handle containers imo .

0
0
1
@meeper @fiore correct. i didnt want to use it. it was like the fourth distro i tried across a 3 month span where my computer was 100% not usable
0
0
2
@fiore @coolbean holy typos :uaecase: :ebassimuslim:
0
0
1

@coolbean @meeper why are u using steam flatpak on fedora just run the native one thats in the repos

1
0
1
@fiore @meeper because i always run the flatpak because it breaks less

i had the native steam break so much on arch and void linux
1
0
2
@fiore @coolbean Oh yeah and also have it a mechnism to modify user files or interfave woth the system package manager in the case it does require to put say udev configuration.

You are a package manager manage my packages to the best pf your ability don't give me a million ways to torsion my balls
1
0
1

@coolbean @meeper i always use native on fedora its always workd better for me but i suppose this is justs a loonics moment

0
0
1

@meeper @coolbean i feel like for some usecases even podman would be better than flatpak . which is of course a horrid realization

(i actually kinda like flatpak im just very annoyed with the little things i dont like)

2
0
1
@fiore @coolbean oh same only time I agreed with flatkill ks when I felt dbus was the evil devil and thus all fdoware is haram
(dbus is still an evil devil just not the greatest one)
2
0
0

@meeper @coolbean its just . bwrap is just SO MUCH nicer than oci runtimes for desktop usage . like . its so Simple

0
0
1
@fiore @meeper i wish appimage had sturdier technical foundations (read as not fuse2) cause in theory i do like not relying on a monorepo and god knows flathub isnt any more stringent than random files on the internet anyway
3
0
1

@coolbean @meeper imean to be fair flathub is not the only flatpak repo around u can literally distribute prebuilt packages anywhere

1
0
0
@coolbean @fiore at least apps are isolated which is also I want an easy way to flatpak random files on the internet without building an entire package
1
0
0
@fiore @meeper yea but noone fucking does. in fact people actively rally against having their stuff packaged in other repos
1
0
1
@coolbean @fiore also my distro package manager or flatpak itself or a frontend of both should interface with each other it's literally 2026 why are system package managers uncoupled messes
2
0
1

@meeper @coolbean its ok that system packages and user apps are decoupled imo . flatpak is meant to be distro agnostic, its ok for it to be that way

1
0
0
@fiore @meeper i know thats why i do it. its fun recreationally. sorta like taking "ecstacy" pills that dont even contain mdma its 100% adulterants
0
0
1
@meeper @fiore this is true i hate that i need to manage it separately from my system package manager
1
0
1
@fiore @coolbean I mean like pacman -S steam could install the necessary system files and then make flatpak do the rest, like the system pm handles the system only sutff
1
0
0
@coolbean @fiore This reminds me of the travesty of desktop environment store apps
1
0
0

@meeper @coolbean oh imean . ehh . letting the user have access to flatpak independently of having root access is important to me.

1
0
0
@meeper @fiore i want to bite my own tongue off
0
0
1
@fiore @coolbean sometimes you need system files with package stuff or some system level config and having that cleanly managed by the tool to do that is a good thing imo.

All package managers should maximise the managng of packages and the concept of packages should be as abstract as possible.

A system package manager should be generalist and handle all kinds of packages cleanly and this should flatpaks.

The isolation can be built in ig.
0
0
0
@coolbean @fiore it's actually asinine that they still use fuse 2

every fucking time. I get an 'appimage' I've to install fuse2 on my distro.

Also the fuckyness with getting an app icon
1
0
0
@meeper @fiore its a dead format htat hasnt been actually relevant in years and claims to the contrary are delusions
0
0
2