Please tell your friends about federated social media site that speaks several fediverse protocols thus serving as a hub uniting them, hubzilla.eskimo.com, also check out friendica.eskimo.com, federated
macroblogging social media site, mastodon.eskimo.com a federated microblogging site, and yacy.eskimo.com an uncensored federated search engine. All Free!
"Interlude 1" by Miley Cyrus serves as a reflective pause within her album "Something Beautiful." This brief yet impactful piece encapsulates the themes of the album, offering listeners a moment of introspection and connection to Cyrus's artistic vision.
Album Artist: Miley Cyrus Album(s): Something Beautiful Released: 2025 Decade for first release: #2020sMusic
Călin Georgescu entlarvte die Kontrolle der pädophilen #Oligarchen über Europa. Das ist der Grund, weshalb man ihn um jeden Preis als rumänischen Präsidenten verhindern will.
Der ehemaliger #UN-Exekutivdirektor und Präsident des #Club of #Rome für #Europa erklärte öffentlich, dass das #WEF die europäischen Staats- und Regierungschefs kontrolliere. Er sagte außerdem, dass pädophile #Oligarchen die #UN sowie die globalen Systeme des #Kindersexhandels kontrollierten und für das spurlose Verschwinden von 8 Millionen #Kindern pro Jahr verantwortlich seien.
Donald Trumps Sieg im Jahr 2016 bezeichnet er als Unfall. Die #Fake-#Pandemie, die eigentlich für 2016 geplant gewesen sei, wäre deshalb um vier Jahre nach hinten verschoben worden. Die Planung für das Jahr 2020 wiederum sah eine Ernährungs- und #Trinkwasserkatastrophe vor, die auf 2025 verschoben worden sei.
Gute Nachricht: “Sie werden damit keinen Erfolg haben. Das System ist fast am Ende. Aber alle von uns müssen nun den Mut finden, nein zu sagen.”
Seien Sie dabei, wenn der ehemalige UN-Exekutivdirektor Călin Georgescu in diesem aufschlussreichen Interview den Prozess der Unterwanderung und der globalen Übernahme der Vereinten Nationen durch Oligarchen, insbesondere Klaus Schwab und das Weltwir…
If your crane's showing red flags—sticky controls, sluggish brakes, or a drifting boom—don't ignore them. A quick patch might seem okay, but it risks accidents or legal trouble.
Grove cranes are built for the toughest jobs, but when they start acting up, the risks are high—downtime, safety issues, or project delays. Some problems you can fix yourself, but others need the expertise of someone who knows these machines inside and out.
Here's how to know when to call in a professional.
When Your Fixes Aren't Enough
Your crane's slow, showing error codes, or just not acting right. You've checked the hydraulics, swapped a filter, or tried a new sensor. But the issue won't budge.
Throwing more parts at it is a waste of time. A technician with access to quality Grove crane parts and diagnostic tools can find the real problem and fix it right the first time.
Electrical Issues That Keep Popping Up
Electrical faults in Grove cranes are hard to pin down. You might replace a relay or tighten a connection, only to see the same problem return. Modern cranes rely on complex electronics, and fixing them requires specialized knowledge.
A Grove crane parts supplier often works with technicians who know these systems well. They use advanced tools to trace issues and deliver repairs that last, not just temporary fixes.
When You Can't Figure Out the Problem
Your crane stops dead—no warning lights, no clear damage, just nothing. It could be a hydraulic issue, a control module, or wear from heavy use finally showing up.
If you're stumped, don't guess. A professional who's worked on Grove cranes can spot the issue based on experience, saving you from costly trial and error.
Problems With Parts or Installation
Using the wrong part is a common mistake. A component that's slightly off can cause big issues, especially in critical systems like hydraulics. A reliable Grove crane parts supplier can match parts to your crane's model and serial number, ensuring a perfect fit.
Even with the right part, some repairs—like load-bearing or hydraulic components—need precision tools and expertise. A pro gets it done safely and correctly.
When Jobsite Pressure Is High
A crane breakdown during a project is a disaster. Deadlines are tight, crews are waiting, and mistakes can cost you big. Trying to tackle a complex repair under pressure is risky.
Field technicians who specialize in Grove cranes are built for these high-stakes moments. They'll diagnose and fix the issue fast, ensuring your machine is safe to operate.
When Safety or Liability Is at Stake
If your crane's showing red flags—sticky controls, sluggish brakes, or a drifting boom—don't ignore them. A quick patch might seem okay, but it risks accidents or legal trouble.
Licensed technicians follow strict safety standards, carry insurance, and provide documentation to protect your operation. Their work keeps your crane safe and your business secure.
Final Thought
Grove cranes are tough, but they're not invincible. Knowing when to call a professional keeps your jobsite running smoothly and safely. If you're stuck, reach out to a Grove crane parts supplier or a qualified technician.
Fixing it right now saves you from bigger problems later.
The Justice Department and FBI have concluded they have no evidence that Jeffrey Epstein blackmailed powerful figures, kept a “client list” or was murdered🙂 #minds
Gunnar #Schupelius: In Neukölln wird eine #Kindertagesstätte mit 188 Plätzen gebaut und vom Senat mit 4,2 Millionen Euro gefördert. Der Träger ist mit einem radikalen #Moscheeverein verbunden.
For the past 7+ years, I've been conducting a programming interview that has been a true personal favorite of mine. It was passed down to me from good friends (Jeremy Kaplan and Carl Sverre, and it was the latter whom I believe invented it).
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) announced that 600,000 children in the Gaza Strip are currently living amidst the rubble without access to education.The agency called on the United Nations to allow the agenc
“Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff. There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” - President Trump on social media
It's not my birthday. Not a holiday. Not even our anniversary. We didn't win the lottery. So why? My husband who used to cook often, before cancer changed everything, decided to cook for me. I get a pass from cooking dinner tonight. He just wanted to do something helpful. It was nice. We are even having ice cream for dessert. I am spoiled. He is cooking for Summer next. Not prawns though. #Food
@Killer_Mule @zika @cute_doggo The internet doesn't appear to know the actual release date. This is a rerelease. Ain't nobody in 2011 could make that timbre.
From John Lee Hooker's 1992 album "Boom Boom." To learn more about John Lee Hooker, visit: http://www.johnleehooker.com or facebook.com/JohnLeeHookerofficial.
You’re living through the most consequential period in human history since World War Two. Be observant and take mental snapshots of the world around you. Things are about ready to change forever.
now it's all "oh there is actually no list" lol nice 180 degree narrative shift. everyone knows they have a bunch of videos, and that a bunch of politicians and billionaires flew on the lolita express, so it's not like we need them to put 2 and 2 together
A reduction in the number of US troops in Europe is not currently under discussion, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said in an interview with The New York Times newspaper published on Saturday.
Join Restore Britain here: https://www.restorebritain.org.uk/join_usYou can find the reading lists of each individual podcast episode on our website: https:/...
Watch the full show: www.kimiversenshow.comDoug Casey is a well-known American investor, bestselling author, and outspoken libertarian thinker, widely recogn...
Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff. There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
@S!ayer @Livestradamus #RunCore @Donald J. Trump I'm 66, I've seen all sorts of movement in one direction or another during my life. I don't see China doing well long term, they don't have enough young people to maintain their productivity.
Michael Parenti is an American political scientist, historian, and cultural critic who writes on scholarly and popular subjects. He has taught at American an...
I am pleased to announce that the UNITED STATES TARIFF Letters, and/or Deals, with various Countries from around the World, will be delivered starting 12:00 P.M. (Eastern), Monday, July 7th. Thank you for your attention to this matter! DONALD J. TRUMP, President of The United States of America.
"Rain On Me" by Lady Gaga and Ariana Grande is an exhilarating dance-pop anthem that celebrates resilience and the power of friendship. With its infectious beat and empowering lyrics, this collaboration showcases the vocal prowess of both artists, making it a standout track that encourages listeners to embrace life's challenges.
🎵 LYRICS 🎵: I didn't ask for a free ride I only asked you to show me a real good time I never asked for the rainfall At least I showed up, you showed me nothing at all
It's coming down on me Water like misery It's coming down on me I'm ready, rain on me
I'd rather be dry, but at least I'm alive Rain on me, rain, rain Rain on me, rain, rain I'd rather be dry, but at least I'm alive Rain on me, rain, rain Rain on me
Rain on me Mmm, oh yeah, baby Rain on me
Living in a world where no one's innocent Oh, but at least we try Gotta live my truth, not keep it bottled in So I don't lose my mind Baby, yeah
I can feel it on my skin It's coming down on me Teardrops on my face Water like misery Let it wash away my sins It's coming down on me Let it wash away
I'd rather be dry, but at least I'm alive Rain on me, rain, rain Rain on me, rain, rain I'd rather be dry, but at least I'm alive Rain on me, rain, rain Rain on me
Rain on me Rain on me Oh yeah, yeah Rain on me, ooh yeah Rain on me Rain on me
Hands up to the sky I'll be your galaxy, I'm about to fly Rain on me, tsunami Hands up to the sky I'll be your galaxy, I'm about to fly Rain on me
I'd rather be dry, but at least I'm alive Rain on me, rain, rain Rain on me, rain, rain I'd rather be dry, but at least I'm alive Rain on me, rain, rain Rain on me
I hear the thunder coming down, won't you rain on me? Rain on me I hear the thunder coming down, won't you rain on me? Rain on me
Directed by Robert Rodriguez Album Artist: Lady Gaga, Ariana Grande Album(s): Chromatica Written by: Alexander Ridha, Ariana Grande, Betty Wright, Jeremiah Burden, Martin Bresso, Matthew James Burns, Michael Tucker, Nija Aisha Alayja Charles, Rami Yacoub, Stefani J. Germanotta, Vernetta Lynn Williams Music genre(s): Dance-Pop Released: 2020 Decade for first release: #2020sMusic
"Love Me Harder" by Ariana Grande featuring The Weeknd is a sultry and passionate duet that explores the depths of desire and connection. With its captivating melodies and powerful vocal performances, this single showcases the chemistry between the two artists, making it a standout track in contemporary pop music.
🎵 LYRICS 🎵: Tell me something, I need to know Then take my breath and never let it go If you just let me invade your space I'll take the pleasure, take it with the pain
And if in the moment I bite my lip Baby, in the moment, you'll know this is Something bigger than us and beyond bliss Give me a reason to believe it
'Cause if you want to keep me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder And if you really need me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder Gotta love me harder (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Love me, love me, love me (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Harder, harder, harder
I know your motives and you know mine The ones that love me, I tend to leave behind If you know about me and choose to stay Then take this pleasure and take it with the pain
And if in the moment you bite your lip When I get you moaning you know it's real Can you feel the pressure between your hips I'll make it feel like the first time
'Cause if you want to keep me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder (Imma love you harder) And if you really need me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder (Love me harder) (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Love me, love me, love me (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Harder, harder, harder (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Love me, love me, love me (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Harder, harder, harder
So what would I do if I can't figure it out? You got to try, try, try again So what would I do if I can't figure it out? I'm gonna leave, leave, leave again 'Cause if you want to keep me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder (Imma love you, love you, love you) And if you really need me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder (Love me, love me, baby)
'Cause if you want to keep me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder (Love me harder) And if you really need me You gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta got to love me harder (Imma love you harder) (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Love me, love me, love me (Ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh, ho-o-oh) Harder, harder, harder (Love me, love me, baby) Love me, love me, love me (Just a little bit harder, harder, a little bit) Harder, harder, harder
Album Artist: Ariana Grande, The Weeknd Album(s): Love Me Harder - Single Written by: Peter Anders Svensson, Max Martin, Savan Kotecha, Ali Payami, Ahmad Balshe, Abel Tesfaye Music genre(s): Pop, R&B Released: 2014 Decade for first release: #2010sMusic
Chinese President Xi Jinping has recently replied to teachers and students of the U.S. youth pickleball cultural exchange delegation from Montgomery County, Maryland, who have visited China under the initiative of inviting 50,000 young Americans to C…
The worst business idea of all time. Because people that pay less will love it. And people that pay more will go elsewhere. Resulting in permanent reduction of income. They are retarded and deserve what they get.
For me, it's the unrenameable, unmoveable, non-hidden snap directory in my home directory's root that doesn't even follow the naming convention of the other directories in there.
~~> plus sudden updates that nuke active applications.~~
~~This is not what's supposed to happen. If an app installed through flatpak is active while it's receiving an update, then the update is not supposed to affect the running application until it's closed/restarted.~~
Edit: Somehow I didn't realize the concern was raised against Snap and not Flatpak.
Snap is not all bad if you're on a Ubuntu based distro, I just don't like the way it's pushed and that it comes from Ubuntu mostly. Startup time is a major issue for me also, but all in all it works.
I'm still sitting on the fence, heavily prefer flatpak but when Ubuntu is going to package nvidia drivers in a snap it's a thing I'm up for trying.
My understanding is that if I'm on Ubuntu and the snap uses the same underlying Ubuntu version as my distro it should be fast but I haven't seen it.
Immutable OSes are difficult to use for coding or other tasks that include installing many terminal utilities and for that reason, I don't recommend them and certainly don't want them to be the future of Linux distros. And if I'm going to create a container running a different distro to install and run the apps I want to use, then I may as well use that distro on my host.
You just move to user directory installation of most tools via brew on Linux. It's not difficult. The Bazzite distro handles all this incredibly well via brew, flatpaks, and distrobox.
@shrewdcat They waste memory by including libraries with every binary rather than using system libraries thus removing the memory efficiency of shared libraries.
i had a hard time getting used to them but now i love them in mint i can switch between the package version and flatpak version and usually the fp one is more updated
See, I only use flatpaks sparingly for this reason, but in some cases they're indispensable when you don't want an application to access certain parts of your system. The sandboxing is what makes them useful, in my opinion. For everything else, there's the deb packages.
That's not really true. It lists all the flatpak dependencies in that disk use, but a lot of those are shared, so they don't actually use that much each if you install more than one, and the deb dependencies aren't included at all. Flatpaks really do use more space, especially if you only have a small number of them, but it's not as bad as that.
No you weren't. That would be ridiculous. The deb dependencies are most of your Linux install. Maybe counting just the new dependencies being installed alongside a typical deb install, but that's still not an apples to apples comparison to 100% of all the flatpak dependencies, even ones shared with other flatpaks, and even that's still very rarely over 1GB.
That's certainly a concern for some, but I'm using like 30 GB for all the things I've installed, which is a lot (12 (flatpak-system), 76 (flatpak-user)) but that's on a 2 TB drive, which amounts to like 1½% of the total available space. I don't think that's a bad trade.
And not many consider the environmental impact of this either. Sure storage might be cheap (not in my country but I digress) but more space still requires more storage and across thousands of computers and then millions of computers that's not an insignificant increase. We should be increasing technological efficiency not what were doing at the moment which seems to be just throwing more power and resources at the problems.
Plus I found on my install flatpak wasn't cleaning up the flatpaks autoinstalled for older versions of nvidia drivers, they were all still listed as dependencies. Not sure who's to blame but that was taking up a few much needed GBs.
I agree that flatpak should just invoke flatpak uninstall --unused right after uninstalling a flatpak. I don't get why it doesn't do this automatically. Granted, some distro package managers (used to) operate somewhat similarly in that they required the autoremove option.
I actually tried flatpak uninstall --unused and it didn't remove these ones. So there's something odd going on there. My guess is maybe Mint manually installed them through the driver manager program? That's a wild guess, I don't know how it works.
I've packaged a CLI that I made as a flatpak. It works just fine. Nothing weird was required to make it work.
The only thing is that if you want to use a CLI flatpak, you probably want to set an alias in your shell to make running it easier.
I'm not sure why more CLIs aren't offered as flatpaks. Maybe because static linking them is so easy? I know people focus on flatpak sandboxing as a primary benefit, but I can't help but think of static linking was easier for bigger applications, it wouldn't be needed as much.
IDK why you're being so rage baity. Its easy to avoid flatpaks if you dont like them. Only thing I've ever found as an obstacle was adding the binaries to my PATH so I can launch it with dmenu_run. Otherwise my package manager works well enough.
Bonus points: Write a PKGBUILD that installs flatpaks to /opt and symlink out binaries as needed.
@ZWQbpkzl [none/use name] @shrewdcat There are three reasons I don't like flatpak, snap, and others of their ilk. 1) The waste of memory by the eliminating the functionality of shared libs, and where I see this most problematic is for people with older memory constrained hardware, 2) the way they distribute crap all over your file systems making a mess, and 3) they are completely unnecessary, instead of inventing a whole new package system just compile the damned binary static and then there is no need.
@shrewdcat @ZWQbpkzl [none/use name] The reason I see it as an issue is those with low end machines coming from Windows to Linux only to find it performs poorly, when using native libs on a tight memory machine it would have performed satisfactorily. I myself am not terribly affected, my workstation is an i7-9700k with 96G of RAM and I have servers with 256G of ram and 18 cores, so the overhead of some extra libs not the end of the world, but for someone on an old Dell laptop with 1-4GB and 2 cores, it is.
@anarchoilluminati [comrade/them] @ZWQbpkzl [none/use name] A lot of my defensiveness is not related to Linux per se' but to the waste that takes so much potential away from what we could do. The first computer I ever programmed had 512 bytes of core memory, you could only program it with machine code, there wasn't even an assembler. Still I was fascinated.
Then a friend bought a Compucolor II 8080 based machine, got board with it after a few months and lent it to me. I learned to program 8080 assembly on it.
Then I bought a Trs-80 model III with the intent of running a BBS on it. I had a whole of 48k of RAM and 320k of floppy disk to work with. I wanted to run a BBS on it, after spending another $300 for a RS-232 port (yes a UART and a few buffer chips set you back $300 to Tandy), I quickly discovered the operating system had no support. And because a lot of what I wanted to do would have been too slow in BASIC, I wrote a custom OS/language (It was like TRSDOS with Microsoft BASIC in structure, but had support for the RS-232 serial port, a lot of additional keywords, better disk I/O routines that would anticipate running out of buffer and spin up and seek the heads ahead of a read to reduce the latency of the floppy drives, format output to screen width, etc. When you're trying to do all of this on such a small machine, you learn to write efficient code. Then for the rest of your life you can't understand why it takes someone else a 5Ghz CPU and a TB of disk to do what you did on 2Mhz and 320k and it's frustrating.
There are merits to using flatpaks. With flatseal application, you can fine-tune the permissions given to a certain flatpak application. The best thing is restricting internet usage.
They always seem to have some critical limitation. Handbrake is too slow via flatpak to work. Flatpak Zoom had no camera access. Flatpak-only Zen browser can't use passkeys. Zen browser asks to be my default browser every time I open it, even though it is and I always say yes; is this a flatpak limitation? I don't know, and I'd prefer not to have to figure it out just for some theoretical benefits and more overhead.
Is there no other way on your system to see what the default browser is? On Gnome you can see a few of your default applications in the settings. And what happens if you open an html file for example? Does it open in Zen? If yes then it appears that Zen is set as your default browser, what more is there to check?
I used them for some things, but other things still don't work quite right. Take Steam for example. I do love flatpaks for testing out apps, things with really finicky dependencies, or pinning a specific version of a software that I want to continue to work in the future. However, for most things, Arch + AUR just covers all my needs without any hiccups.
To me flatpaks are sort of like NixOS. All the benefits they provide aren't something I need on a daily basis. Rolling back works just fine 99% of the time with downgrade. I already have system backups. Despite what some articles might insist, things don't just break all the time. I'm not running untrusted software.
Basically no solution is perfect, but they don't need to be. If the benefits I gain can be recreated through other methods without the tradeoffs they introduce, then I will go with that. Of course, that isn't to say they don't have their place, but sometimes I feel like some people think that "being designed from the ground up" to handle certain use cases is always better than whatever "cobbled together" thing we currently have and that isn't always the case. I'm specifically quoting those two phrases because these are the exact phrases you will hear projects using to justify their existence. In fact, I would go so far as to say that some people have outright confused modularity for "cobbled together".
One last example I want to make is that I make use of projects like the fish shell and helix editor. In these cases, I find the features they introduce to be worth the tradeoffs and work better because of being designed "from the ground up" to do what they do. However, I don't make use of immutable systems, containers such as docker, or say filesystems such as btrfs. The features they provide are not useful enough to me compared to the problems they introduce.
Don't AppImages also have a similar requirement just with stuff that is already installed on many popular distros so many people just don't notice it? I think I read somewhere that running AppImages on systems that even slightly differ from the big popular distros is a pain since you still have to ship this stuff with them but it is more cumbersome than with flatpaks.
Those mystical average people would probably stay on Windows, if they don't care or cannot learn basics of other systems. Its really not hard to explain and understand, even for "average person" that there is an universal source for applications and there are packages designed and managed by your operating system. I think its important for people to learn basics and we should teach them, not dumb them down like on Windows. Soon people won't be able to eat themselves anymore...
A few reasons security people can have to hesitate on Flatpak:
In comparison to sticking with strictly vetted repos from the big distros like Debian, RHEL, etc., using Flathub and other sources means normalizing installing software that isn't so strongly vetted. Flathub does at least have a review process but it's by necessity fairly lax.
Bundling libraries with an application means you can still be vulnerable to an exploit in some library, even if your OS vendor has already rolled out the fix, because of using Flatpak software that still loads the vulnerable version. The freedesktop runtimes at least help limit the scope of this issue but don't eliminate it.
The sandboxing isn't as secure as many users might expect, which can further encourage installing untrusted software.
By a typical home user's perspective this probably seems like nothing; in terms of security you're still usually better off with Flatpak than installing random AUR packages, adding random PPA repos, using AppImage programs, installing a bunch of Steam games, blindly building an unfamiliar project you cloned from github, or running bash scripts you find online. But in many contexts none of that is acceptable.
Flatpaks together with "immutable" distributions, Wayland and systemd are a heresy, a crime against the UNIX principles, a disgrace in the eyes of of SED and AWK. REPENT! Save your immortal core dumps and return to the one true /home !
If it's a mostly self-contained app, like a game or a utility, then Flatpak is just fine. If a Flatpak needs to interact with other apps on the host or, worst case, another Flatpak it gets tricky or even impossible. From what I've seen though, AppImage and Snap are even worse at this.
Flatpak doesn't support dev device access no matter what I use flatseal and all the shabang, so bottles is useless to me for a lot of the wine applications I would like to "not emulate"
I'd take a well-maintained native package for my distro over a Flatpak, but sometimes, a Flatpak is just the the easiest way to get the latest version of an application working on Debian without too much tinkering - not always no tinkering, but better than nothing.
This is especially true of GIMP - Flatpak GIMP + Resynthesizer feels like the easiest way to experience GIMP these days. Same with OBS - although I have to weather the Flatpak directory structure, plugins otherwise feel easier to get working than the native package. The bundled runtimes are somewhat annoying, but I'm also not exactly hurting for storage at the moment - I could probaby do to put more of my 2 TB main SSD to use.
I usually just manage Flatpaks from the terminal, though I often have to refresh myself on application URLs. I somewhat wish one could set nicknames so they need not remember the full name.
Which ones? Everything in the arch main repos are compiled for your system, and most things in the AUR can either be built from source, or have -bin installs.
aleph one from the AUR refused to run properly, often crashing on startup so i just grabbed the flatpak the weirdest one was ghostwriter from the official repos, for some reason one day the preview window showed heavily corrupted output and tinkering with it on and off for a week did nothing, including a complete purge and reinstall of the program the flatpak was the only version of it that worked after that
Mostly because of detailed and easy permissions, and also because I have other distibutions on my other computers and want my programs to be consistent everywhere - same programs, same version.
My favorite part of the linux experience is the FREEDOM, but also being talked down to for not using my freedom correctly, I should only do things a specific way or I might as well just use windows.
Because using your freedom to promote options that restrict freedom means helping to remove your freedom. But hey, what do the Linux elders know? Clearly the new people into Linux are far smarter...
If we’re talking about enterprise-grade, five-nines reliability: I want the absolute simplest, bare-bones, stripped down, optimized infra I can get my hands on.
If we’re talking about my homelab or whatever else non-critical system: I’m gonna fuck around and play with whatever I feel like.
You are mixing different ideas of freedom. Software freedom is not the same as freedom of choice of software.
You don't need Linux to have choices of what software to use, you have that in most (all?) proprietary systems, in some you might even have more choices than in Linux.. even if it includes proprietary software.
This is analogous to how being a free person (not a slave) is not the same as having freedom to choose who to work for, even if some of them are slavers (ie. having freedom to choose your master).
Wait how do you install flatpaks? I add the remote (if necessary) and then install it from there. That is nothing like I have ever seen on Windows (though apparently there are package managers).
I mean, they added "bash scripts you find online", which are only a problem if you don't look them over or cannot understand them first... Their post is very much cemented in the paranoid camp of security.
Not that they're wrong. That's the big thing about security once you go deep enough: the computer has to work for someone, and being able to execute much at all opens up some avenues of abuse. Like securing a web based service. It has to work for someone, so of course everything is still vulnerable at some point. Usually when private keys or passwords are compromised if they're doing things remotely correctly, but they're still technically vulnerable at some point.
Flatpaks are pretty great for getting the latest software without having to have a cutting edge rolling release distro or installing special repos and making sure stuff doesn't break down the line.
I use Flatpaks for my software that I need the latest and greatest version of, and my distros native package for CLI apps and older software that I don't care about being super up to date.
My updater script handles all of it in one action anyways, so no biggie on that either.
Flatpaks are the best all-in-one solution when compared to Appimages or Snaps imo.
I don't like how so many distros ship with discover configured to install flatpaks by default. It's a huge newbie trap when you click "open file" and uh where are all my files?? You should only install a flatpak if the program is not available for your OS, or if the native version doesn't work for some reason.
I'm starting to think that in terms of features and possiblities, nix might truly be the best third party package manager of all. But the downside is that especially when using it the way it's recommended, combined with home manager, it has the steepest learning curve. Also graphical apps can be problematic. There is a tool called nixgl that tries to solve this, but it's a wrapper, so when a nix application opens a child process that needs to use the native system drivers, that childprocess is also wrapped in nixgl and it breaks. I recently found a neat workaround on github to solve this in a better way, which is to create a driver package manually with home manager, and symlink it to /run/, which is also where the drivers are linked on NixOS. This is a gamechanger to me because with no driver problems anymore, you can install almost everything through nix on pretty much any distro, except maybe for some programs that need system level access to run. You can install graphical programs, cli programs, and even entire window managers with it. I'm using full NixOS at the moment, but i'm seriously debating moving back to void linux with nix on top. Currently messing with it in a vm to test my configs.
The parent comment mentions working on security for a paid OS, so looking at the perspective of something like the users of RHEL and SUSE: supply chain "paranoia" absolutely does matter a lot to enterprise users, many of which are bound by contract to specific security standards (especially when governments are involved). I noted that concerns at that level are rather meaningless to home users.
On a personal system, people generally do whatever they need to in order to get the software they want. Those things I listed are very common options for installing software outside of your distro's repos, and all of them offer less inherent vetting than Flathub while also tampering with your system more substantially. Though most of them at least use system libraries.
they added “bash scripts you find online”, which are only a problem if you don’t look them over or cannot understand them
I would honestly expect that the vast majority of people who see installation steps including curl [...] | sh (so common that even reputable projects like cargo/rust recommend it) simply run the command as-is without checking the downloaded script, and likewise do the same even if it's sudo sh. That can still be more or less fine if you trust the vendor/host, its SSL certificate, and your ability to type/copy the domain without error. Even if you look at the script, that might not get you far if it happens to be a self-extracting one unless you also check its payload.
I like them as an option, there are some programs like Bottles or specific game launchers that work under flatpak better than the versions available via native package manager (with Bottles in particular, you can use various built-in sandbox features via flatpak which makes things a bit more secure), but it's also a bit of a pain because it's an additional package manager you have to update separately now, or tweak if things go wrong.
Certainly a fan, and I don't understand the hate towards it.
Flatpaks are my preferred way of installing Linux apps, unless it is a system package, or something that genuinely requires extensive permissions like a VPN client, or something many other apps depend on like Wine.
The commonly cited issues with Flatpaks are:
Performance. Honestly, do you even care if your Pomodoro timer app takes up 1 more megabyte of RAM? Do you actually notice?
Bloat. Oh, yes, an app now takes 20 MB instead of 10 MB. Again, does anybody care?
Slower and larger updates. Could be an issue for someone on a metered traffic, or with very little time to do updates. Flatpaks update in the background, though, and you typically won't notice the difference unless you need something newest now (in which case you'll have to wait an extra minute)
Having to check permissions. This is a feature, not a bug. For common proponents of privacy and security, Linuxheads grew insanely comfortable granting literally every maintainer full access to their system. Flatpaks intentionally limit apps functionality to what is allowed, and if in some case defaults aren't good for your use case - just toggle a switch in Flatseal, c'mon, you don't need any expertise to change it.
What you gain for it? Everything.
Full control over app's permissions. Your mail client doesn't need full system permissions, and neither do your messengers. Hell, even your backup client only needs to access what it backs up.
All dependencies built in. You'll never have to face dependency hell, ever, no matter what. And you can be absolutely sure the app is fully featured and you won't have to look for missing nonessential dependencies.
Fully distro-agnostic. If something works on my EndeavourOS, it will work on my OpenSUSE Slowroll, and on my Debian 12. And it will be exactly the same thing, same version, same features. It's beautiful.
Stability. Flatpaks are sandboxed, so they don't affect your system and cannot harm it in any way. This is why immutable distros feature Flatpaks as the main application source. Using them with mutable distributions will also greatly enhance stability.
Alternatives?
AppImages don't need an installation, so they are nice to see what the program is about. But for other uses, they are garbage-tier. Somehow they manage both not to integrate with the system and not be sandboxed, you need manual intervention or additional tools to at least update them/add to application menu, and ultimately, they depend on one file somewhere. This is extremely unreliable and one should likely never use AppImages for anything but "use and delete".
Snaps...aside from all the controversy about Snap Store being proprietary and Ubuntu shoving snaps down people's throats, they were just never originally developed with desktop applications in mind. As a result, Snaps are commonly so much slower and bulkier that it actually starts getting very noticeable. Permissions are also way less detailed, meaning you can't set apps up with minimum permissions for your use case.
Flatpaks, appimages, snaps, etc: why download dependencies once when you can download them every time and bloat your system? Also, heaving to list installed flatpaks and run them is dumb too, why aren't they proper executables? "flatpak run com.thisIsDumb.fuckinEh" instead of just ./fuckinEh
No thanks. I'll stick to repos and manually compiling software before I seek out a flatpak or the like.
This shit is why hobbies and things should be gatekept. Just look at how shit PC design is these days. Now they're coming after the OS.
As I said, dependencies typically don't take that much space. We're not in the '80s, I can spare some megabytes to ensure my system runs smoothly and is managed well.
As per naming, I agree, but barely anyone uses command line to install Flatpaks, as they are primarily meant for desktop use. In GUI, Flatpaks are shown as any other package, and all it takes is to push "Install" button.
If you want to enjoy your chad geeky Linux, you still can. Go for CachyOS, or anything more obscure, never to use Flatpaks again. At the same time, let others use what is good and convenient to them.
Do all laptops users have this option? Also you keep saying megabytes when it's never just a few megabytes. It downloads atleast a few gbs worth of data just for one gui app.
Please clarify, what option do you mean? Flatpaks are supported on any Linux system, it doesn't matter what distro or hardware. Or if you mean sparing some megabytes - typically yes as well. The smallest amount of memory I've seen on a laptop is 32gb, and typically it's no less than 250gb.
If it's not present in you distributions' app store, you can either enable it somewhere or download another app manager like Discover, GNOME Software, or pamac if you're on Arch.
If installation of some app incurs a few gbs of downloads, it is likely that your system updates packages alongside installing your app. Typical Flatpak app takes 10-150 megabytes.
I've been working on Linux for 15 years now and I perfectly remember the origin of many concepts. If you look at it through time, what would it be like: 1. We can build applications with external dependencies or a single binary, what should we choose? 2. The community is abandoning a single binary due to the increased weight of applications and memory consumption and libraries problems 3. Dependency hell is coming ... 4. Snap, flatpack, appimage and other strange solutions are inventing something, which are essentially a single binary, but with an overlay (if the developer has hands from the right place, which is often not the case) 5. Someone on lemmy says that he literally doesn't care if the application is built in a single binary, consumes extra memory and have libraries problems. Just close all permissions for that application...
Well, all I can say about this is just assemble a single binary for all applications, stop doing nonsense with a flatpack/snap/etc.
UPD: or if you really want to break all the conventions, just use nixos. You don't need snap/flatpack/etc.
I don't mind other solutions, as long as they have the key features Flatpak offers, namely: * Being open-source * Having app permission system * Having bundled dependencies * Integrating decently with the system
Times are changing, and memory constraints for most programs are generally not relevant anymore.
Old guy here too, used un*x before linux existed in the 90s. I still use a Debian based distro (MX) without systemd and no snap/flatpak/whatever. Just build/compile or install .deb and dependencies. Lastly unfortunately I had to install a flatpak to test "deskflow", the first time I installed one, I feel dirty now 🙁
The few things I don't like about flatpaks (which become a problem on atomic distros that use almost all flatpak by design):
Some types of embedded development is essentially impossible with flatpaks. Try getting the J-link software connected with nrftools and then everything linked to VScodium/codeoss
Digital signing simply doesn't work, won't work for the foreseeable future, and is not planned to get working,
Flatpaks sometimes have bugs for no reasons when their package-manager counterparts don't (e.g. in KiCAD 8.0, the upper 20% or so of dialog boxes were unclickable with the mouse, but I could select and modify them with the keyboard, only the flatpak version)
The status on whether it is still being actively developed or not (at least I hear a fair amount of drama surrounding it)
But besides those small things, it seem great to me.
Thanks for the input! Yes, there are still certain issues with Flatpaks (for me it was aforementioned VPNs which also don't work through Distrobox, and it would be quite odd anyway). But overall, they manage most apps well, just as you say.
Either it did something it shouldn't, or the system updated Nvidia drivers every time for no apparent reason. I have an Nvidia GPU, running proprietary drivers, and haven't ever witnessed anything of the kind.
Idk how, but one time I tried installing something as a flatpak and it took like 300+MB and a very long time. I figured something was wrong, found a way to install it normally and it took like 10MB and installed quickly. Idk what went wrong, but I'll never touch this garbage again
Edit: oh they're not for arch. Maybe they should have told me before the 300mb slog
If i got it right, flatpacks gather all of the dependencies of the package and bundles them with tha package. Maybe those extra 290mb were from dependencies that you already had installed but that flatpak wanted to install another copy.
Otherwise I'm agnostic on flatpaks - I've used a couple and they're ok? They just remind me of old windows games that dump all their libraries in a folder with them.
On a modern system the extra space and loss of optimisation is ok, but on older hardware or when you're really trying to push your system to run something it technically shouldn't, I can see it being an issue.
I've heard Flatpaks aren't great at CLI tools, is that true ?
As a Nix user, I'm glad Flatpaks exist for other people, but I only ever use them when a package is not available from Nix directly. Seeing as Nix is literally the biggest package manager out there, it's a pretty rare occurrence.
I posted this in another thread, but reposting here because a lot of people, including myself up until very recently, were under that impression:
I've packaged a CLI that I made as a flatpak. It works just fine. Nothing weird was required to make it work.
The only thing is that if you want to use a CLI flatpak, you probably want to set an alias in your shell to make running it easier.
I'm not sure why more CLIs aren't offered as flatpaks. Maybe because static linking them is so easy? I know people focus on flatpak sandboxing as a primary benefit, but I can't help but think that if static linking was easier for bigger applications, it wouldn't be needed as much.
About the image: The joke's on you, I install my flatpaks via the terminal.
I've started using flatpaks more after starting using Bazzite and I liked them more than I expected. As a dev, I still need my work tools to be native, but most of my other needs are well covered by flatpaks.
Tip: Flatseal is a great config manager for flatpaks' permissions.
I replaced Firefox system package with Flatpak because I think browser is the most used and vulnerable thing in my system. And the size seemed reasonable.
I did not replace Thunderbird because its size is almost 10 times.
Installing them is not difficult. It's the same as any other flatpak.
The problem is when running them (actually, when running any flatpak, not just CLI tools) you need to type out the whole backwards domain thingy that flatpaks use as identifier, instead of having a proper typical and simple executable name like they would have if they were installed normally.
I end up adding either symlinks or aliases for all my flatpaks because of this reason. After doing that it's ok.. but it's just an extra step that's annoying and that the flatpak devs have no interest on fixing apparently.
one of my least favorite things about arch and other rolling distros is that yay/pacman will try and recompile shit like electron/chromium from source every few days unless you give it very specific instructions not to - which is annoying as shit bc compiling the entirety of chrome from source takes hours even with decent hardware.
granted, i fucking hate google products too but if you’re doing any web dev it’s necessary sometimes.
idk im definitely willing to admit i might be the idiot here. managing your packages with pacman might just be routine to some people. to me arch is the epitome of classic bad UX in an open source project. it’s like they got too focused on being cmatrix-style terminal nerds and forgot to make their software efficiently useable outside of 5 very specific people’s workflows. it’s not even the terminal usage that is bad about arch. plenty of things are focused on that and… don’t do it shittily? idk…
edit: yes to all the arch fanboy’s points in response to me. i used to be super into arch and am aware of the fact that this isn’t explicit behavior but to act like it doesn’t happen in a typical arch user experience is disingenuous. i also disagree with the take that arch doesn’t endorse this outright with its design philosophy, bc it does. the comparison of the AUR to other, similar things like PPAs doesn’t land for me bc PPAs aren’t integrated into the ecosystem nearly as much as AUR is with arch. you can’t tell people to just grab the binaries or not use AUR whenever it’s convenient to blame the user, when arch explicitly endorses a philosophy amicable to self-compilation and also heavily uses the AUR even in their own arch-wiki tutorials for fairly basic use cases. arch wants to have its cake and eat it too and be a great DIY build it yourself toolkit while also catering to daily driver use and more generalist users. don’t get me wrong, it’s the best attempt at such a thing i’ve seen - but at a certain point you have to ask if the premise makes sense anymore. in the case of arch, it doesn’t and it causes several facets of the ecosystem to flounder from a user perspective. the arch community’s habit of shouting “skill issue” at people when they point out legitimate issues with the design philosophy bugs the fuck out of me. this whole OS is a camel.
is garuda like endeavorOS or manjaro where it’s technically still an arch-based rolling release distro but the OS maintainers hold packages from upstream mainline arch?
i don’t hate that model, it’s more fun to use as an end user for sure, but i feel like it kind of defeats the point of arch’s entire ethos lmao.
sometimes you’re working with particular releases or builds that don’t, but like i said i might be the idiot lol.
i like the concept of arch. i don’t like the way i need to come up with a new solution for how im managing my packages virtually every few days that often requires novel information. shit, half the time you boot up an arch system if you have sufficient # of packages there is 9/10 times a conflict when trying to just update things naively. like i said it’s cool on paper and im sure once you use it as a daily driver for awhile it just becomes routine but it’s more the principle of the user experience and its design philosophy that i think might be poor.
arch is for techies in the middle of the bell curve imo… people on the left and the right, when it comes to something as simple as managing all my packages and versions, want something that just works^TM^ - unless i specifically want to fuck with the minutiae.
All of the normal Arch packages are pre-built, so the only way you'd be compiling things that often is if you installed a large amount of things from the AUR. Make sure you get the bin versions instead of git versions.
The google-chrome and chromium packages are already a binaries so my guess is you need ungoogled-chromium-bin. You can also use the Chaotic AUR repo to get pre-built binaries of a lot of the most common AUR packages. But ideally you should avoid using the AUR when it's not necessary.
While using the AUR is common, it's a bit frustrating you are blaming Arch for your experience. If you only use pacman you would never compile anything, or have very many conflicts. It's like if you added 20 different PPAs on Ubuntu and then complained about the problems that arose from that.
one of my least favorite things about arch and other rolling distros is that yay/pacman will try and recompile shit like electron/chromium from source every few days unless you give it very specific instructions not to
My understanding is that constantly triggering compiling like that shouldn't be happening in any typical arch + pacman situation. But it can happen in AUR. If it does, I think it's a special case where you should be squinting and figuring out what's going on and stopping the behavior; it's by no means philosophically endorsed as the usual case scenario for packages on arch.
There's certainly stuff about Arch that's Different(TM) but nothing about the package manager process is especially different from, say, apt-get or rpm in most cases.
saying it can happen in the AUR feels disingenuous to me when you consider how integrated the AUR is to the arch ecosystem. this is a genuine complaint from a user perspective and is an issue with the design philosophy imo. it is a special case but it’s so frequent as to be annoying, is my point.
not sure why everyone is replying like i’m unaware and totally ignoring the actual grievance i have. im very well aware of pacman and yay’s intended behaviors, i just think they’re shit in some cases. idk if people who say this have never tried to daily drive arch before or something but the AUR is absolutely not optional unless you want to constantly hand roll your own shit. see my edit to the original comment.
Feyd did a pretty good job of outlining the AUR disclaimers in a different comment so I won't do that here. It's true that Arch won't stop you from shooting yourself in the foot, but again it's nuts to claim that routine compiling is the usual case for all rolling distros and belies your claim that you're familiar with usual case experience. There's absolutely no routine experience where you're regularly compiling.
I've used debian and apt-get most of my life, I've used arch on a pinetab 2 for about 6 months, regularly playing with pacman and yay and someone who's never met me is saying I'm a fanboy for being familiar with linux package management. 🤷♂️
saying it can happen in the AUR feels disingenuous to me when you consider how integrated the AUR is to the arch ecosystem. this is a genuine complaint from a user perspective and is an issue with the design philosophy imo. it is a special case but it’s so frequent as to be annoying, is my point.
not sure why everyone is replying like i’m unaware and totally ignoring the actual grievance i have. im very well aware of pacman and yay’s intended behaviors, i just think they’re shit in some cases. idk if people who say this have never tried to daily drive arch before or something but the AUR is absolutely not optional unless you want to constantly hand roll your own shit. see my edit to the original comment.
iit: nerds unable to comprehend that building a piece of software from source in not something every person can do
huh? Using package managers almost never involves compiling. It's there as a capability, but the point is to distribute pre-compiled packages and skip that step in the vast majority of cases.
Bro, TRUTH. I have preferences but when you gotta get something done, it doesn't matter how the app comes bundled. I'd run .exe's through Wine if I needed to.
never tried flatpak, snaps were so bad as to never consider non-native installs or just use docker instances when I need to run something weird. so dunno.
whats the use case for a flatpak exactly? maybe im not the target audience???
Flatpaks mean you don't have to compile everything from scratch and solve dependency conflicts if you want a newer version of a program than what's available in your distro's repo, of if it's something that doesn't have a native version at all.
Honestly, i'm not entirely sure what Flatpaks are all about. Not sure I could explain them. But I use them. I've used apt. I've even used Pacman and Yay in Manjaro for a few years. Now, I also Flatpak (no longer on Manjaro, though. I no longer boot to a blank screen every 6 months or so! Very nice!)
Flatpaks are great for situations where installing software is unnecessary complex or complicated.
I have Steam installed for some games, and since this is a 32 bits application it would install a metric shit-don of 32 bit dependencies I do not use for anything else except Steam, so I use the Flatpak version.
Or Kdenlive for video editing. Kdenlive is the only KDE software I use but when installing it, it feels like due to dependencies I also get pretty much all of the KDE desktop’s applications I do not need nor use nor want on my machine. So Flatpak it is.
And then there is software like OBS, which is known for being borderline unusable when not using the only officially supported way to use it on Linux outside of Ubuntu – which is Flatpak.
And then there is software like OBS, which is known for being borderline unusable when not using the only officially supported way to use it on Linux outside of Ubuntu – which is Flatpak.
But why is that? I mean just because it is packaged by someone else does not mean its unusable. So its not the package formats issue, but your distribution packaging it wrong. Right? In installed the Flatpak version, because they developers recommended it to me. I'm not sure why the Archlinux package should be unusable (and I don't want to mess around with it, because I don't know what part is unusable).
The unofficial OBS Studio Flatpak on Fedora Flatpaks is, seemingly, poorly packaged and broken, leading to users complaining upstream thinking they are...
The quoted image does not say so, they do not say the native packaging from your distribution is borderline unusable. That judgement was added by YOU. The devs just state the package on Archlinux is not officially supported, without making a judgement (at least in the quoted image).
As for the Fedora issue, that is a completely different thing. That is also Flatpak, so its not the package format itself the issue. Fedora did package the application in Flatpak their own way and presented it as the official product. That is a complete different issue! That has nothing to do with Archlinux packaging their own native format. Archlinux never said or presented it as the official package either and it does not look like the official Flatpak version.
So where does the developers say that anything that is not their official Flatpak package is "borderline unusable"?
I spent my time fighting AppImages until Canonical started to force Snap on me. I hated Snap so bad it forced me to switch distros. Now I appreciate Flatpak as a result and I don't find AppImages all that bad, either. Also, I haven't found myself in dependency-hell nor have I crashed my distro from unofficial Repos in well over a decade.
-It's a long way of saying It works for me and it's not Snap.
I like the idea of them because I don't like dealing with dependencies changing and breaking stuff and I don't really care too much about disk space in the context of non-game desktop apps, as I don't tend to install lots of them.
That being said I absolutely hate that permissions are all over the place and flatpak doesn't ship a GUI to manage them by default, nor do you get any indication as to what permissions a program has until you try some functionality (like filesystem or camera access) only to find out it doesn't work out of the box.
That just displays the command or is there a browser extension that runs it for you too? Most Windows apps certainly don't run by just clicking a button either.
I've never heard anyone say that Flatpaks could result in losing access to the terminal.
My only problem with Flatpaks are the lack of digital signature, neither from the repository nor the uploader. Other major package managers do use digital signatures, and Flatpaks should too.
I was just wondering the connection between flatpaks and the terminal because I’ve never heard of flatpaks before and Wikipedia says they’re a sandboxed package management system or something?
As someone who uses Flatpak you can still use the terminal to install, uninstall and do maintenance, not sure why people believe terminal is useless with Flatpak 😞
Flatpaks are containers, same as Snaps, I personally prefer Flatpaks over Snaps, but just my personal choice. I use Flatsweep and Flatseal apps to help administrate Flatpak apps, but use terminal as well 🙂
I've no real preference so long as my PC starts stuff. The reason I avoid flatpaks is because I have at some point acquired the habit of anything I install that's not an appimage I pretty much launch from the terminal and I remember trying flatpaks and them having names like package.package.nameofapp-somethingelse and I can't keep that in my head.
Nah, it's the same as with systemd, docker, immutable distros etc. Some people just don't appreciate the added complexity for features they don't need/use and prefer to opt out. Then the advocates come, take not using their favorite software as a personal insult and make up straw-men to ridicule and argue against. Then the less enlightened of those opting out will get defensive and let themselves get dragged into the argument. 90% that's the way these flame wars get started and not the other way around.
For the record, I use flatpak on all my desktops, it's great, and all of the other mentioned things in some capacity, but I get why someone might want to not use them. Let's not make software choice a tribalism thing please. Love thy neighbor as thyself, unless they use Windows, in which case, kill the bastard. /s
You answered your own question. Arch and Nix solve the same problem Flatpak solves, but by using better dependency management. Flatpak’s main proposition is built-in sandboxing and convenience, but if you’re on an “expert” oriented distro like Arch (btw), you probably don’t care as much about those “freebies.”
In that case flatpak is basically a hack for OS's with broken or improper dependency manangement systems. Either those OS's should fix their broken systems, or ppl should move to OS's that do it properly, as that's one of the most important functions of your OS anyway.
Also pretty much everywhere you're using flatpaks (or snaps or...), you are doing it on top of a Linux system that's still getting its core system updates via traditional dependency management. And flatpaks, despite trying not to, make assumptions about your kernel, your glibc version, architecture, ability to access parts of your filesystem or your devices, that can break things, and doesn't bother to track it.
And the closer you get you tracking that stuff (like Snap tries to), you hilariously just get back to where you started, with traditional dependency management that already exists and has existed for decades.
main selling points are isolation and having the latest version directly from developers without having to wait for your distro to package/update it.
both are debatable since they are not as good as promoted (isolation doesn't always work correctly and it's a mess to configure it once you use anything different than the more mainstream distros) or goes against the historical preference (using bundled everything instead of cooperating with your distro packages and trusting every individual over trusting your distro as a whole) but having the latest version on any distro without having to wait is a popular need so they gained traction quite fast. this might make little sense for rolling release distros (arch, nix) but it's helpful if you have a stable base (years old debian) but need the latest feature on an specific application or have to use very specific libraries that are not packaged on the main distro and would require complex upgrades
I'm not a huge fan of Flatpaks, they're a lot harder to distribute offline versus something like AppImage. Seriously, you have to like create an offline repository, then create a bundle, and it's like 6 or 7 steps, it's honestly kind of ridiculous lol but other than that they seem fine, and they're easy enough to update (but so are apt packages)
I know some people may say "oh why do you need that", but Linux has taught me that my computer is my own, and I should be able to use it the way I want to. I shouldn't have to fight with my package manager to get it to do what I want. So I guess you could say, no I'm not really a fan of Flatpaks.
Personally, I didn't mind Snaps, but I'm getting kind of really fed up with especially for-profit companies etc so I don't like Snap that much now either.
Apt packages are nice, but the more of them you have installed, especially if you're using Ubuntu-based distros and have lots of PPAs, the more annoying upgrading your distro version can be because of all the dependencies and cross-dependencies.
AppImage tends to just work for me, as long as it's not compiled with a newer libc-bin version than the distro I'm currently using has, and I really enjoy that it's just one file I can copy and run pretty much anywhere.
I seem to have constant issues with AppImages. Every single one I have currently won't open. I get an error message relating to either qT or GTK. Tried searching for the error and get a bunch of old forum threads talking about either not being compatible with Wayland at all, or comments stating that the one specific AppImage in question must have been "packaged badly". Thankfully, nothing 'mission critical' for me is an AppImage currently, but it is quite upsetting that I have the most problems with the supposed "just works" app packaging/distribution option.
Yes, Flatpak is overall a better approach when compared to AppImages, since being dependent on a known runtime ensures the program will run whenever the runtime is available.
What I wish they would add is a way to run the flatpak in a portable way. Because as it stands, AppImages is the only option for that. Flatpak doesn't really allow to have a portable installation in a pendrive, for example. At the moment there's no replacement for AppImage in such use cases, which is a pity.
But there's no fundamental technical design roadblock in flatpak that would prevent it from supporting this in the future, imho. theoretically one could create a program that mounts the flatpak file into a ramfs layered with the runtime and run it.
Yeah that's why I'm a bit weary of switching to Wayland, so many apps still seem unsupported, or have issues, whereas on X11 everything for me just works. Plus, the two DE's I'd actually consider using either don't have Wayland support at all or have very early experimental support (Cinnamon and Xfce) so it'll still be a while for me before I am able to consider switching to Wayland, assuming everything else works.
I don't actually know if it is a Wayland issue - most of those forum posts are like 3 years old... And I have definitely used these same AppImages in the past on Wayland without issue. I think the AppImages are expecting some specific dependency to be installed on my system that is no longer installed due to updates. (which I thought was counter to the entire point of an AppImage? I thought it was supposed to be kinda like Flatpak where it has it's dependencies in the image? Maybe I just misunderstood AppImage...)
To give you some hope, my Distro switched to Wayland as default a little over a year ago (i think) and I have not been running into problems (outside this AppImage problem, if it is indeed a Wayland issue, which I cannot confirm or deny).
It destroys the beautiful and carefully cultivated ecosystem of distributed packages that has been the bedrock of Linux for decades. They're bloated, often not quite as sandboxed as claimed, have created packaging chaos, and assume availability of system services that may not be there.
Just go to the package manager, type in the name of the program, install.
That's easier than on windows: go to the browser, search for the program, avoid the ads, search for the download button, follow the install wizard, avoid the toolbar
The one "good" thing about containers is that you keep your DLL-like mess localized. Just one or a few related apps run in the container and if they want / need some weird library version, they can have it without breaking other things.
Yeah but that’s a huge benefit already. I am not savvy enough in the development side to know whether that’s a reward that justifies any of the frustrations people have. Personally I don’t really mind varying methods to do any one job, as long as it’s well-documented, easily managed, and does not create a higher load on the system in any respect.
I view the delays during launch and the extra time spent during updates as a "load on the system."
Also, it entirely depends on your deployment environment. I develop system images that go out on thousands of devices deployed in "Cybersecuity Sensitive" environments, meaning: we have to document what's on the system and justify when anything in the SBOM (list of every software package installed on the machine) is identified as having any applicable CVEs... soooo.... keeping old versions of software anywhere on the machine is a problem (significant additional documentation load) for those security audits. Don't argue with logic, these are our customers and they have established their own procedures, so if we want their money, we will provide them with the documentation they demand, and that documentation is simplest when EVERYTHING on the system has ALL the latest patches.
The most secure systems are those that don't do anything at all. You can't hack a brick.
Hey, like I said, great info for me to learn because I don’t know. I was only saying that I don’t mind because my situation is fine with it. Thanks for the info, it’s interesting. I’m sure for any situation there’s a better and worse solution and I’m sure that for any solution, there’s a situation that either likes or dislikes the approach.
Yeah, I agree. Canonical seems to think "snaps are for everyone" so, for both my personal and professional applications they have decided: "Canonical is not for me."
i mostly use them for proprietary stuff or for software that is incredible painful to package (mostly electron apps). i will probably never use them for anything that actually matters but i also use rolling release distros everywhere so latest release is never too far. for testing latest version of any software i prefer appimages since they are simpler and don't need a messy setup as flatpak, but i also won't use them pass the testing phase and i prefer packaging the software if possible.
snaps, on the other hand, will never go near any of my systems. not even by accident
The thing that grinds my gears is when I'm doing an apt update and then it goes off to check on the snaps and drags the process out a lot longer. It doesn't help that they're slower to load the apps too. Then there's the additional attack surfaces to accumulate more CVE reports (and more out of date library versions on your system begging for a security patch...) Mostly, I just purge snap support from Ubuntu these days - but for people who don't notice / mind such things, you do you - maybe they'll eventually improve the lightweight container system until the rest of us don't notice it either.
There was a few years where I pretty much only used Flatpaks because I was scared of the terminal. But now that I've learned how to use the terminal, it's so much more convenient because I can quickly update all my applications all in one place without having to open a separate app. Plus, some Flatpaks can fall really behind on software updates.
There might be a Linux userbase someday where no one over than developers actually knows how to use the terminal, because users can run everything they want without a command line, but maybe that's actually a good thing because it'll drive up how many people use a Linux distro.
With Windows and Mac, there's a shareholder incentive to enshittify. With Linux, if a distro goes bad and gets commercialized, there's always another distro people can move to, not to mention there's no financial incentive. The more people get on Linux, the less power these tech companies have. Personally, that and privacy are what drew me to Linux much more so than being able to tinker or fine-tune my experience.
There might be a Linux userbase someday where no one other than developers actually knows how to use the terminal, because users can run everything they want without a command line
Ideally, all the essential terminal commands could be replicated in a user-friendly GUI-applicable manner. Don’t ever have to remove the terminal for those that enjoy it, but if we could have a magic world where even the failure states could be navigated with little to no prior knowledge required and it gets everyone away from Windows and Mac for good, I’m all for it.
Could things like this go in linuxmemes? Memes are fun but it would be nice to keep this a place for actual information. And no, this is not a comment on what it's saying, I'm just tired of so many memes.
I wouldn't say I have had a problem with snaps or flatpacks either. I uninstall all snaps first thing when I install recent Ubuntu versions, and I have never messed with flatpacks, so... no problems.
Fast storage is one of the cheapest components of modern PCs so I'm always surprised when Flatpak file size is brought up. It's not something I worry about very much.
And they are still, in my experience, slow to load, a cumbersome addition to the update process, and often un-necessary.
Don't get me wrong, if you're in a tight spot and can't make two significant software packages work in a distribution due to conflicting library version requirements... some kind of lightweight container solution is attractive, expedient, and better than just not supporting one of the packages. But, my impression is that a lot of stuff has been moved into flatpak / snap / etc. just because they can. I don't think it's the best, or even preferred, way to maintain software - for the desktop environment.
(Returns to checking on his Docker containers full of server apps on the R-Pi farm...)
It's a neat concept. The distro-agnostic aspect is definitely a plus for some people but I still prefer distro-specific installation methods. The only time I would seek out the Flatpak version of a particular software is when it's the only version available.
flatpaks are fine and useful, i just wish we didn't move into a scenario where applications that used to be easily available in distro repos start moving away from them and are only available through flatpaks. distro packages are just so much more efficient in every way. flatpaks are easier on maintainers and developers but that comes at a cost to the user. i have about a dozen or less flatpak apps installed and already i have to download at least 2 gigs of updates each week. i run debian
i agree with this but this isn’t the reality of the arch ecosystem. AUR is explicitly promoted on the wiki for a large amount of tasks the average user is going to do. it feels skeevy to acknowledge the problems with the AUR and then abscond arch’s responsibility for them, because the AUR is not like PPAs or anything. it is significantly more integrated into the ecosystem.
Thanks. In the past I have worked in Slackware, and even had Gentoo on my home system for a couple of years, but otherwise I've been fully saturated in Debian and its children - so that's my "comfort zone." I used to like KDE, but drifted away from it when I got a 4K screen notebook and KDE hadn't figured out resolution scaling yet, while Ubuntu/Unity had. I never quite warmed up to GNOME, but definitely have done my time with it. XFCE has matured enough for me to daily drive it without too much pain now, and I love the ways it can be de-featured (don't want a launcher bar? Don't run it, nothing else breaks.)
Server-side, I have been filling my Raspberry Pis with Docker containers for a while now... it's not completely alien, but I do kind of tend to "set it and forget it" when it comes to container deployments.
you (rhetorical you, not you) can recommend not using the AUR officially all you want. it doesn’t mean anything if a large number of tasks the average user is going to do require AUR packages. i’m kind of drunk rn but i’ll go find specific pages of the wiki that demonstrate what i’m talking about, i stg this isn’t nothing. the core system itself can entirely be managed with pacman, yes, but the average user is going to be doing a lot more than just that. there is a certain discord in the messaging of arch as a whole.
this is exactly my point. arch can either be a nuts and bolts distro or it can be made for normies. it can’t be both.
I like flatpak, but I can't download Flathub flatpak applications and (specially) Flathub flatpak runtimes from my phone. I hope Flathub learns from F-Droid
I'm happy to use Flatpaks but the annoyances I've had are like when one application says to use you'll need to point to the binary of another application that it depends on but very understandably doesn't package together, figuring that out to me can be annoying so I'll switch to a regular installation and it all just works together no fuss, no flatseal, no thinking about it really. Also some applications where it's really nice to launch from the terminal especially with arguments or just like the current working directory and with Flatpaks instead of just right off the bat it's application name and hit enter, Flatpak hope you remember the whole package name
As long as software is available in the Software Manager to be installed that way... I don't care what format it's in.
But don't make normies go to the terminal. It's inhumane, and really does not help the masses get away from big tech - which is a worthier goal than keeping your software terminal-only.
While I wouldn't want flakpak going deep into the OS I think the advantage of using them on the desktop is obvious. Developers can release to multiple dists from a single build and end users get updates and versions immediately rather than waiting for the dist to update its packages. Plus the ability to lock the software down with sandboxes.
The tradeoff is disk consumption but it's not really that big of a deal. Flatpaks are layered so apps can share dependencies. e.g. if the app is GNOME it can share the GNOME runtime with other apps and doesn't need to ship with its own.
FTFY: Flatpaks are layered so apps can share dependencies. e.g. if the app is GNOME 4.2.11.3 it can share the GNOME 4.2.11.3 runtime with other apps and doesn't need to ship with its own, but every app requires a different GNOME version anyway
Perhaps ironically, this is mocking a strawman. Flatpacks can be installed and managed using the terminal! Not only that but Linux-Distros have had graphical package managers for decades.
The primary reason that distros have embraced flatpack / snap / appimage is that they promise to lower the burden of managing software repositories. The primary reason that some users are mad is that these often don't provide a good experience:
they are often slower to install/start/run
they have trouble integrating with the rest of the system (ignoring gtk/qt themes for example)
they take a lot more space and bandwidth
Theoretically they are also more secure... But reality of that has also been questioned. Fine grained permissions are nice, but bundling libraries makes it hard to know what outdated libraries are running on the systems.
As far as I know, I've only installed Flatpaks using the terminal. The most annoying thing about them for me is having to type out the fully-qualified name of the software (e.g. org.mozilla.firefox instead of just firefox), which is a very terminal-specific issue, LOL!
Size and gnome/GTK dependencies are main reasons why I don't use Flatpaks (I have nothing against gnome though, it just pulls in too much and KDE is worse in this regards, which is why I use Sway and River)
Flatpak being securely sandboxed by default is both its biggest strength and its worst point of contention. The XDG is still scrambling to replicate the permission requests paradigm from Android on the Linux desktop.
Not a fan for a few reasons. Flathub (as far as I know) works on the app store model where developers offer their own builds to users, which is probably appealing to people coming from the Windows world who view distros as unnecessary middlemen, but in the GNU/Linux world the distro serves an important role as a sort of union of users; they make sure the software works in the distro environment, resolve breakages, and remove any anti-features placed in there by the upstream developers.
The sandboxing is annoying too, but understandable.
Despite this I will resort to a flatpak if I'm too lazy to figure out how to package something myself.
I'm a big fan of the idea of sandboxed apps. Flatpak is not great as it compromises sandboxing for compatibility (both with distros and apps) and also it's quite stagnant now. But there are no other options anyway, so I use it.
War with who? I'm posting this from Kubuntu and I'd happily agree with you that Snap should fuck off and die. (In particular, the backend being controlled by Canonical makes it objectively bad compared to Flatpak.) Even among people like me who tolerate Snap (for now...), I really don't think you're gonna find anybody who actually likes it, let alone enough to champion it.
Oh, hi! I also use Kubuntu, but I love Snaps! I use them for everything. I even tried to use a Snap-version of the kernel, but it completely destroyed my system so I had to reinstall... but other than that, they're great.
I "grew up" with Slackware, so I definitely understand the dependency issue.
I like flatpaks (and similar) for certain "atomic" pieces of software, like makemkv. For more "basic" software, like, say, KDE, I want it installed natively.
Just another tool in the toolbox. Use it or not, up to the user. I've even seen Slackware users who say they use Flatpak to ward off dependency rabbit holes.
Don't like it for one simple reason: no integration with the distribution. Flatpak is this sort universal solution that works, but doesn't necessarily work hand-in-hand with the distro, unlike package managers.
"The Way" by Ariana Grande is a romantic and soulful track that beautifully expresses the feeling of being in love. With its smooth melodies and heartfelt lyrics, this song from the album "Yours Truly" showcases Grande's impressive vocal talent and her ability to connect with listeners on an emotional level.
🎵 LYRICS 🎵: What we gotta do right here is go back, back to the top
I love the way you make me feel I love it, I love it I love the way you make me feel I love it, I love it
Say, I'm thinking 'bout her every second, every hour Do my singing in the shower Picking petals off the flowers like Do she love me, do she love me not? (love me not) I ain't a player,I just (Player, I just...)
You give me that kind of something Want it all the time, need it everyday On a scale of one to ten I'm at a hundred Never get enough, I can't stay away If you want it, I got it, I got it everyday You can get whatever you need from me Stay by your side, I'll never leave you And I ain't going nowhere 'cause you're a keeper
So don't you worry, baby, you got me I got a bad boy, I must admit it (Hey) You got my heart, don't know how you did it (Hey) And I don't care who sees it, babe I don't wanna hide the way I feel when you're next to me (Hey)
I love the way (I love the way you make me feel) I love the way (I love it, I love it) Baby, I love the way (I love the way you make me feel) Ooh, I love the way (I love it, I love it) The way you love me
Oh, it's so crazy you get my heart jumping When you put your lips on mine And, honey, it ain't a question (Q-q-question) 'Cause, boy, I know just what you like So if you need it, I got it, I got it everyday Be your lover, your friend, you'll find it all in me Stay by your side, I'll never leave you Said I ain't going nowhere 'cause you're a keeper
So don't you worry, baby, you got me I got a bad boy, I must admit it (Hey) You got my heart, don't know how you did it (Hey) And I don't care who sees it, babe I don't wanna hide the way I feel when you're next to me (Hey)
I love the way (I love the way you make me feel) I love the way (I love it, I love it) Baby, I love the way (I love the way you make me feel) Ooh, I love the way (I love it, I love it) The way I love you
I make you feel so fine, make you feel so fine I hope you hit me on my celly when I sneak in your mind You a princess to the public, but a freak when it's time Said your bed be feeling lonely So you're sleeping in mine Come and watch a movie with me "American Beauty" or "Bruce Almighty" that's groovy Just come and move closer to me I got some feelings for you I'm not gonna get bored of But, baby, you're an adventure so let me come and explore you
So don't you worry, baby, you got me I got a bad boy, I must admit it (Hey) You got my heart, don't know how you did it (Hey) And I don't care who sees it, babe I don't wanna hide the way I feel when you're next to me (Hey)
I love the way (I love the way) I love the way (I love it, I love it) Baby, I love the way (I love the way) Ooh, I love the way (I love it, I love it) I love the way (I love the way you make me feel) I love the way (I love it, I love it) Baby, I love the way (I love the way you make me feel) Ooh, I love the way (I love it) The way I love you
The way I love you, you, you, yeah, the way I love the way you make me feel I love it, I love it I love the way you make me feel I love it The way I love you
Album Artist: Ariana Grande Album(s): Yours Truly Written by: Douglas Gibson, Robert W. Manigault, Brenda Gordon Russell, Amber Denise Streeter, Gerald Elliot Thomas, Harmony David Samuels, Jordin Sparks, Al Sherrod Lambert, Malcolm James McCormick, James W. Castor, Harry V. Jensen, Langdon Jr. Fridie Music genre(s): R&B, Pop Released: 2013 Decade for first release: #2010sMusic
In a highly unusual ruling, the California State Supreme Court declared this week that O.J. Simpson attorney Alan Dershowitz is, quote, "one ugly bastard."
"breathin" by Ariana Grande is an empowering pop anthem that addresses anxiety and the importance of self-care. With its uplifting beat and relatable lyrics, this track from the album "Sweetener" showcases Grande's vocal strength and her ability to inspire listeners to find calm amidst chaos.
🎵 LYRICS 🎵: Some days, things just take Way too much of my energy I look up and the whole room's spinning You take my cares away I can so over-complicate, people tell me to medicate
Feel my blood runnin', swear the sky's fallin' I know that all this - fabricated, mm Time goes by and I can't control my mind Don't know what else to try, but you tell me every time
Just keep breathin' and breathin' and breathin' and breathin' And, oh, I gotta keep, keep on breathin' Just keep breathin' and breathin' and breathin' and breathin' And, oh, I gotta keep, keep on breathin', mm-mm
Sometimes, it's hard to find Find my way up into the clouds Tune it out, they can be so loud You remind me of a time When things weren't so complicated All I need is to see your face
Feel my blood runnin', swear the sky's fallin' I know that all this - fabricated, mm Time goes by and I can't control my mind Don't know what else to try, but you tell me every time
Just keep breathin' and breathin' and breathin' and breathin' And, oh, I gotta keep, I keep on breathin' Just keep breathin' and breathin' and breathin' and breathin' And, oh, I gotta keep, I keep on breathin', mm, yeah
My, my air, my, my air My, my air, my air My, my air, my, my air My, my air, yeah
Just keep breathin' and breathin' and breathin' and breathin' And, oh, I gotta keep, I keep on breathin' Just keep breathin' and breathin' and breathin' and breathin' And, oh, I gotta keep (ay), I keep on breathin', mm, yeah
Feel my blood runnin', swear the sky's fallin' (oh, whoa) I keep on breathin' (oh, yeah) Time goes by and I can't control my mind I keep on breathin', mm, yeah
Directed by Hannah Lux Davis Produced by Fuliane Petikyan & Brandon Bonfiglio Edited by Hannah Lux Davis & Anne Laure Dhooghe For London Alley
Music video by Ariana Grande performing breathin.
Album Artist: Ariana Grande Album(s): Sweetener Written by: Peter Anders Svensson, Savan Harish Kotecha, Ilya Salmanzadeh, Ariana Grande Music genre(s): Pop Released: 2018 Decade for first release: #2010sMusic
"Into You" by Ariana Grande is an electrifying pop track that captures the thrill of infatuation and desire. With its pulsating beat and sultry lyrics, this song from the album "Dangerous Woman" showcases Grande's vocal range and ability to convey deep emotions, making it a fan favourite.
🎵 LYRICS 🎵: I'm so into you I can barely breathe And all I wanna do Is to fall in deep
But close ain't close enough 'Til we cross the line, hey, yeah So name a game to play And I'll roll the dice, hey
Oh, baby, look what you started The temperature's rising in here Is this gonna happen? Been waiting and waiting for you to make a move (ooh, ooh) Before I make a move (ooh, ooh)
So, baby, come light me up And maybe I'll let you on it A little bit dangerous But, baby, that's how I want it A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you
Got everyone watchin' us So, baby, let's keep it secret A little bit scandalous But, baby, don't let them see it A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you Ooh, yeah
This could take some time, hey I made too many mistakes Better get this right, right, baby
Oh, baby, look what you started The temperature's rising in here Is this gonna happen? Been waiting and waiting for you to make a move (ooh, ooh) Before I make a move (ooh, ooh)
So, baby, come light me up And maybe I'll let you on it A little bit dangerous But, baby, that's how I want it A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you
Got everyone watchin' us So, baby, let's keep it secret A little bit scandalous But, baby, don't let them see it A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you ('cause I'm so into you)
Tell me what you came here for 'Cause I can't, I can't wait no more I'm on the edge with no control And I need, I need you to know You to know, oh, yeah
So, baby, come light me up (light me up) And maybe I'll let you on it A little bit dangerous (dangerous) But, baby, that's how I want it (how I want it) A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you
Got everyone watchin' us (watchin' us) So, baby, let's keep it secret A little bit scandalous (scandalous) But, baby, don't let them see it A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you
So come light me up So come light me up, my baby Little dangerous A little dangerous, my baby A little less conversation and a little more touch my body 'Cause I'm so into you, into you, into you
Directed by Hannah Lux Davis Produced by Brandon Bonfiglio
Music video by Ariana Grande performing Into You.
Album Artist: Ariana Grande Album(s): Dangerous Woman Written by: Martin Karl Sandberg, Alexander Erik Kronlund, Savan Harish Kotecha, Ilya Salmanzadeh, Ariana Grande Music genre(s): Pop Released: 2016 Decade for first release: #2010sMusic
![anarchoilluminati [comrade/them]](photo/contact/80/2431325?ts=1725840626)
![sovietknuckles [she/her]](photo/contact/80/2435702?ts=1752777855)
![Andrzej3K [none/use name]](photo/contact/80/2532700?ts=1728130079)
relentless_eduardo
in reply to Zardoz • • •Lady MountainJay
in reply to Zardoz • • •