Applications to Flatpak

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



While waiting on/working on getting Flatpaks building in the Fedora infrastructure, I took some time to write a tool to collect information about applications we might want to package as Flatpaks and how they correlate with the runtime. You can find the result at:

 https://fishsoup.net/misc/flatpak-runtime-reports/applications.html

(more reports can be clicked through at the top.)

The data source for this are:

 A) The Fedora appstream
 B) The Fedora package set
 C) The Flathub appstream
 D) ODRS reviews (odrs.gnome.org)

[ Scripts are in https://src.fedoraproject.org/modules/flatpak-runtime/ - but currently depend on only-on-my-computer versions of fedmod. Once the F28 hybrid compose is sorted out, I can start working on pushing those changes out. ]

Some initial observations:

 * The most popularly reviewed applications on ODRS are either a) packaged in Fedora or b) can't be packaged in Fedora. This is somewhat circular because a large fraction of ODRS reviews come from Fedora.

 * There are a lot of popularly reviewed applications in Fedora that are *not* on Flathub. Some are don't make sense or are very hard to Flatpak (GParted, GNOME Boxes), but plenty of others (qBittorent, Stellarium, etc.) should be reasonably straightforward.

 * Many applications have a *lot* of dependencies that would need to be bundled given the current runtime contents. But often these are stray - e.g. gedit pulls 41 dependencies, but if it would only require 4 dependencies if it was fixed to depend on gvfs-client rather than gvfs. Or as another example, applications that depend on the KDE Frameworks pull in a pile of perl packages because of /usr/bin/preparetips5 in kf5-kconfigwidgets which seems marginally useful at runtime.

 * A few packages would get bundled into many, many applications - and should definitely be added to the runtime (qt-settings, glx-utils). But on the other hand there are a huge set of packages that get bundled into exactly 1 out of the 800 packages examined here (maybe 1700/3700.)

 * I'm not sure yet whether a "flatpak-shared-deps" module with dependencies built into /app is useful. The pros of it are:
 - Things built in it will be shared on disk between different apps because of ostree deduplication. (But not when downloading via OCI.)
 - Things that are hard to build (think perl, texlive) only need to be worked out once.

* The bulk of the runtime packages get used very broadly, but there is a short tail of stuff in there that *no* app requires. Some of this I've already identified as stray and to be removed (krb5-server, say.)

Once we get the building infrastructure going, we can start picking off some of the low-hanging fruit and looking at the harder cases.

Regards,
Owen

_______________________________________________
desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora KDE]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Config]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat 9]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux