Re: F27 System Wide Change: Graphical Applications as Flatpaks

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

 



After reading this, I think there's a false dichotomy here:

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:26 PM,  <mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> There ought to be better ways to sandbox applications than to turn them
>> into
>> what is essentially a full container (i.e., almost a full VM, only minus
>> the
>> kernel), bundling all the libraries. The split into an application and a
>> runtime that Flatpak does is only a partial workaround.
>
>
> I don't think there are better ways to sandbox applications. Sandboxing is
> what has really sold me on Flatpak.

Flatpak provides two things that are very nearly orthogonal: packaging
and sandboxing.  Packaging is the system of bundles, apps, runtimes,
etc that allows you to build a Flatpak, send it to a different
machine, and run it there, even if the other machine runs a different
distro.

Sandboxing is Flatpak's system of portals, confinement, etc.

Aside from the fact that both are based on namespaces, I see no reason
at all that they need to be conflated.  It should be entirely possible
for Flatpak ro run an "app" that is actually a conventional RPM
installed on the host system using host libraries.  Flatpak would just
map all of /usr into its namespace rather than mapping a container
bundle into its namespace.  The sandbox would work exactly the same as
for any other Flatpak except that the sandboxed app would be able to
read all of /usr.  Arguably, in a model where all of /usr is visible
in the app's namespace, development and debugging might be
considerably easier.

Perhaps Fedora should consider a scheme where graphical application
RPMs are augmented with the metadata needed to run them inside Flatpak
while still packaging them the old-fashioned way with old-fashioned
RPM library dependencies and old-fashioned build tools.  This would
almost certainly entail modifications to Flatpak, but I bet they'd be
fairly minor modifications and quite possibly much less complex than
all the tooling needed to get the average graphical application RPM to
build a functional Flatpak bundle.

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




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux