News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default by attractivechaos on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @08:34AM (#35356292)
I wish all software could provide portable binaries. However, compiling portable binaries is hard. Not many developers have the skill.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default by dTal on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @09:45AM (#35357207)
Indeed. This seems like a tooling issue, and one that strikes me as more worthy of community attention than reinventing the package manager for the nth time.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default by veeti on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @09:52AM (#35357291)
Yes, and once we have the tooling to build portable .tar.gz application packages someone should come up with a tool to automatically upgrade them.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default by dTal on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @10:20AM (#35357683)
Perhaps. Extrapolating the idea that .tar.gz application packages should be standalone, a better system than an external updater might be that the aforementioned build tooling includes an "update" script inside the .tar.gz. Then the user can run them at their own convenience. This is similar to how Firefox's updater works, except Firefox itself does double duty as the update script.
Re:Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default by erik_seaberg on Wednesday March 29, 2023 @03:39PM (#35362230)
I prefer a binary more willing to interop with the system it’s installed on, rather than the statically linked black boxes we see on end user desktop platforms.