>new gnome app store
>X11 app support labeled as "unsafe"
>X11 app support labeled as "unsafe"
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Replies
15
@phnt yeah flathub has gotten many side eyes for trying to enforce gnome's preferences as policy. there's some of the more kde aligned folk have told them they refuse to use it because flathub has demanded shit like changing their app icon to appease the style police.
@phnt there's also been some discussions about better compression which all get "but ostree"'d, i think someone also asked about casync and they just got "but ostree"'d again.
it's apparently just a tech demo for ostree, a plant for gnome (and thus RHEL) preference dissemination, and there's some faffing around with bubblewrap that is all very half hearted. bleh
it's apparently just a tech demo for ostree, a plant for gnome (and thus RHEL) preference dissemination, and there's some faffing around with bubblewrap that is all very half hearted. bleh
@phnt gnome knows best
@phnt i see they’re taking lessons from rust propaganda now
hasn't that been a thing for a while on flathub?
@rose No clue, haven't used flatpaks in like a year and flathub as a website way longer.
Here's the code though:
https://github.com/bazaar-org/bazaar/blob/main/src/bz-safety-calculator.c#L145
https://github.com/bazaar-org/bazaar/blob/main/src/bz-safety-dialog.c#L243
https://github.com/bazaar-org/bazaar/blob/main/src/bz-app-permissions.h#L47 (there's no wayland permission which I think is a valid flatpak permission.)
Here's the code though:
https://github.com/bazaar-org/bazaar/blob/main/src/bz-safety-calculator.c#L145
https://github.com/bazaar-org/bazaar/blob/main/src/bz-safety-dialog.c#L243
https://github.com/bazaar-org/bazaar/blob/main/src/bz-app-permissions.h#L47 (there's no wayland permission which I think is a valid flatpak permission.)
Oh bazaar, yeah they copied that from flathub and gnome software (screenshot is from flathub)
these kinds of brainworms are insane lmao
these kinds of brainworms are insane lmao
@rose At least it is labeled as potentially unsafe and not unsafe.
@icedquinn
>ostree compression
There's a 4 year old issue about it: https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/2626
>bubblewrap
I hate bwrap and it's dissemination into various projects with zero thoughts. Recently gnome broke everything that was sandboxed manually (like with firejail) and used a gtk file picker. So safe to say basically 90% of gtk apps, because they switched to rust glycin which runs image format parsers in a bwrap sandbox. Nobody had an idea to check whether the app was already sandboxed and after it was reported, the supposed fixed didn't work at all. It was never properly fixed in glycin.
>RHEL
I don't see an issue with that much. Nobody sane uses that on the desktop and on servers, they already have their monopoly. systemd, polkit, dbus and much more. It's more of a gnome push I think, aligned with Fedora as the gnome OS of choice.
>ostree compression
There's a 4 year old issue about it: https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/2626
>bubblewrap
I hate bwrap and it's dissemination into various projects with zero thoughts. Recently gnome broke everything that was sandboxed manually (like with firejail) and used a gtk file picker. So safe to say basically 90% of gtk apps, because they switched to rust glycin which runs image format parsers in a bwrap sandbox. Nobody had an idea to check whether the app was already sandboxed and after it was reported, the supposed fixed didn't work at all. It was never properly fixed in glycin.
>RHEL
I don't see an issue with that much. Nobody sane uses that on the desktop and on servers, they already have their monopoly. systemd, polkit, dbus and much more. It's more of a gnome push I think, aligned with Fedora as the gnome OS of choice.
@phnt red hat structurally owns freedesktop and gnome
@phnt i don't hate bwrap. firejail never worked right for me (firefox kept escaping somehow.) i think tying flatpak to bwrap has been a long running mistake though.
sandboxing goes along with power box batterns and IPC which is a different war for another day and fighting on multiple fronts isn't great
sandboxing goes along with power box batterns and IPC which is a different war for another day and fighting on multiple fronts isn't great
@icedquinn The way Flatpak sandboxing works was flawed from the start. Punching holes in the sandbox at will with portals and what not is a mistake that already gave them problems. Sandboxes should just be static.
@phnt static isn't realistic for desktop use. the power box pattern is fine they just didn't stick the landing.