If there's one thing you can always count on in the Linux world it's that packaging can be a nightmare. The OBS Studio team are not happy with the Fedora folks due to Flatpak problems and threatened legal action.
  • recursive_recursion they/them@lemmy.caEnglish
    832·
    28 days ago

    I’m not surprised that the OBS devs are considering suing Fedora for their Fedora Flatpaks.

    For anyone out of the loop:
    Fedora’s been packaging and providing apps as Fedora Flatpaks which cause users trouble cause they’re honestly pretty shit and known to be unreliable. The issue is that users assume that these faulty packages are provided by the Original Devs and complain towards the ODevs.

    As endless waves of users complain towards the ODevs it causes them unnecessary headache as well as costing valuable time and resources to tell users that it’s actually Fedora fucking things for everyone.

    All of this is unnecessary because if Fedora stopped installing Fedora Flatpaks as the default then there wouldn’t be this problem in the first place.

    • simple@lemm.ee
      30·
      27 days ago

      Wait, why is Fedora making their own flatpaks? I thought the entire point is that they work on any distro and everybody gets the original source from flathub.

      • Sparking@lemm.eeEnglish
        17·
        27 days ago

        I asked this exact thing somewhere else, and the best answers I got were:

        • there is a somewhat legitimate motivation for fedora to package their own flatpaks in the context of their atomic desktops project.
        • they started doing this before flathub was established, and it was a better idea at that time.

        So, as per usual with Linux, there are some obscure and historical reasons this is a thing, but it is useless for the majority of users. Fedora should really not have it configured as the default source for flatpaks out of the box

      • anothermember@feddit.ukEnglish
        8·
        27 days ago

        Wait, why is Fedora making their own flatpaks? I thought the entire point is that they work on any distro and everybody gets the original source from flathub.

        Just to add to the other replies you’ve got, as far as I’m aware there’s no reason why you can’t add Fedora’s flatpak repo on another distro. Why you would want to is another matter, but I think the fact that anyone can make their own repo is the fundamental strength of flatpak as opposed to snaps; it’s not tied to one organisation, Flathub is the de facto central repo but it doesn’t always have to be.

    • Jayb151@lemmy.world
      5·
      27 days ago

      Thank you for the context. I’ve been kind of out of the loop with Linux on general and have been using fedora… But now a question. What’s the most stable form of package and which distros use it by default? I’ve been kind of confused my the whole all image, flatpack, etc thing.

      • recursive_recursion they/them@lemmy.caEnglish
        31·
        26 days ago

        Personally I’d recommend installing in this order:

        1. Packages from your distro’s native repository.
        2. Flatpaks from Flathub (please avoid Fedora’s Flatpaks).
        3. AppImages/Debs usually provided on the app developer’s site.
        4. The Arch User Repository (AUR) if compatible.
        5. Tarballs.
        6. Ubuntu Snaps.
        7. Fedora Flatpaks.
      • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
        44·
        27 days ago

        There isn’t one. It’s still a shit show.

        The most reliable way to distribute software on Linux is still to make a statically linked binary (linking with a very old glibc is fine) and use curl | bash. But that isn’t always possible depending on the language used and the app.

        Seems like OBS Studio is C++/Qt, so it shouldn’t be too difficult though. I’ve done it before in the distant past. But looking at their releases they only provide .deb for Linux, so I can understand why people would want something else.

        • suy@programming.dev
          3·
          27 days ago

          I’ve made several Qt apps (in C++) easily packaged using AppImage. Perhaps OBS is harder because they require some level of integration with the hardware (e.g. the virtual camera perhaps requires something WRT drivers, I don’t know), but in the general case of a Qt app doing “normal GUI stuff” and “normal user stuff” is a piece of cake. To overcome the glibc problem, it’s true that it’s recommended using an old distro, but it’s not a must. Depends on what you want to support.

          As a user, I prefer a native package, though (deb in my case).

  • thatradomguy@lemmy.world
    301·
    28 days ago

    Funny, I always thought it would be Canonical getting into this kind of trouble with snaps. Oh well…