Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Flatpak problem

New to Debian (Or Linux in general)? Ask your questions here!
Post Reply
Message
Author
faziopesce
Posts: 18
Joined: 2018-06-11 05:57

Flatpak problem

#1 Post by faziopesce »

I installed flatpak added repo but when i install a package this error pop-up. I'm internet connected.Image

Wheelerof4te
Posts: 1454
Joined: 2015-08-30 20:14

Re: Flatpak problem

#2 Post by Wheelerof4te »

Use code tags and post only outputs of commands, screenshots are next to useless.
Like

Code: Select all

this
Have you tried again? You also have the options of appimage, try that if flatpak doesn't work.
BTW, that KDE runtime is huge, 310+ MB...

faziopesce
Posts: 18
Joined: 2018-06-11 05:57

Flatpak problem

#3 Post by faziopesce »

Now I'm not able to try but I've tested android studio and the error has exactly the same output.
After downloading all delta parts, flatpak tells me that there is a connection problem.

Wheelerof4te
Posts: 1454
Joined: 2015-08-30 20:14

Re: Flatpak problem

#4 Post by Wheelerof4te »

Try using the latest version from stretch-backports. Uninstall your current flatpak, add stretch-backports repo, install flatpak from it and then try again.
https://backports.debian.org/Instructions/
There might be a problem with the old version, but I haven't tested it.


User avatar
golinux
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2010-12-09 00:56
Location: not a 'buntard!
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Flatpak problem

#6 Post by golinux »

Flatpaks ARE the problem . . .
May the FORK be with you!

arochester
Emeritus
Emeritus
Posts: 2435
Joined: 2010-12-07 19:55
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Flatpak problem

#7 Post by arochester »

@golonux Specific evidence, please?

User avatar
stevepusser
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 71 times

Re: Flatpak problem

#8 Post by stevepusser »

My advice would be to resort to these bloated universal packages only if you exhaust the possiblity of a native backport...

https://repology.org/metapackage/keepassxc/versions

Hmm, Debian and thus MX 17 backports have fallen a couple releases behind. Let me see I I can update it for MX and my OBS backports. https://build.opensuse.org/package/show ... /keepassxc
MX Linux packager and developer

User avatar
stevepusser
Posts: 12930
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 71 times

Re: Flatpak problem

#9 Post by stevepusser »

2.3.3 backports were successful for Jessie and Stretch on the OBS, and I'll see about adding Buster. A Debian Buster version or official backport will upgrade over mine if it ever comes down the pipe.

So it's your choice, a broken 300+ MB flatpak, or a few MB of backports done right.
MX Linux packager and developer

User avatar
golinux
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2010-12-09 00:56
Location: not a 'buntard!
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Flatpak problem

#10 Post by golinux »

arochester wrote:@golinux Specific evidence, please?
@stevepusser said it for me:
So it's your choice, a broken 300+ MB flatpak, or a few MB of backports done right.
The way that's sold as "easy" to the clueless is often neither easy, efficient or reliable. And likely to have other undesirable, unadvertised "features" included.
May the FORK be with you!

User avatar
sunrat
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6382
Joined: 2006-08-29 09:12
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Has thanked: 115 times
Been thanked: 456 times

Re: Flatpak problem

#11 Post by sunrat »

golinux wrote:Flatpaks ARE the problem . . .
Agreed. Why build packages that don't use available native libraries?
Just from a size aspect, I installed telegram-desktop from Debian repo yesterday. It used ~28MB of space. The equivalent flatpak is about 300MB!
“ computer users can be divided into 2 categories:
Those who have lost data
...and those who have not lost data YET ”
Remember to BACKUP!

User avatar
Head_on_a_Stick
Posts: 14114
Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
Location: London, England
Has thanked: 81 times
Been thanked: 132 times

Re: Flatpak problem

#12 Post by Head_on_a_Stick »

sunrat wrote:Why build packages that don't use available native libraries?
I want the latest Blender version[1] for my Debian stable system but it won't backport and I'm not compiling it on an X201 but I do have the disk space to spare for a flatpak so it makes sense for me :)

[1] They have a new principled BSDF for their Cycles renderer that emulates Disney's ubershader.
deadbang

User avatar
debiman
Posts: 3063
Joined: 2013-03-12 07:18

Re: Flatpak problem

#13 Post by debiman »

flatpaks (and whatever other container thingymajicks exist) are a problem if they create the illusion that they are easier and thus better than installing normal apps.
soon people will choose to install everything through flatpaks, and even the 1TB root partition is filled up in no time... not to speak of all the specific problems these containers bring with them.
especially if people don't even realise that what they install is something fundamentally different than if installing from the repos.

User avatar
bester69
Posts: 2072
Joined: 2015-04-02 13:15
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: Flatpak problem

#14 Post by bester69 »

debiman wrote:flatpaks (and whatever other container thingymajicks exist) are a problem if they create the illusion that they are easier and thus better than installing normal apps.
soon people will choose to install everything through flatpaks, and even the 1TB root partition is filled up in no time... not to speak of all the specific problems these containers bring with them.
especially if people don't even realise that what they install is something fundamentally different than if installing from the repos.

flatpak and Appimage are great (i dont like snap), There is not such a drama, they're around 250-450MB each application at first, until they start to sharing same frameworks, then they fill the same size as the regular application.
For example, flatpak is great for last video edition apps, they have most of them (kdenlive, pitivi, openshot, shotcut, avidemux, etc),, and they offer you last realised, and result that version is less buggy than what Stretch ships on. Ive seen it, kdenlive , others stretch apps crashing more often than flatpak's later versions.

Im already accepted flatpak as part of my system, Thanks to flatpak i dont see any need to use debian testing, when you can have available that last software now in debian stable.
bester69 wrote:STOP 2030 globalists demons, keep the fight for humanity freedom against NWO...

Post Reply