this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
397 points (95.6% liked)

linuxmemes

21222 readers
80 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
    • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
    • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

    • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    poopsmith@lemmy.world
    zephyr@lemmy.world
    rtxn@lemmy.world
    397
    wth, that was really annoying (lemmy.ml)
    submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by Samsy@lemmy.ml to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
    72 comments fedilink hide all child comments
     

    Background-Story: I did a "flatpak update" on a remote client and every package wants the PW for downloading and for installing again. I had to enter the password like 30 times or more.

    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] stepanzak@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    Yes, but developers can create only flatpak, where they make sure it works and they officially support it, and then completely stop caring about other formats and community packages. Just like Bottles project does.

    [–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    where they make sure it works and they officially support it

    Citation needed

    completely stop caring about other formats and community packages.

    That seems to be the case every time developers package software in any way. Sometimes even if they don't package it at all.

    [–] stepanzak@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 8 months ago

    I'll try to reword it so it's clearer what I meant: I think developers shouldn't have to maintain more than one package format, and I think flatpak is the best format to be the one supported by the developer officially. Many developers officially support only .deb for example.