flathub
com.bitwarden.desktop | flathub | |
---|---|---|
15 | 114 | |
14 | 1,074 | |
- | 2.5% | |
7.3 | 6.7 | |
7 days ago | 4 days ago | |
- | GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0 only |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
com.bitwarden.desktop
-
Flathub – The Linux App Store
> One thing I don't know about (which maybe somebody can inform me/us about): the wiki states that PRs are reviewed by Flathub reviewers, but I see no sign of human review on e.g. https://github.com/flathub/com.bitwarden.desktop/pull/167 (or others in that repo). What's the actual process?
In this case, I think the lack of human involvement is mostly a good thing. Flathub was criticised for having outdated packages[1]. Using automation to automatically update packages is mostly a good thing.
Obviously, we want to see thorough review of new packages, but that's a separate issue.
[1] I thought I read this in an LWN article, but I can't find it. But see e.g. https://github.com/flathub/org.qutebrowser.qutebrowser/issue...
-
Can I trust Flatpak apps if they are not managed by the app developer?
for example, bitwarden's flatpak on github shows basically just repackages the official debian build into a flatpak build. in this case i think it's pretty safe (in fact i use the flatpak).
-
Bitwarden not working
You might also be interested in learning a little about Flatpaks and downloading/installing programs from Flathub. I'll give you the basic background: It's an alternative (in some ways, honestly, modern) way of installing programs that can be sandboxed/permissioned. It's a way of releasing software that also helps ensure compatibility across a wide variety of systems. It's also a way of releasing software that can update independently from the base installation. You can think of it sort of like an app store on a phone where the programs are a bit self-contained and can update independently from the phone's operating system. https://flathub.org/apps/details/com.bitwarden.desktop
- First config install
-
In using Ubuntu for ARM, I noticed there's a 4-year-old version of Bitwarden ARM64 on the Ubuntu Software Center. Be cool if you updated it, but maybe remove it at this point. It’s identified as unsafe due to ‘using a legacy windowing system’, and while it installs, the login errors out.
See https://github.com/flathub/com.bitwarden.desktop/issues/63
-
Publishing Electron apps to flathub
Example of an application but with Electron: https://github.com/flathub/com.bitwarden.desktop
-
I'm a very basic user. What am I missing?
Since we're on the subject, you can also host your own BitWarden if you wanted. Bitwarden also has a desktop client for Linux as well. Alternatively if enabled 3rd Party Repositories or just manually enabled Flathub, you can install the Bitwarden flatpak.
- I made a BASH script that removes Snap from an Ubuntu system and replaces it with Flatpak.
-
Vote for the Bitwarden flatpak app to become official
It's not really that much of a risk. If you look at the yaml file you can see exactly what permissions it requests and what happens when the package is built.
-
What's the current obstacle to more developers directly pushing their apps to flathub?
Luckily, Flathub is transparent in what manifests are used in the production of the Flatpaks they host. For example, this is the one for Bitwarden. You can take some time to learn how Flatpaks are built, but this one seems pretty straight forward. They are taking the .deb file from Bitwarden's github release page and extracting the executable from there. Then it adds a couple extra files, which are viewable within the manifest file, to make it into a Flatpak app.
flathub
-
XZ backdoor story – Initial analysis
> Nobody ever even audits the binary contents of flatpaks on flathub (were they actually built from the source? the author attests so!).
IME/IIRC There aren't (or shouldn't be) any binary contents on Flathub that are submitted by the author, at least for projects with source available? You're supposed to submit a short, plain-text recipe instead, which then gets automatically built from source outside the control of the author.
> The Flathub service then uses the manifest from your repository to continuously build and distribute your application on every commit.
https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/submission/#ho...
Usually the recipes should just list the appropriate URLs to get the source code, or, for proprietary applications, the official .DEBs. Kinda like AUR, but JSON/YAML. Easy to audit if you want:
https://github.com/orgs/flathub/repositories
- FOSS software is probably less likely to abuse this, but it just depends how ruthless the publisher is, a lot of people desire to be successful and it's human nature to look for advantages to put yourself above others in competitive environments.
-
Flathub – The Linux App Store
I also don't believe third parties maintainers packaging software on flathub is a big issue but I'm also not familiar with how other distro repos trust their maintainers. Hopefully more developers maintain their flatpak themselves (or someone they trust) and get their apps verified. If most apps are verified, warning users of unverified apps might be a good idea.
There's ongoing discussion about splitting open source and proprietary apps in to seperate repos [1]. Additionally having seperate repos for verified and unverified apps might make it more obvious where an app comes from in the cli.
But I don't know how seamlessly an app could transition between being in the third party repo and being in the official repo. Having the user quietly stop receiving updates seems like a bad idea, but automatically migrating might not be desirable either.
I also think flatpaks cli interface needs some work. It is functional but far from distro package managers.
Being verified is especially important for critical apps. Recently someone added malicious versions of apps to the snap store [3]. This lead to people getting their cryptocurrency stolen.
[1] https://github.com/flathub/flathub/issues/691
[2] https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/requirements
[3] https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/temporary-suspension-of-automat...
-
Bforartists Flatpak, coming soon to Flathub
That means Linux users can now install Bforartists on any Linux distro easily, regardless of glibc version! https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pull/4295
-
Turtle 0.3 released (formerly TurtleGit)
Still having some problems with the flathub build, see https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pull/4082 for the current status.
-
TurtleGit released, a git frontend for GNOME and Nautilus
Here is the flathub draft pull request: https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pull/4082
-
The first tip to give to any new Linux user should be "do NOT search for, download, and install software on the Web!"
i assume you dont know how flathub works , theirs little or no QC , done flathub is just get told theirs an update for the package , if yo go look at the github repo pes https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pull/4164 for example , only updates the link to the girt repo , theirs 0 code checked
-
Who is behind flathub and rpmfusion really?
It all should be written in pages for contributors, read the docs for fusion, and the docs for flathub.
-
Flathub just hit 1 billion total downloads
These are criticisms of the flatpak ecosystem as it stands today. Currently, the Firefox ESR package on flathub seems to be caught in limbo or maybe dead. Mozilla publishes both a snap and a flatpak of Firefox latest, but only a snap of the ESR version. This raises the question of why. Have Mozilla chosen to invest more in snaps than in flatpaks? If so, what's their reasoning? (More users on snaps, making it similar to why they put more investment into Windows than Linux? Something else?) If they haven't invested more into snaps than flatpaks, is this a sign that it's harder to maintain flatpaks (or at least on flathub) than snaps? If that's true, I would hope that flatpak/flathub would be soliciting feedback from Mozilla about it.
-
VirtualBox as Flatpak
Because that may be very hard to sandbox: https://github.com/flathub/flathub/issues/3366
What are some alternatives?
desktop - The desktop vault (Windows, macOS, & Linux).
ZeroTier-GUI - A Linux front-end for ZeroTier
snapd - The snapd and snap tools enable systems to work with .snap files.
Ryujinx - Experimental Nintendo Switch Emulator written in C#
flatpak-external-data-checker - A tool for checking if the external data used in Flatpak manifests is still up to date
bubblewrap - Low-level unprivileged sandboxing tool used by Flatpak and similar projects
org.qutebrowser.qutebrowser
flatpak - Linux application sandboxing and distribution framework
snap-to-flatpak - A BASH script that removes Snap from an Ubuntu system and replaces it with Flatpak
openbsd-wip - OpenBSD work in progress ports
steam-runtime - A runtime environment for Steam applications
easyeffects - Limiter, compressor, convolver, equalizer and auto volume and many other plugins for PipeWire applications