us.zoom.Zoom VS nix-bundle

For example, let's say we want a separate instance of Zoom (Zoom on Flathub) to run along the default one.

It seems to divert the discussion to something that doesn't make too much sense. X and Wayland are two different things by design, this probonopd sounds extraordinarily salty that moving an application under a new server breaks some things, making some applications entirely useless, but I say, that is to be expected. Saying that Wayland breaks stuff by design, as if that was their only objective is just petty, of course it's a pity that those devs have thrown in the towel, but let's not pretend like theirs were the only options, e.g. screen recording works perfectly fine with OBS, at least it has done so on my machines with AMD/Intel GPUs; Jitsi works now; Zoom screensharing being GNOME only is Zoom devs being dicks that can't be arsed to support standards, the community came in to work around it and also I don't know how they could bring up a proprietary application that has not made the Flatpak package themselves as an example, the whole thing is a community effort there apparently; etc. etc. (I'm not going to debunk all the others that are invalid, the internet is there for everyone)

Can you be specific about the problems with X11? I've been using X11 for decades and it's been ROCK SOLID. And that is exactly what you want from something so essential. Wayland feels like an expensive boondogle, frankly. Wayland breaks everything and only provides 20% the functionality that X11. It also forces application and DE developers to implement special tools and solutions for wayland which have always been provided as a common interface by X11, like screenshots/ recording and screen sharing, e.g. https://github.com/flathub/us.zoom.Zoom/issues/22

For college and therapy, I've had to use Zoom. I've been using the zoom flatpak, as I try and use flatpak for any proprietary software. That being said, it is not officially supported (by zoom), and also doesn't listen to Pop!_OS's tiling window manager. Certainly, I'm not the only one who has questioned which client to use, but I'm curious what y'all think. I like flatpak because I can trust that, worst case scenario, the proprietary software (read: Spyware) only has access to a limited amount of my system. But it'd also be nice to, ya know, use the tiling feature.

I've gathered a coredump and a stack trace, which might be useful.

You can get it as a flatpak too which should (presumably) take care of any dependencies automatically. :)

Here you go: https://flathub.org/apps/details/us.zoom.Zoom

Check this out https://github.com/flathub/us.zoom.Zoom/blob/master/zoom.sh

Link to the github issue for the flatpak

I admit that there is an element of, "but I chose an obscure and challenging linux variant, waaah why isn't it supported" here, but (a) there's currently no flatpak and (b) when, for goodness sakes, will major linux projects begin packaging for Nix/NixOS as a matter of course?

It's not hard, and the benefits go far outside merely supporting Nix, as e.g. a flake.nix file would allow this project to generate docker images, and appImage images, as basically afterthoughts. (See e.g. https://github.com/matthewbauer/nix-bundle.)

Nix flake support would also provide a perfectly reproducible build environment, which can help clarify dependencies, and thus help the project build achieve idempotence, but I'll save the full shill for some github issue.

In fact, I'm inclined to roll up my shirtsleeves and help make this real.

https://github.com/matthewbauer/nix-bundle perhaps?

Another way to approach this would be to advocate Nix as the build system for Flatpak or AppImage. Don't know what the status is of nix-bundle, but if it is possible to turn a Nix package into an AppImage with little extra work that would be ideal.

Nix itself is more focused on "distribute from this host with nix, to this other host with nix".

Though, here is e.g. https://github.com/matthewbauer/nix-bundle, which is supported as an experimental command in nix 2.4.

I believe this tool does: https://github.com/matthewbauer/nix-bundle

Yes, it's extremely powerful once you truly understand Nix.

There are efforts to improve documentation, but it still is lacking (I think the biggest problem is that Nix is so big, not just the OS but it can be utilized as a build system).

Just with NixOS is not exactly clear how can you for example build your custom image.

I think https://nix.dev/ is approaching the documentation from the right direction.

There are also many pieces that people built that you need to find.

For example some things that I found accidentally:

* https://github.com/matthewbauer/nix-bundle

* https://github.com/cleverca22/not-os

Unfortunately those side projects often have even worse documentation.