CentOS - Aug 2017 - Fedora bugs and EOL [was Re: CentOS users: please try and provide feedback on Fedora] Boltron

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 03:25:36PM +0200, hw wrote:
> >In all honesty, I wouldn't want Libreoffice running in a container
> >and I can't imagine why you'd want an xterm in its own
container.
> It was only an example.  The point of doing that is to use different
versions of
> xterm and of emacs as come by default.  How else would I do that when
non-default
> versions of packages require their own container each?
I think what you're looking for here is Flatpak.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader

Am 03.08.2017 um 15:55 schrieb Matthew Miller <mattdm at
mattdm.org>:
> 
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 03:25:36PM +0200, hw wrote:
>>> In all honesty, I wouldn't want Libreoffice running in a
container
>>> and I can't imagine why you'd want an xterm in its own
container.
>> It was only an example.  The point of doing that is to use different
versions of
>> xterm and of emacs as come by default.  How else would I do that when
non-default
>> versions of packages require their own container each?
> 
> I think what you're looking for here is Flatpak.

Just a off-topic question (maybe in the future of EL less off-topic); 
Does the concept of flatpak make updates in general more complicated 
(e.g. security issues in libraries)? The centralized concept of "shared 
libraries" does support by design the elimination of issues with
"one"
update. The flatpak approach implies that "every" flatpak packaged 
software must be updated individually, right? I hope that i got it right? 

Thanks,
LF

On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 02:10:31PM +0200, Leon Fauster
wrote:
> > I think what you're looking for here is Flatpak.
> Just a off-topic question (maybe in the future of EL less off-topic); 
> Does the concept of flatpak make updates in general more complicated 
> (e.g. security issues in libraries)? The centralized concept of
"shared
> libraries" does support by design the elimination of issues with
"one"
> update. The flatpak approach implies that "every" flatpak
packaged
> software must be updated individually, right? I hope that i got it right? 
Partly. Flatpak supports the concept of runtimes, which are shared, so
updates to those will be shared. Additionally, since it uses os-tree,
updates can be small and fast and are de-duplicated on disk.

If you're installing Flatpaks from arbitrary sources, of course, you
need to make sure that you trust each provider. In Fedora, our plan is
to automatically generate Flatpaks from RPMs, and when those RPMs are
updated they will automatically cascade through the build and update
system. 

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader