An exciting development for this Linux app sandboxing and distribution tech. This would also help improve Google Chrome/Chromium support outside the likes of RPM and Debian based distributions with a cleaner packaging experience.

That’s what he said.

  • echo@lemmy.ml
    7·
    14 hours ago

    I’ve been using the Flatpak version of Ungoogled Chromium for a while now (for websites that don’t work natively with Librewolf). Is this really that new?

    • blobjim [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
      1·
      3 hours ago

      The main Chrome flatpak currently just installs the official RPM file for Chrome. You’re right that the Chromium and Ungoogled Chromium ones do seem to build from source a bit more. I imagine it will just mean a better build process with less patching.

      But you can see exactly what it means right in the ticket:

      • Create chrome/installer/linux/flatpak/ with packaging scripts and templates for metadata, AppStream metainfo, and launcher entrypoint.
      • Add enable_flatpak GN build argument (default false).
      • Add package_format to InstallerConfig and omit host desktop integration artifacts (system desktop files, /usr/bin symlinks, AppStream appdata, GNOME default apps, manpages, and AppArmor profiles) when packaging for Flatpak.
      • Update common/installer.py with Flatpak configuration and App ID mapping for Chromium (org.chromium.Chromium*) and Google Chrome (com.google.Chrome*).
      • Generalize common/desktop.template to support both Flatpak and system-wide desktop execution commands.
      • Disable setuid sandbox and zlib compression for non-official builds.
      • Update BUILD.gn with flatpak packaging targets and aliases.
    • smeg@feddit.ukEnglish
      6·
      12 hours ago

      The one on Flathub is unofficial, presumably this one is official