this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
46 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

46875 readers
2667 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
nooter692@lemmy.ml
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
46
Does this exist: flatpak-like sand-boxing with gentoo-like source-based package management? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 11 months ago by cyclohexane@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I assume it doesn't, but thought I'd ask.

I really like the principles behind both gentoo and flatpak, but right now I can only do the gentoo way or the flatpak way (and I've opted for gentoo's for now).

What I'd love to have from flatpak:

  • container like sandboxing and isolation
  • customizable sandboxing and permissions

What I'd love to have from gentoo:

  • powerful build system building packages from source
  • global declarative management of compilation options
  • easy patches
  • easy to add packages that aren't in repos
  • support for many architectures or setups
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

At that point you might as well use a Docker type container in which to build your software from source and deploy in the container.

[–] hallettj@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

But Flatpak has its fancy "portals" to connect each app with the specific resource it needs which you don't get with Docker.

Also if the goal is to limit access of apps you don't want to fully trust, I think Docker doesn't have the appropriate security properties. Here's a quote from the readme for Bubblewrap (the sandboxing tool that Flatpak and Nixpak use),

Many container runtime tools like systemd-nspawn, docker, etc. focus on providing infrastructure for system administrators and orchestration tools (e.g. Kubernetes) to run containers.

These tools are not suitable to give to unprivileged users, because it is trivial to turn such access into a fully privileged root shell on the host.

[–] gkpy@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

in theory shouldn't it be possible to use bubblewrap and the xdg-desktop-portal project to hack together only the sandboxing bits of flatpak while leaving out ostree/distribution

you might run into this though: https://github.com/flatpak/xdg-desktop-portal/issues/737

[–] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

I don't think Docker is comparable to bubble wrap. The latter is a lot more flexible. Docker is a pain with GUIs, and difficult to have a customizable way to "break" isolation when you need to, like having applications talk to each other or exchange files, etc.