Make an official Flatpak on Flathub

AppImages and RPMs are quite literally the easiest package formats to use, what? +1 for flatpak though.

Agreed! A flatpak would be killer

AppImages and RPMs are quite literally the easiest package formats to use, what? +1 for flatpak though.

Increasingly distros are not supporting packages, and appimage is on a deprecation path for some as well. Flatpak and Snap (for Ubuntu) are almost universally supported these days however.

Flatpak would be huge. :)

just came here to request this! I use a Fedora Atomic image on my laptop, and while I'm going to go the appimage route for now, a flatpak would be preferred (and was the first thing I checked for)

I have a working Flatpak hosted on my private repo if anyone needs it. flatpak remote-add --user --no-gpg-verify fluxer https://flathub.gimpel.vip/fluxer.flatpakrepo and it should show up in your Store (Bazaar KDE-Discover) whatever you have.

I spawned a clanker

Ugh, is that what that is?

I have a working Flatpak hosted on my private repo if anyone needs it. flatpak remote-add --user --no-gpg-verify fluxer https://flathub.gimpel.vip/fluxer.flatpakrepo and it should show up in your Store (Bazaar KDE-Discover) whatever you have.

why private? that seems sus lol, anyways gonna try packing it with it source building

> I have a working Flatpak hosted on my private repo if anyone needs it. > flatpak remote-add --user --no-gpg-verify fluxer https://flathub.gimpel.vip/fluxer.flatpakrepo > and it should show up in your Store (Bazaar KDE-Discover) whatever you have. why private? that seems sus lol, anyways gonna try packing it with it source building

Empty profile too.

> I have a working Flatpak hosted on my private repo if anyone needs it. > flatpak remote-add --user --no-gpg-verify fluxer https://flathub.gimpel.vip/fluxer.flatpakrepo > and it should show up in your Store (Bazaar KDE-Discover) whatever you have. why private? that seems sus lol, anyways gonna try packing it with it source building

Because I wasn't sure if the developers would be ok for me to host a Flatpak of their app officially. I just made it for my friends who are using Bazzite and don't want to constantly run the AppImage. I'm not forcing anyone to use it of course.

building

Can't they just use gearlever?

continuation about me trying to pack it: for right now i am stuck with a problem, as per flatpak documentation: setting the disable-lfs flag in the git source SHOULD make it stop trying to pull lfs files, while the primary download succeeds, when it gets to the build phase, it starts updating files, which includes pulling lfs files, which then makes it fails fixed, just dealing with npm bs rn lol

continuation about me trying to pack it: for right now i am stuck with a problem, as per flatpak documentation: setting the disable-lfs flag in the git source SHOULD make it stop trying to pull lfs files, while the primary download succeeds, when it gets to the build phase, it starts updating files, which includes pulling lfs files, which then makes it fails

I had the same problem. In the end I made the Flatpak out of the AppImage.

yeah, that would be the easiest solution, but i am trying to see if i can maybe get it published to flathub lol :p they require source builds

yeah, that would be the easiest solution, but i am trying to see if i can maybe get it published to flathub lol :p they require source builds

Oh, understandable. I never owned a github repo, and have no idea how it works yet. I'd need to read the documentation for it. That's why I just made my own private flathub. Good luck with building and publishing!

I'm unsure why anyone would want a flatpak as it always has been poor in terms of platform integration especially when there's prebuilt deb's and rpm's. If anything anyone should prefer a native package manager maintained version over flatpak but I can see how it might be a problem on immutable Distro's but those usually tend to have different solutions that are preferable. With that said, this doesn't mean there shouldn't be an unofficially supported flatpak, I just don't want to end up with a situation where a flatpak is the only option which does happen.

With that said, this doesn't mean there shouldn't be an unofficially supported flatpak, I just don't want to end up with a situation where a flatpak is the only option which does happen.

Why wouldn't we want an universal format that works on most* linux systems and is easy for the maintainer?

@spectrapulse You can't use prebuilt deb's and rpm's on immutable distros.

> With that said, this doesn't mean there shouldn't be an unofficially supported flatpak, I just don't want to end up with a situation where a flatpak is the only option which does happen. Why wouldn't we want an universal format that works on most* linux systems and is easy for the maintainer?

Because of the very reasons I've mentioned in the very reply you're quoting

@spectrapulse You can't use prebuilt deb's and rpm's on immutable distros.

I'm not sure about Debian based distro's but I know Fedora based images usually come with rpm-ostree which does work with rpm's.

> @spectrapulse > > You can't use prebuilt deb's and rpm's on immutable distros. I'm not sure about Debian based distro's but I know Fedora based images usually come with rpm-ostree which does work with rpm's.

Layering like that will dramatically increase build times. It should be done as an absolute last resort. If all software took this approach we'd have a real problem on immutable distros. Do you have a real reason for not liking Flatpak? I like the option to install via package managers too but you seem to have quite the hate boner for Flatpaks despite them being the more popular method of distribution.

Flatpak has its problems, but they're usually exaggerated by the typical /g/ mob. A chat and VoIP application like Fluxer doesn't need deep system integration, it just needs to implement the XDG portals for accessing microphones, cameras, file pickers and global shortcuts.

Came here to rep the Flatpak, if it's between Deb/RPM support and Flatpak support, I'd rather Flatpak every time.

> @spectrapulse > You can't use prebuilt deb's and rpm's on immutable distros. I'm not sure about Debian based distro's but I know Fedora based images usually come with rpm-ostree which does work with rpm's.

It is strongly recommended to avoid and minimize the use of rpm-ostree on such distros, and some remove it entirely. Nobody here is advocating for removing native packages, only treating flatpak as a first class citizen alongside them. Most desktop systems where this would be used support flatpak, or can easily install it, and it dramatically reduces management for a maintainer to be able to target one distribution method. That said, once pipelines are built it's not usually a big deal to maintain multiple distribution methods and given that they support AppImage and didn't deprecate the packages I do not think there is any real risk of them deprecating packages. If anything has to be deprecated I'd prefer AppImage due to the problems and security issues with that format. But really nobody is calling for that either.

Offical KDE Linux went full flatpak More on that here: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2026/02/kde-linux-gets-performance-improvements-new-default-apps-and-goes-all-in-on-flatpak/

fluxer for flatpak is being worked in here, if anyone can help with fixing flatpak's node generator tooling to work with pnpm based projects that would be great because that is the current blocker as of now (generating an npm lockfile then using that does not work, nor does the pnpm to npm converter)

if @hampus-fluxer could make the flatpak himself that would be the best way forward. i'm doing my best, and have a fully functional flatpak by pulling the tarball from the official website, but as flathub requires building from source wherever possible i feel like there is little i can do without refactoring a lot of stuff to use npm instead of pnpm, which i'm in no position to do as i am really unfamiliar with the javascript ecosystem (and hampus probably chose pnpm for a reason). he knows the codebase better than anyone else so he can adapt it for flatpak-builder's lack of any real pnpm support. flathub also requires some files (.desktop file, appstream metadata, icon...) to be upstream. i highly endorse the creation of a flatpak (specifically an official one), as appimage has several security and usability pitfalls and some people i know outright refuse to use it. if anyone else wants to take a shot at making an flatpak i recommend taking a look at the fluxer-git pkgbuild on the aur for reference. if you come up with something that works and can be automated on flathub's ci, make a pr against my new-pr flathub branch to avoid making a duplicate pr on flathub's repo.

I would love a flatpak for Fluxer Currently i'm using fluxer-bin from the AUR, but an universal flatpak app would be better.

Huh. Looks like the unofficial Fluxer World community has a flatpak client: https://fluxer.world/#downloads