Upon trying to run the BlackBox flatpak it immediately crashes, running from the teminal gives me the following error before crashing instantly. Problem persists after reboot in case thats helpful.
#BlackBox terminal emulator flatpak crashing immediately on voidlinux
potent orbit
atomic blaze
Upon trying to run the BlackBox flatpak it immediately crashes, running from the...
do you have flatseal installed?
maybe you can try messing with permissions - dbus system bus, network, whatever works
might be because you're using runit
and also can you show me the output of getent passwd $USER | cut -d: -f7
potent orbit
oki i will in a moment
potent orbit
and also can you show me the output of `getent passwd $USER | cut -d: -f7`
there u go uwu
atomic blaze
hmmmm, looks normal
i've actually met several people with the same issue you have
though not exactly related to void
there's quite a few issues open on gitlab related to it
like this one
and this one
potent orbit
interesting
btw @atomic blaze would u recommend installing software as flatpaks when there are native binary versions available? like for steam for example?
atomic blaze
absolutely
actually, there's a shitshow going on in #tech-general over that right now lol
potent orbit
absolutely
and why is that? just general flatpak sandboxing and such?
potent orbit
actually, there's a shitshow going on in <#848349994082893884> over that right n...
sounds fun lol
atomic blaze
yeah, and especially since u use void, bundling in libraries can be helpful
not sure if you use musl or not, but flatpak is really good for running things that depend on glibc on musl distros
potent orbit
i mean steam works fine as a native package ¯_(ツ)_/¯
potent orbit
not sure if you use musl or not, but flatpak is really good for running things t...
i don’t use musl coz nvidia drivers 😔
atomic blaze
ah, i assume u use glibc void then
potent orbit
yee
atomic blaze
i don’t use musl coz nvidia drivers 😔
sad 😔
potent orbit
@atomic blaze are flatpaks actually worse performing than binary packages 
and is it a good idea to use flatpaks when they aren’t officially supported by the project (like the lutris flatpak)
(or the firefox flatpak)
atomic blaze
<@587815317238054913> are flatpaks actually worse performing than binary package...
nope
atomic blaze
and is it a good idea to use flatpaks when they aren’t officially supported by t...
i think so
unfortunately the project is not always willing to maintain a flatpak package, so the community has to
my friend maintains the microsoft edge flatpak, and he asked microsoft to maintain it and they unfortunately declined
atomic blaze
(or the firefox flatpak)
also, the firefox flatpak is official
potent orbit
also, the firefox flatpak is official
i see, what was the issue with it being the default on silverblue again then??
atomic blaze
i see, what was the issue with it being the default on silverblue again then??
the firefox fedora flatpak experience is very subpar
they refuse to use flathub still
fedora has it's own flatpak repo, called fedora flatpaks, and the firefox package on there is just not really fun to use
potent orbit
i see
atomic blaze
if they used the flathub version everything would be fine, but fedora doesn't want to sue flathub
the fedora flatpaks version doesn't support installing third party codecs
potent orbit
ah
atomic blaze
which is pretty important to most people
potent orbit
i mean i have heard at least for chromium that the native package is better as the flatpak version replaces the chromium sandbox with the flatpak one which is worse??