- Package:
- flatpak-builder
- Source:
- flatpak-builder
- Description:
- Flatpak application building helper
- Submitter:
- Felix Geyer
- Date:
- 2024-10-04 16:51:02 UTC
- Severity:
- normal
flatpak-builder in bookworm is unable to build apps that are based on the 24.08 SDK. 1) appstream-compose is no longer present in the SDK leading to: bwrap: execvp appstream-compose: No such file or directory Error: ERROR: appstream-compose failed: Child process exited with code 1 Since version 1.4 it calls "appstreamcli compose" on the host instead: https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak-builder/pull/517 2) flatpak-builder doesn't pass the libdir to build systems which means some libraries are installed to /app/lib64 instead of /app/lib on x86_64, breaking some apps. This is also fixed in 1.4: https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak-builder/pull/588 https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak-builder/pull/608 https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak-builder/pull/610 It seems difficult to backport these changes to 1.2. What do you think about at least providing 1.4 in bookwork-backports? I can upload that if you don't mind. It's working fine for me in bookworm without any changes. Cheers, Felix
Yes, I suspect you're right.
The whole flatpak family usually backports relatively easily - they're
designed to have relatively light dependencies on anything outside that
immediate family of packages.
If flatpak-builder is something you use regularly, would you be able to
help to maintain it? I would welcome co-maintainers. I don't really use
it myself (other than for smoke-testing), so I'm only uploading it for
others' benefit. It's in the debian team on Salsa, so you probably have
commit access already.
And, for the more immediate question, if you can maintain flatpak-builder
in bookworm-backports for the lifetime of bookworm, please go ahead.
Thanks,
smcv
Yeah, I use it somewhat regularly and am happy to help taking care of the package. That sounds doable. I'll push a branch to Git and upload it to backports. Cheers, Felix