Nico Kadel-Garcia píše v Út 18. 07. 2017 v 22:44 -0400:
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Debarshi Ray
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 09:44:18AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 03:31:30PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > > F29: packagers (of graphical applications) must create
> > > Flatpaks of
> > > their applications if possible. They *may* keep standard
> > > RPM
> > > packaging.
> > At least we see where this is going.
> > If RPMs of the graphical application work fine now, what on earth
> > is
> > the point of forcing packagers to make Flatpaks? Sandboxing
> > isn't one
> > of them - as already explained, sandboxing is orthogonal to
> > packaging.
> Huh? How would you get sandboxing without Flatpaks? Unless you are
> proposing a different sandboxing technology.
By putting them in "/opt", the way other sanely packaged 3rd party
How does that ensure any sandboxing?