Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Ubuntu

Flatpak Doesn't Work in Ubuntu 25.10, But a Fix is Coming (phoronix.com) 74

Posted by EditorDavid from the fixing-a-Flatpak dept.
"It's not just you: Flatpak flat-out doesn't work in the new Ubuntu 25.10 release," writes the blog OMG Ubuntu: While Flatpak itself can be installed using apt, trying to install Flatpaks with Flatpak from the command-line throws a "could not unmount revokefs-fuse filesystem" error, followed by "Child process exited with code 1". For those who've installed the Ubuntu 'Questing Quokka' and wanted to kit it out with their favourite software from Flathub, it's a frustrating road bump.

AppArmor, the tool that enforces Ubuntu's security policies for apps, is causing the issue. According to the bug report on Launchpad, the AppArmor profile for fusermount3 lacks the privileges it needs to work properly in Ubuntu 25.10. Fusermount3 is a tool Flatpak relies on to mount and unmount filesystems... This is a bug and it is being worked on. Although there's no timeframe for a fix, it is marked as critical, so will be prioritised.
The bug was reported in early September, but not fixed in time for this week's Ubuntu 25.10 release, reports Phoronix: Only [Friday] an updated AppArmor was pushed to the "questing-proposed" archive for testing. Since then... a number of users have reported that the updated AppArmor from the proposed archive will fix the Flatpak issues being observed. From all the reports so far it looks like that proposed update is in good shape for restoring Flatpak support on Ubuntu 25.10. The Ubuntu team is considering pushing out this update sooner than the typical seven day testing period given the severity of the issue.
More details from WebProNews: Industry insiders point out that AppArmor, Ubuntu's mandatory access control system, was tightened in this release to enhance security... This isn't the first time AppArmor has caused friction; similar issues plagued Telegram Flatpak apps in Ubuntu 24.04 LTS earlier this year, as noted in coverage from OMG Ubuntu.

Flatpak Doesn't Work in Ubuntu 25.10, But a Fix is Coming More | Reply

Flatpak Doesn't Work in Ubuntu 25.10, But a Fix is Coming

Comments Filter:

  • What is this RevokeFS filesystem ? Anyone has any idea, because I can't find anything on the net (except this exact error)
    SquashFS, OverlayFS, ResilientFS i can understand but RevokeFS ? Maybe some new/re-branded journalling thing?

  • are making Linux into Windows, where arbitrary security rules blocks functionality. And that is probably the motivation by adding those restrictions: Corporate IT departments are used to them from Windows, therefore we need to add them in Linux, too. What about just making the standard Linux system secure, while workable, instead of adding configuration rules on top?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Viol8 ( 599362 )

      I'm all for pointing out the foibles of windows, but I'm afraid security and firewall rules are standard in the corporate world and have been for decades. If you think any of the corporate *nixes like Solaris of HP-UX didn't have any of this then you really need to get yourself up to speed as to how IT works in a business.

      • That doesn't make it right, does it? It comes from corporate IT's mistrust of their users. If they instead made compartmentalise their IT infrastructure, each user wouldn't be that dangerous.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Viol8 ( 599362 )

          Oh dear. When you leave your mums basement and go get a job in the messy real world with companies having to mitigate against idiots, lazies trying to cut corners and people with bad intentions get back to us.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by laxguy ( 1179231 )

          maybe some day you'll meet an end-user... until then, have fun in your fantasy-land.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by _merlin ( 160982 )

      The trouble is, the POSIX model is broken. You need root to do all sorts of things, but once you get root, it doesn't just allow you to do the thing you need to do, it allows you to do anything. This gives bugs a lot more exploitation potential. SELinux lets you check that programs are only doing the things they're supposed to be doing, and not accessing something they shouldn't.

      • And then Ubuntu disable user namespaces such that you need root access even more. You run Docker containers as root instead as user applications, but someone have decided that pseudo root looks too much like real root, and we better disable it. It is Flatpack and other user namespace using technologies, are what actually helps security, by giving more power to users, not making everything need to run as root.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Viol8 ( 599362 )

        "The trouble is, the POSIX model is broken"

        Its not broken, people just don't use it properly. You're supposed to use groups to give permissions for certain activities but its too much effort so , what the hell, just use root, right?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by _merlin ( 160982 )

          You need root to change your UID. This means that any service that needs to impersonate users needs a component running as root. SELinux mitigates the impact of vulnerabilities in that component that are exposed during the time between when it starts and when it changes to the target UID.

          • Why would you as non-root need impersonate another user? I can see rare uses covered by user namespaces, but that again keeps you within what you as a user is allowed to do with other people's resources. A lot of cases are probably due to bad implementations of stuff; for instance package managers: Why can't I apt install something in my home dir?
            • Sorry, I misread the comment. I understand you don't want to run services as root. But Linux have capabilities. If those aren't fine grained enough, make a better system with the kernel community. Staying as root, but then remove capabilities again is the dumbest approach ever. It is much better to fix the security model and give the correct privileges. As of now you can split your services in a minimal part, which does the privileged stuff, while the major part of the service runs unpriviliged. The privile

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by _merlin ( 160982 )

                That minimal part is still a major target for exploitation, and checking commands is one of the areas most prone to vulnerabilities as we've seen numerous times. Having something to mitigate vulnerabilities in that minimal part is an advantage out here in the real world.

                You recommend sudo, but that's a critical component where we keep finding vulnerabilities. It's also a nightmare to configure properly without inadvertently opening holes. It's mainly used for "allow these users to get root" but even that

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Viol8 ( 599362 )

            You don't need to change your UID if you can do what you need using a specific GID. Looks like you're another one who doesn't understand the purpose of groups.

  • Flatpak: a solution in search of a problem. If an app isn't available locally just download the source tree and compile it yourself.

    $ ./configure
    $ make
    $ make install

    • If an app isn't available locally just download the source tree and compile it yourself.

      I've been compiling software for Linux since I first started running it 1994 and it has never been more complicated than it is today. Dependency changes five levels deep or more and you get compilation errors at multiple levels. Your dismissiveness is unwarranted and makes you look ignorant.

      • Plus, you apply one update and EVERYTHING breaks, so re-building any codebase, even without any changes, is a nightmare.

        Welcome to the world of "living standards".

    • Re:Flatpak: a solution in search of a problem. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Monday October 13, 2025 @08:28AM (#65721198)

      Here is where things rapidly snowball. The developer used 50 different esoteric libraries that you don't have. Those libraries have their own dependencies. Software is such a shit show that they decided it was easier to recreate the one off developer environment instead of make something truly portable.

      • I know I'll get downmodded to oblivion for complimenting Rust, but this is one of my favorite aspects about it. Cargo automatically downloads all of the dependencies recursively and builds everything in a single command. It does this in the same manner that most other modern languages have supported by default.
    • Try even to compile old gcc and binutils with a modern gcc...

    • $ ./configure
      $ make
      $ make install

      This is DLL - Hell Linux style. Virtually all completely broken Linux systems I've fixed (or attempted to fix) have been the result of straying from the curated path that distribution maintainers provide.

      If this shit were so easy we wouldn't need distributions. You can very rapidly break things when you need to deal with dependencies of custom compiled and self-installed packages. If this isn't you, congrats, either you're lucky, a guru, or haven't tried hard enough.

    • Flatpak is about containerizing third party applications to add a level of security that wouldn't exist otherwise. It's not just another packaging system. The thing you're quoting works for insecure applications, but in theory someone can put stuff in the code that could have access to things it shouldn't.

      That said, Flatpak (and its rival Snap) are both particularly bad solutions because it appears the starting point was "How can we containerize Firefox" rather than "How can we create a framework where appl

    • Working in small boxes is good for security and also makes your software behave much more predictable. The is more like a phone OS, but that is fundamentally a better model than the old general purpose OS, where you install everything in one "compartment".

  • And this is why Microsoft got away with Windows 11 (Score:3, Funny)

    by xack ( 5304745 ) on Monday October 13, 2025 @07:59AM (#65721146)
    Because Microsoft actually uses all the telemetry to fix problems. Remember the Gimp is 30 years old, Linux is 34 years old, Gnome is 27 years old and Microsoft still has the upper hand after all these years. I gave up on Wayland after constant freezing up and now that distros are going past the point of no return I "silently" went back to Windows 11. Many Linux users don't admit when they go back to Windows, because they can't take the humbling.

    • Because Microsoft actually uses all the telemetry to fix problems

      [citation needed]

      Windows 11 is causing me grief daily, and the UI is provably worse than it was in 10.

      • I struggle with Win11 at work. I try WSL2 but it is terrible unstable - but much fastet than Windows. Virtual Box isn't much better - could be in conflict with WSL2, as Windows have trouble with running multiple hypervisors. If I could just transform my Windoze to run as a virtual machine under Linux, my boss probably wouldn't really mind...

        • If I could just transform my Windoze to run as a virtual machine under Linux, my boss probably wouldn't really mind...

          I don't know how hard it would be to do with your existing install, but I have Windows 11 in a QEMU/KVM VM with a virtual TPM and it works fine...

  • Yup. Ubuntu problems with Every. Single. Release. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by doubledown00 ( 2767069 ) on Monday October 13, 2025 @09:45AM (#65721318)

    Meanwhile Ubuntu 22.04 and 24.04 were just dogshit. After install I spent weeks tracking down various bugs and making basic stuff on my systems work. It felt like using Linux on the desktop circa 2001 again. To say nothing about the noticeable step down in virtualization performance from version 18 to 22.

    This is why I left Ubuntu. Say what one wants about Redhat and RHEL. I don't agree with all their tactics in the past or their decisions on CentOS. But from a system usability standpoint they generally don't have these issues on initial release. That's probably because they dedicate the time and resources to actually test their software!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jopet ( 538074 )

      Next time I "upgrade" i will also get rid of Ubuntu on all my machines (6 of them).
      Have not decided which one yet, but I think I have had it with Ubuntu.

  • Atomic packaging systems suck (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rtkluttz ( 244325 ) on Monday October 13, 2025 @11:46AM (#65721582) Homepage

    With atomic packaging systems, I feel like computing is in a weird place where it has taken on all of the bad characteristics that are both a step backwards towards the days of DLL hell and a step forwards to today where there is almost no tweaking and debloat attempted by devs because powerful hardware and memory make it unnecessary in their eyes.

    I don't WANT 53 copies of the same library on my system. I don't want slow startup because applications to have to be unpacked before they can be used. I don't want applications that make it difficult or impossible to share data between applications. I don't want applications that don't theme properly. I don't want applications that weaponize themselves against the owner of the machine and try to dictate how the app is used like Windows apps do.

    I simply do not want atomic packaging systems. I want traditionally installed apps that only put one copy of the library on my system and I want to be able to share data between apps easily and efficiently without having to install additional apps from the same package manager to be able to use them... for example for gaming, If you want to use Lutris and choose the version that comes from an atomic package manager, you also have to install a SECOND version of all your 3d libraries for your video card that are available to the atomic Lutris. Fuck that, fuck the entire idea of that type of system.

    • On one hand, I agree with you, I want everything done the old way and all my packages updated, and for all that software to still work.

      On the other hand, that's not actually realistic, and a lot of people have to do a lot of hackery and patchwork in order to make it be like that.

      I chose the version of Lutris that you get from their apt repo. If it installed extra 3d libraries, I didn't notice because disk space is cheap. I noticed it installed extra copies of runners available to Steam. I'm not thrilled abo

    • Things are updated every 5 minutes and we have "living standards" everywhere. It is simply not possible to have one version of a library shared by everything. Those days do not exist anymore.

  • that terrible package manager is still broken, struggles with home directories not on the root file system and sucks in many other ways.
    Same with wayland: "modern" tech that is unable to do lots of things that are possible with X (related to remote desktops, running windows remotely etc).

    The next update of my Ubuntu machines will actually a replacement with some other distro that does not shove all that enshittified limited or broken stuff down their users.

Slashdot Top Deals

If Machiavelli were a programmer, he'd have worked for AT&T.

Close