hellostick@lemm.ee to Linux@lemmy.ml · 18 days agoVirt-Manager, use deb version of flatpak version??message-squaremessage-square14fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1message-squareVirt-Manager, use deb version of flatpak version??hellostick@lemm.ee to Linux@lemmy.ml · 18 days agomessage-square14fedilink
minus-squareliliumstar@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·18 days agoI would use the native version. For something like this, it makes sense that it should have less restricted/sandboxed access to the underlying system.
minus-squarealteredEnvoy@sopuli.xyzlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·18 days agoHmm, wouldn’t the virt manager just be a frontend and communicate with the virtd socket though?
minus-squaredeadcade@lemmy.deadca.delinkfedilinkarrow-up0·18 days agovirt-manager only requires access to the libvirtd socket, as long as the flatpak.has that as default configuration (which I imagine would be the case), there’s zero difference beteween flatpak and native.
minus-squarehellostick@lemm.eeOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·17 days agoi am not sure which one is the native version… you mean the version packaged by the distro (deb) or the developer (flatpak)?
minus-squareliliumstar@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·17 days agoIn this case I meant the one packaged by your distro.
I would use the native version. For something like this, it makes sense that it should have less restricted/sandboxed access to the underlying system.
Hmm, wouldn’t the virt manager just be a frontend and communicate with the virtd socket though?
virt-manager only requires access to the libvirtd socket, as long as the flatpak.has that as default configuration (which I imagine would be the case), there’s zero difference beteween flatpak and native.
i am not sure which one is the native version… you mean the version packaged by the distro (deb) or the developer (flatpak)?
In this case I meant the one packaged by your distro.