Unknown software wants to install itself on my Linux system!

[Fredashay]

For the past couple of days, I've been getting a box whenever I start that wants me to allow software to install.

The software is org.freedesktop.Flatpak.runtime-install.

I've heard of Flatpak in a round-a-bout sort of way, but I've never used it and don't know anything about it.

I've been clicking CANCEL each time it comes up.

Do I have a Linux virus?

Whatever it is, I don't want it!

How do I get this thing to stop asking me every time I start my system?

[trytip]

flatpak https://flatpak.org/
mint adopted the use of packages that do not use the mint/ubuntu repos for dependencies. i don't remember a message, what does it say?
if it's just a startup message you can disable it in settings/ startup

[absque fenestris]

This question, whether flatpak is a virus, is also very controversial in this forum

Seriously: flatpak is part of Linux Mint since version 18.x
Take a look at your startup settings to disable entries about flatpak if necessary.

[Flemur]

You might want to

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get purge flatpak

[gm10]

You might want to

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get purge flatpak

Dangerous advice, you'll lose access to Software Manager if you do this, as well as to whichever applications you have installed via flathub (you have/had at least one or it wouldn't have a runtime installed - run flatpak list in a terminal window to see what that is).

[Flemur]

You might want to

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get purge flatpak

Dangerous advice, you'll lose access to Software Manager if you do this, as well as to whichever applications you have installed via flathub (you have/had at least one or it wouldn't have a runtime installed - run flatpak list in a terminal window to see what that is).

Oops. Sorry, OP!

I never use the Software Manager...

[jglen490]

Well that sux!!

You should be able to remove flatpak from your sources without killing software manager. I'm not saying the flatpak is bad, but there is no reason to use flatpak when the regular repos have what it takes to make a flexible, usable system - especially if the user does not want to use flatpak.

And quite frankly, I was not aware that flatpak was required in Mint. I will need to get back on my Mint laptop and check that out. if it is required, then I will have second thoughts

[gm10]

You should be able to remove flatpak from your sources without killing software manager. I'm not saying the flatpak is bad, but there is no reason to use flatpak when the regular repos have what it takes to make a flexible, usable system - especially if the user does not want to use flatpak.

And quite frankly, I was not aware that flatpak was required in Mint. I will need to get back on my Mint laptop and check that out. if it is required, then I will have second thoughts

Flatpak is integrated into Software Manager since LM18.3. I don't use flatpaks, either, so I disabled the flatpak auto-update in startup applications (as already suggested to you by absque fenestris above), but keeping the package itself installed doesn't bother me. It won't run if you don't use it. Which is what you have done. As I said, there will be no runtime installed unless you install a flatpak application first. Maybe you did not notice - as I said, it's integrated into Software Manager. Also as I said, run flatpak list to see what it is, it might be something you are still using, so disabling flatpak updates wouldn't be in your best interest then.

[jglen490]

So it's not a"source", and instead is in some way hardcoded into software manager? Two strikes!!

[all41]

So it's not a"source", and instead is in some way hardcoded into software manager? Two strikes!!

You can run a terminal inquiry:

Code: Select all

flatpak remotes

to show remote sources.
Delete the sources as in this example:
flatpak remote-delete flathub

When you run flatpak remotes and get no results then there are
no installed sources.

[jglen490]

Thank you, done. It's disturbing that is has to be more difficult that just removing a source from sources.list.

I suppose there's a reason for doing this, and why it's not an install option. Maybe I missed it during the install?

[jglen490]

I just went into Synaptic and found "flatpak". I marked it for removal to see what popped up. And it wanted to remove mintinstall, also. Not good, in my opinion. Again, I suppose there's a reason, but this is not ....

I would have thought that flatpak, as an alternative to typical repo installations, would have been a stand alone activity just as flatpak itself purports to provide. I'm disappointed.

[ajgringo619]

As a Flatpak user, I've never seen the application that the OP mentioned; it certainly doesn't show up when I search the Flatpak repos. I'll ask on the Flatpak list and see if anyone has heard of it.

[all41]

Thank you, done. It's disturbing that is has to be more difficult that just removing a source from sources.list.

I suppose there's a reason for doing this, and why it's not an install option. Maybe I missed it during the install?

If you install flatpak programs those sources become active, otherwise they remain inert, as well as the flatpak package itself.

[DAMIEN1307]

just another reason why i started this thread some time ago...even though it is not a "virus"...as far as im concerned, if something is in my system i do not want, then it IS ,perhaps only in MY opinion, an unwanted virus, but then again, i call windows operating systems an unwanted "virus" as well...it is still an infection...at least to me.

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=277199

at least on my other OS...peppermint 9, which includes snap, (snapd), at least they allow you to uninstall it in its entirety which i did as follows.

Purge Snapd

Code: Select all

sudo apt purge snapd

Purge Gnome-Software Repository (SNAP)

Code: Select all

 sudo apt-get remove --purge gnome-software gnome-software-plug
in-snap

this is not FUD...this is just user preference is all...i prefer NOT to have this garbage. and also, when i got fed up with win 10 in october of 2016...i went whole hog, all the way anti-windows, anti-microsoft, anti=google etc, and became a linux "puritan" ...no outside PPAs etc...i made only one exception to this rule...(i installed the "brave" browser)...other than this, if its not in the genuine linux repositories, then it is not necessary on my system.

[smurphos]

I just went into Synaptic and found "flatpak". I marked it for removal to see what popped up. And it wanted to remove mintinstall, also. Not good, in my opinion. Again, I suppose there's a reason, but this is not ....

I would have thought that flatpak, as an alternative to typical repo installations, would have been a stand alone activity just as flatpak itself purports to provide. I'm disappointed.

No need for all the FUD - flatpak is nothing but an alternative packaging system that gives easy access to up-to date versions of applications without resorting to PPAs. It also allows for multiple versions of applications to be installed (the debian packaged version and the flatpak version can co-exist in harmony)

By default Mint flatpak integration uses the flathub repository (aka remote) whose contents are human curated by the maintainers of flathub.

It's a dependency of mintinstall because of the integration. It's integrated to make it easy for users who may not be comfortable using the command-line to access flatpaks.

And as has been said if you haven't installed any flatpak apps (and if you have without realising you really should concentrate more on what you are installing in software manager), the you can open your Startup Applications settings module and disable the flatpak updater job.

https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3418

http://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/avail ... times.html

https://flathub.org/home

[jglen490]

Thanks for the explanation. I do believe that the integration with mintinstall, while as well intended as it is, is not a great solution. Adding flatpak as an alternative could still have been done with another installer, but it is what it is. I'll still be looking at other Linux alternatives for my laptop platform.

Neither flatpak nor snap are inherently bad, but they should be used as they are in my opinion - software resources separate from the repos managed via apt.

[gm10]

Adding flatpak as an alternative could still have been done with another installer, but it is what it is.

It is what it is because most users disagree with you. They don't want to have to search different sources separately. Integration is what they want. And there is no downside to the integration, all it does is give you a bigger choice of software to install, a choice that remains entirely up to you; nobody can force you to install a flatpak. Nor even to use Software Manager. Feel free to use something else.

[Hoser Rob]

Linux is a lot more modular than WIndows, no megalithic system files. So you're going to get messages saying it wants to install or update something you're never heard of regularly. It's when it wants to REMOVE something I take notice more.

[jglen490]

Adding flatpak as an alternative could still have been done with another installer, but it is what it is.

It is what it is because most users disagree with you. They don't want to have to search different sources separately. Integration is what they want. And there is no downside to the integration, all it does is give you a bigger choice of software to install, a choice that remains entirely up to you; nobody can force you to install a flatpak. Nor even to use Software Manager. Feel free to use something else.

I will agree that some users probably do want greater integration with other sources. I would also point out that this did become problematic for the OP, so there may be a downside for some others. I think that making a clear distinction between the repos and additional resources is a useful feature, and would actually highlight the fact of the additional resources. Trust that some of your users are actually inquisitive, which is why you actually have a lot of traffic on these forums.

I know I am already free to use something else, and I probably will, so the gratuitous throw away statement was probably unnecessary. On the other hand, fomenting and expressing free thought and opinion is a Linux thing. See you soon