Talk: Flatpak install/update fails with “Need more input” or “Input buffer too small”

[augenauf (Flo)]

@kparal

That’s a misunderstanding of karma. The default karma question available under all updates is Is the update generally functional? That doesn’t refer to installation. That really refers to testing general functionality (in this case, anything related to flatpak operations).

Yes, I get this. The issue is that this general functionality defines the karma. But testing if a package installs fine is by far not enough to be called ‘testing’!

@kparal

you hope that those people who first test it and supply karma would be the ones to trigger the bug and notice it. That hasn’t happened here.

Clearly, just thumbs up to push the package or receive the next “testing” badge.

@kparal

One of the improvements is to add specific test cases for flatpak, and people can then perform those steps. Let’s be sincere - almost no one does that, even for packages which have these test cases.

If that’s the case, the process of giving karma in Bodhi is useless.

@kparal

A better improvement is to create an automated test suite which is mandatory to pass - Fedora CI is then used to execute it.

+1

[mjg (Michael J Gruber)]

@garrett

I saw that the issue did not affect flatpaks that were installed on the system and updated from an administrator account (that is sudo flatpak update). And it also did not affect people installing flatpaks to the user account and updating via user.

It “only” affected system flatpaks being updated by the user (which is the case for almost everyone using flatpaks on Fedora), due to something that broke due to assumptions on how FUSE is used in this case. This includes using GNOME Software or KDE Discover to install and update flatpaks as well as the command line when you’re updating system flatpaks from your user account.

But that would explain why some people didn’t see a problem and it got in (even despite some tests and some QA), whereas most of us saw the issue.

Indeed.

In fact, I find the default of having users modify system flatpak installs a really strange mix, in particular when flatpaks are marketed as a tool for installation and as a way to make app-user-land independent of the underlying system.

I’d say either use system flatpaks via sudo (or other admin access), or use user flatpaks administered by a user. Most people won’t even know that they change the system flatpaks as an ordinary user …

[1player (Stephane Travostino)]

Ugh, all this back and forth made me think the fix was buggy, and got me very confused.

AFAICT the fix is fine, it’s not hit Silverblue and Kinoite yet because the composes are failing. No reason to panic.

All this discussion about karma and who’s at fault should probably go elsewhere and not pollute this thread.

[jn64 (Justin Koh)]

Most package managers work at the system level; I don’t see why that is strange at all. Flatpak’s “universality” has nothing to do with where the flatpaks are installed.

Defaulting to user installation will create other problems/confusion, when someone installs an app and can’t see it on other users. And there’ll be (even more) complaints of “bloat” because apps have to be installed in duplicate.

@mjg

I’d say either use system flatpaks via sudo (or other admin access)

That’s how it works currently—the “other admin access” being polkit. You need to be an admin user (in wheel group) to use flatpak on the system installation without other authentication.

[mjg (Michael J Gruber)]

@kparal

This is a discussion topic for the following Common Issue:
Flatpak install/update fails with "Need more input" or "Input buffer too small"

You can discuss the problem and its solutions here, but please note that debugging and technical feedback should primarily go to the issue trackers (e.g. Bugzilla) linked in the Common Issue, because that’s the place that developers watch, not here.

If there are any updates/changes/amendments for the Common Issue description, which you believe should be performed, please post it here.

Not quite - dnf update tells me it needs to be run with superuser privileges [sic]), and flatpak update silently works on the system install. And that is exactly the difference I’m pointing at.

[jn64 (Justin Koh)]

Yes, it works silently because of the polkit policy. You still need to be an admin user (in wheel group).

Would you rather the policy be removed so everyone has to type sudo flatpak? I don’t think this benefits any Fedora user.

FWIW, PackageKit-command-not-found is included in Workstation. This allows any user in wheel to install any package (that provides a command) without sudo, by simply typing the command. So, dnf can also indirectly be used without sudo.

@mjg

privileges [sic]

“Privileges” is spelled correctly.