info: display extensions found in other installations #5670
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Flatpak looks for extensions in all installations, but `flatpak info -e` would display an error when an extension isn't present in the same installation as the ref. Also display the installation name for each extension.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Flatpak looks for extensions in all installations, but
flatpak info -ewould display an error when an extension isn't present in the same installation as the ref.Also display the installation name for each extension.
I couldn't see a good way to get the installation name for unmaintained extensions without substantial changes, so I left them as 'unknown'.
Side note: I've always known those as 'unmanaged' extensions, but I've just learned that flatpak doesn't call them that. It took me a bit to realize that's what I was looking at, and not something relating to the typical meaning of 'unmaintained'. flatpak/flatpak-docs#419 uses 'unmanaged' throughout; maybe we should change to that? The term is only exposed in the UI here in
flatpak info -e, and it's not in any public API.