Flatpak-builder constructing repeating filename

I’m doing some basic checks (on a cut-down version) before updating my app from

runtime: org.gnome.Platform
runtime-version: “3.38”

to

runtime-version: “40”

This is the relevant bit of the manifest:

modules:

I keep getting the error (on either runtime):

Successfully installed Pillow
Error: module python3-pillow: Error when getting information for file “/home/chris/flatpak/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S/.flatpak-builder/git/https_github.com_myapp/objects/pack/pack-da9b70b334cbb58385a7a9d43d76a07248816692.idx”: File name too long
FB: Unmounting read-only fs: fusermount -uz /home/chris/flatpak/.flatpak-builder/rofiles/rofiles-sXgi2S

I have edited out many lines. It seems this filename is in an endless loop of adding to itself over and over again. I’ve seen this before and wasn’t able to fix it.

I’ve never seen this before. I have no idea and I could only make some trial&error attempts. Can you put a link to the repository so we can test it?

@fedelibre No bugs have been reported, so I haven’t looked at this for about 6 months, so I might be a bit rusty and have done something stupid. (I’m running it on Fedora-35-Beta, but that isn’t the problem as it did it on Ubuntu Budgie 20.10 or 21.04) This is just a cut down version without the main part of the app to test the basics:

app-id: com.github.test.test

runtime: org.gnome.Platform
runtime-version: “40”
sdk: org.gnome.Sdk

command: test
copy-icon: true
finish-args:

  • –share=ipc
  • –socket=fallback-x11
  • –socket=wayland
  • –filesystem=host:rw

modules:

@fedelibre Solved by deleting ~/.flatpak-builder.
I’ve been using --force-clean but forgotten about a cache of previous attempts in ~./flatpak-builder. There’s probably a command-line parameter to delete this.

It started when I tried switching from using the .yml format for my manifest to the .json format.

@ChrisOfBristol , I faced the same issue.
But in my case even deleting ~/.flatpack-builder doesn’t helps.

Do You have any ideas???

bellow is screenshot of error
System - Ubuntu 22.04
Flatpak 1.12.7
flatpak-builder 1.4.1

Can anybody explain what is the purpose of “rofiles” and why their file structure repeated recursively?
Is it Ok? maybe I need some other Filesystem (XFS for example ) to be able handle such long file names ?

It’s not to do with file systems. I’m not sure what causes it, but I think it’s related to caching or possibly glew and/or glew versions. My notes say:

BEWARE OF ~/flatpak-builder which contains a cache of previous efforts - if not deleted can cause a loop of filename.

# This removes previous efforts recursively, so beware!
# Used to avoid filename loop or module version problems. For speed do not use normally.
rm -r .flatpak-builder

Although you mention that you have already tried that.

echo --disable-cache removes all previous attempts but takes ages doing some dependencies
flatpak-builder ~/git/build ~/git/build/{your app}.yml --install --force-clean --user --disable-cache

 --force-clean -or --disable-cache might help.

I also noted, but didn’t use:

   --disable-rofiles-fuse
       Disable the use of rofiles-fuse to optimize the cache use via
       hardlink checkouts.

I don’t really know what this is all about, but I did fix it with the first two statements.

Before I’m packed my app with snapcraft, and compared with snapcraft flatpak reminds me of the stone age…so maybe 2 more questions?

  1. are --cchache and --disable-cache options mutually exclusive ?
  2. Is there any way to publish closed source app in Flathub?

I found Flatpaks so much more straightforward and the support for making them so much better that I switched from Snap to Flatpak.
[edited to remove inaccurate information.]

Yes, shouldn’t be a problem at all, but be careful with architecture support.

@razzeee
Basically, as far as I understand, I need to build flatpak app on my own infrastructure and somehow tell flatpak to take already built binaries from somewhere ( instead of building from src. )…
But is there any instructions how to actually do it?

not sure if we have a separate walk through for that, in essence it’s just like doing a normal flatpak, but you skip the building part and download your binaries as sources instead - hopefully architecture aware (you can tag them in your instructions) and the rest is as in every other flatpak. with the difference, that you want your metainfo to say proprietary

This topic was automatically closed after 2 days. New replies are no longer allowed.