modrinth
Packaging solutions
At the time of writing, there are only two official ways for using the Modrinth App on Linux - AppImages and Debian packages. While this is fine for people on Debian-based distributions, and those who like using AppImages, some may prefer to use a package manager such as flatpak or dnf as it's easier to manage packages that way. According to this comment, the current compiled Debian packages aren't very great right now because they don't include proper dependency info and leave out some important stuff.
Along with AppImages and Debian packages, there are various packaging solutions to consider. If there's other packaging types that you think would be a good idea, suggest them in this thread. I personally think that the Flatpak should be maintained by Modrinth, and the rest could be maintained by members of the community if they wanted to do so. I think this is especially important as the Modrinth App is now in an open beta.
This issue serves as a place to discuss packaging, and I'll also treat this as a sort of "unofficial download page" for Linux users with updated information on what packages to use and where to get them.
Indicators
✅
- a package exists and works properly
- that package is considered ready for daily use
- that package is available on commonly used repositories, such as a Flatpak being on Flathub for example
🔃
- same as 1 and 2 in the above
- however, that package is not available on commonly used repositories, but is available on a developer's personal repository. this may not be applicable for some solutions and will use the checkmark icon instead, such as COPR
Unix/Unix-like packaging
✅ 
Flatpak
Package is available and maintained on Flathub - thank you @getchoo and other contributors!
Package that can be used on most common Linux distributions, and also good for security as Flatpaks are sandboxed unlike other types. This will be the package that most Linux users are looking for.
Notable mentions/issues
- https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/issues/3619 (@Hyphrio)
- May be tricky to upload to Flathub, see this comment
Who's working on this?
- @getchoo is currently working on a package https://github.com/modrinth/theseus/pull/559
- @getchoo opened a PR for Flathub https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pull/4950
✅ 
Arch
Packages are available and maintained on the AUR - modrinth-app and modrinth-app-bin - thank you Antti!
Any ideas on this?
- @offbeat-stuff suggested making a PKGBUILD that extracts the
debpackage to be used as an Arch pacman package. Here's an example
Notable mentions/issues
- https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/issues/3728 (@Hyphrio)
- https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/pull/4301 (@Hyphrio)
Who's working on this?
✅ 
Nix
Package is available and maintained on Nixpkgs - modrinth-app - thank you @getchoo and other contributors!
Nix can be used on both Linux and Darwin systems and is the package manager for NixOS.
Who's working on this?
- @getchoo has a PR in nixpkgs https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/289149
- @getchoo is also working on a Nix flake https://github.com/modrinth/theseus/pull/561
Fedora Copr
User-maintained package repositories for Fedora, CentOS Stream, and RHEL. Can be enabled with dnf copr enable <author>/<repo>
Notable mentions/issues
- https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/issues/4402 (@Hyphrio)
- May be difficult, see this comment
Homebrew cask
Homebrew is a package manager for MacOS (and Linux). Idea from https://github.com/modrinth/theseus/issues/560. It would allow for easy installation on MacOS.
Windows packaging
🔃 🍨 Scoop
Package is available and maintained on brawaru/bucket - thank you @brawaru!
Scoop is a command-line installer for Windows. It has many benefits, such as installing packages in a portable way (by default, it installs packages to ~/scoop). Package manifests are just simple JSON files - this shouldn't be too hard to set up.
✅ 
WinGet
Package is available and maintained on WinGet - thank you @TheBossMagnus and other contributors!
WinGet is Microsoft's own package manager.
Other information
Theseus is very complex to package and doing so for many different formats at a time would be a little chaotic. I think that the common package types like Flatpak, Arch and Nix packages should be done.
Leave your thoughts below!
For discussion, see the thread in the #development channel of the Modrinth Discord. You can also continue discussing here if you prefer that.
For Linux these two Tauri issues are related: https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/issues/4402 https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/issues/3619
At least make a PKGBUILD that extracts the deb package to be used as an archlinux pacman package.
Here is a PKGBUILD for archlinux that extracts a .deb package
https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=linux-xanmod-linux-bin-x64v3
At least make a PKGBUILD that extracts the deb package to be used as an archlinux pacman package.
this isn't a good method for the long term, especially as arch is known to make abi incompatible changes to packages frequently, or at the very least push versions of libraries usually incompatible with those found on debian/ubuntu based distros (there are also problems between those, but usually less so). here's a good example
for a temporary thing it would probable be fine? but ideally all community packages should be built against their distro's packages to ensure the final binaries actually work
I personally think that the Flatpak should be maintained by Modrinth, and the rest could be maintained by members of the community if they wanted to do so.
i 100% agree with this. it's very hard and completely impractical for upstream to support the endless amounts of linux distributions out there; universal solutions should be the main focus here, along with basic files for distribution that can be used there and in downstream packages
the biggest issue here is that networking may need to be enabled during building due to flatpak's build tools lacking support for pnpm lock files. this is a problem since flathub doesn't really like that and it could make it very difficult for it to be uploaded there
this is pretty much complete and fully working on any linux distro. macos support for is being worked on. the problem with pnpm and offline builds also showed up here, but since nix is a lot more flexible with it's build process, i was able to figure out a way to maintain reproducibility while still using pnpm's lock file. i will try to upstream this in nixpkgs once a stable release is made
like you said, these should probably be community packages. i would like to note though that some may be difficult (mainly fedora rpms) due to the issue with pnpm and offline builds as mentioned before. arch is very lose with this though so it should work fine; i can't say anything about alpine since i've never used/packaged for it personally
the only other thing i would like to note is that tauri's native package export feature really shouldn't be used here. the current debian package for example seems to strip out the other tools theseus provides such as it's cli, doesn't include dependency information (i'm assuming the direct dependencies of theseus are compiled statically...which isn't great but works ig) which can cause issues with even launching minecraft, and in general is very inflexible for the future where manual intervention for packaging may be required. i'm shocked the deb package works in it's current state, let alone if it can even actually start minecraft ootb. we should be following the standard of other linux packages (specifically packages for other launchers) by supporting the formats themselves instead of relying on a tool that in all honestly, doesn't produce good packages. most of this will fall on the community of individual distros, but for a download link on the upstream maintainer's website, poorly auto generated debs and appimages aren't really acceptable for "linux support" imo. the best solution to fix this is flatpak
edit: macos support for nix is available now. discussion about upstreaming to nixpkgs will be in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/247468 (thanks PC!)
Tauri issue and PR for Arch Linux: https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/issues/3728 https://github.com/tauri-apps/tauri/pull/4301 PR seems to be related for Pacman but seems to have stalled
If you do go for Flatpak, please, PLEASE include proper permissions. I'm tired of having to deal with broken permissions on Flatpak packages.
If you do go for Flatpak, please, PLEASE include proper permissions. I'm tired of having to deal with broken permissions on Flatpak packages.
Flatseal can help with fixing those, but agreed.
Flatseal can help with fixing those, but agreed.
The user shouldn't have to use Flatseal to fix broken permissions provided by the package, that's just bad design
Flatseal can help with fixing those, but agreed.
The user shouldn't have to use Flatseal to fix broken permissions provided by the package, that's just bad design
Again, I said I agreed
There is a tool to generate flatpak builder sources definitions from package-lock.json or yarn.lock, but it doesn't support pnpm-lock.yaml. The only way I found to convert pnpm-lock.yaml to something that the tool can consume is this npm package, but I didn't manage to make it work. We need to get either yarn or npm lockfile with right dependency versions. (Or implement support for pnpm in that tool, but that's very not easy).
Besides that, we probably will need to disable auto updating for the flatpak package. If there is no better way, that could be done with some sed in the build script.
Since the whole app is bundled in a single executable, packaging it as a flatpak would probably be pretty easy.
Actually, on a closer look, the resulting binary has quite a few dynamic dependencies. I'll try to see if I can put all of them into the flatpak
I just made a forum thread in the Modrinth Discord server #development channel for discussing about this: https://discord.com/channels/734077874708938864/1138510665947041876
I'll also edit the issue and place it around the top, you can continue discussing here aswell :)
https://discord.com/channels/734077874708938864/1138510665947041876
quoting a message i made here:
nix packaging for linux and darwin is basically complete, just needs a few little touchups. i have flatpak almost working, but as it stands it would only be able to be distributed through flathub - only the website. this is due to no flatpak build tools supporting pnpm’s lockfile format; it’s a similar case with nix, but there are a few diy methods already in nixpkgs i was able to use so not an issue there. for flatpak, networking needs to be enabled during the build but that’s a big nono
only other “issue” is that tauri (or what i’m hoping to be only the specific version of tauri being used) is using an old version of webkitgtk to build so…i need to compile all of webkitgtk for it to work, which causes my pc to oom
it seems that upstream is willing to switch to npm (source) which solves the first issues; everything else with the flatpak seems pretty good.
one thing i thought of though was making some packaging guidelines for the app, as currently some things such as actual naming can be unclear. maybe this could be done with upstream sources for stuff like desktop files?
https://discord.com/channels/734077874708938864/1138510665947041876
quoting a message i made here:
nix packaging for linux and darwin is basically complete, just needs a few little touchups. i have flatpak almost working, but as it stands it would only be able to be distributed through flathub - only the website. this is due to no flatpak build tools supporting pnpm’s lockfile format; it’s a similar case with nix, but there are a few diy methods already in nixpkgs i was able to use so not an issue there. for flatpak, networking needs to be enabled during the build but that’s a big nono
only other “issue” is that tauri (or what i’m hoping to be only the specific version of tauri being used) is using an old version of webkitgtk to build so…i need to compile all of webkitgtk for it to work, which causes my pc to oom
it seems that upstream is willing to switch to npm (source) which solves the first issues; everything else with the flatpak seems pretty good.
one thing i thought of though was making some packaging guidelines for the app, as currently some things such as actual naming can be unclear. maybe this could be done with upstream sources for stuff like desktop files?
You and the Modrinth team would probably be better at chatting about how this would work imo. I mostly broght up Flatpak due to it being more secure thanks to its sandboxed nature.
And, Snaps also suck, Debs are kinda the stone-age of package formats, and AppImages are kinda annoying due to you having to manually download each new AppImage per update. Also, both the Deb and AppImage Modrinth provides seem to be quite buggy. At least, afaik.
And, Snaps also suck, Debs are kinda the stone-age of package formats, and AppImages are kinda annoying due to you having to manually download each new AppImage per update. Also, both the Deb and AppImage Modrinth provides seem to be quite buggy. At least, afaik.
I was joking about snaps (unfortunately Canonical isn't), and I've had tonnes of issues with installing the DEB version at all, plus packaging systems that bundle everything like AppImages and Flatpak tend to take up more space than native (10x more for the modrinth app), which might be an issue for some people.
And, Snaps also suck, Debs are kinda the stone-age of package formats, and AppImages are kinda annoying due to you having to manually download each new AppImage per update. Also, both the Deb and AppImage Modrinth provides seem to be quite buggy. At least, afaik.
I was joking about snaps (unfortunately Canonical isn't), and I've had tonnes of issues with installing the DEB version at all, plus packaging systems that bundle everything like AppImages and Flatpak tend to take up more space than native (10x more for the modrinth app), which might be an issue for some people.
Eh, true. But there's no real universal way of packaging apps easily.
Flatpak tend to take up more space than native (10x more for the modrinth app),
this is basically a made up number. in fact, most of modrinth app's dependencies are already in the runtime - this means unlike some flatpaks, there are very few dependencies specific to it that need to be bundled. it should be a similar size to the deb + the size of the runtime
Flatpak tend to take up more space than native (10x more for the modrinth app),
this is basically a made up number. in fact, most of modrinth app's dependencies are already in the runtime - this means unlike some flatpaks, there are very few dependencies specific to it that need to be bundled. it should be a similar size to the deb + the size of the runtime
I was more talking about the appimage, I'm aware that flatpak has measures to keep its size down.
I'll add that flatpak is what the Steam Deck is using, so that's a big gaming base there
I'll add that flatpak is what the Steam Deck is using, so that's a big gaming base there
flatpak is supported by almost all modern distros in general, but the deck can run the AppImage.
Added getchoo's two PRs to the issue
- https://github.com/modrinth/theseus/pull/559
- https://github.com/modrinth/theseus/pull/561
I've also added a section for this Homebrew issue:
- https://github.com/modrinth/theseus/issues/560
ok fair other launchers dont support arm too
MultiMC5 has a few ARM forks iirc.
no arm64 support sad
it wouldn't be impossible to compile this for an ARM64 machine, but most of these devices have a small gaming userbase, have different natives that aren't mature, etc, etc. But I'm pretty sure you can just paste the .mrpack into MultiMC, and run it that way.
you might be able to use the GUI (no clue about in-game performance) if you emulate via UTM or QEMU on an M1 Mac, but i have doubts about compatibility.