Chrome and Chromium Test Flatpak to Expand Their Reach on Linux

Google is experimenting with Flatpak packaging for Chrome and Chromium on Linux, an initiative that could simplify their distribution beyond RPM and Debian packages, although it does not yet represent a commitment to official support.

• Google has incorporated experimental support for Flatpak packaging in the code of Chrome and Chromium for testing on Linux.
• The proposal aims to evaluate restricted sandbox configurations and expand the use of XDG portals.
• The change includes packaging scripts, application identifiers, and metadata templates for Flatpak.

Google is experimenting with Flatpak packaging for Chrome and Chromium on Linux, according to a report by Phoronix. The initiative is still in a testing phase and does not represent a commitment to official support for this format, meaning it does not equate to a stable release or confirm a guaranteed new installation pathway.

The modification seeks to facilitate testing of restricted sandbox configurations and expand existing support for XDG portals, components that allow applications to access Linux system functions in a controlled manner. The available evidence does not allow for attributing the implementation to a specific individual nor confirming the exact date indicated in the original draft.

A Limited Test, Not a Support Announcement

Flatpak is an application distribution format for Linux that bundles the program and its dependencies within a more isolated environment from the host system. This architecture can help a single application run more uniformly across different distributions, although it also requires adapting integration mechanisms with the desktop, permissions, and security features.

The experimental incorporation does not constitute a promise of official support for Flatpak packages. The code allows for exploring a technical possibility, but does not confirm that Chrome will be generally distributed via Flathub, that Google will offer ongoing maintenance, or that the format will replace its current channels.

The work creates the directory chrome/installer/linux/flatpak/, which includes packaging scripts and templates for metadata, AppStream information, and the launcher entry point. It also adds the build argument GN enable_flatpak, which remains disabled by default and allows activating the experimental flow in builds intended for that format.

The modification has been incorporated into the test code, allowing developers to evaluate the browser's behavior within a Flatpak package. However, the integration of the code only demonstrates that the technical capability has entered the project; it does not establish a date of availability for end users nor does it itself modify Google's distribution policy.

What Changes in Chrome Packaging

The proposal incorporates the field package_format into InstallerConfig, the configuration used by the installation process to distinguish between output formats. When the target is Flatpak, the system omits several integration artifacts specific to the host machine, including .desktop files from the system, symbolic links in /usr/bin, AppStream metadata, default GNOME applications, man pages, and AppArmor profiles.

These exclusions respond to a fundamental difference between a traditional installation and a confined application. In conventional packages, the installer can write directly to shared locations of the system, while Flatpak seeks to keep the application within defined boundaries and use controlled interfaces to interact with the desktop and other resources.

The code also updates common/installer.py to incorporate Flatpak configuration and application identifier mapping. For Chromium, the pattern org.chromium.Chromium* is considered, while Google Chrome uses com.google.Chrome*, a separation that allows distinguishing both products within the Linux application ecosystem.

Additionally, Google generalizes common/desktop.template to support execution commands for both Flatpak applications and system-wide installations. This adaptation is necessary because the launcher does not invoke a confined application in exactly the same way as a binary installed in a traditional path.

Sandbox, Builds, and Potential Scope

The modification disables the setuid sandbox and zlib compression in unofficial builds. The implementation text links these decisions to the experimental flow, so they should not be interpreted as general changes in the official version of the browser or as a recommendation for users to remove security layers from their installations.

The setuid sandbox belongs to mechanisms used by Chromium to reinforce process isolation, while Flatpak provides its own confinement and permission control model. The coexistence of both systems requires careful testing, as an incorrect configuration could affect the application's compatibility, performance, or security surface.

The change also updates BUILD.gn with targets and aliases intended for Flatpak packaging. By integrating them into the build system, developers can produce and test the format within the project's usual workflows, although the option remains experimental and is kept out of the default configuration.

If testing progresses satisfactorily, Flatpak could offer Chrome and Chromium a more uniform path for Linux distributions that do not rely on RPM or Debian packages. This possibility is attractive for users and maintainers who prefer a self-contained application, but any future benefits will depend on subsequent decisions regarding support, updates, permissions, and distribution.

Causes of Recent Movements

In this case, it is not a market movement, but a technical modification in the code of Chrome and Chromium. The confirmed catalyst is the experimental incorporation of Flatpak packaging to test restricted sandbox configurations and integration with XDG portals. There is no available evidence of an official support announcement or a decision to distribute Chrome via Flathub.

A Possible New Phase for Linux

Chrome and Chromium have historically had a particularly visible presence in Linux environments based on traditional package formats. The exploration of Flatpak does not eliminate those channels, but suggests that Google is evaluating a less distribution-specific installation experience.

For users, a Flatpak package could simplify the availability of the browser on systems where there is no adapted official package or where dependencies create friction. Still, the format may also raise questions about download sizes, file access, integration with visual themes, multimedia playback, and compatibility with features that expect to interact directly with the system.

The support for XDG portals occupies a central place in this phase because it offers standardized interfaces for operations such as selecting files, opening links, or accessing environment resources with greater control. Expanding that support would allow Chrome to operate within a sandbox without relying on broad permissions for each everyday interaction, although the quality of the experience will need to be validated through real testing.

For now, the most concrete signal is technical and not commercial: Google has incorporated experimental code to build Flatpak packages, but it has not announced official support. The next step will be to check if the implementation reaches the necessary stability and compatibility to justify a formal distribution.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only and doesn't constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Any events, rewards, online promotions, or related information mentioned herein should not be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or invitation to purchase, sell, trade, or otherwise deal in any crypto assets. Crypto assets are highly volatile and may result in loss. The availability of WEEX services, products, and related events may vary by region. You are responsible for ensuring that your participation is in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations.