Test version not available as flatpak.

[OoMrFlibble]

Flatpaks in current unstable releases are vanilla (215MB) and dev (11.3MB!!?)

Test is absent.

[oocube]

Indeed, flatpak is not available.
On top, the dev version is not available in the 1.92 releases but exists in 1.93. It's size is too small, and it cannot be run after installation. Either we remove it or make it functional.

[mcarans]

@oocube @OoMrFlibble The other flatpak file is not an Oolite version. It is debug symbols for the one release deployment flatpak. That is the way flatpak do it - you have to have a separate file.

[OoMrFlibble]

Ah. Ok. That's not at all obvious from the filename.

[oocube]

@oocube @OoMrFlibble The other flatpak file is not an Oolite version. It is debug symbols for the one release deployment flatpak. That is the way flatpak do it - you have to have a separate file.

Should we document somewhere how to make use of the file? If it is unusable, why do we provide it at all?

[mcarans]

Ah. Ok. That's not at all obvious from the filename.

Unfortunately I think that's a Flatpak naming convention.

Should we document somewhere how to make use of the file? If it is unusable, why do we provide it at all?

It is not unusable - it works in conjunction with the other file so that you can use a debugger like gdb and have symbols (variable names, source code etc.) appear. It is only useful to developers.

[OoMrFlibble]

Should there not anyway also be available Dev and Test variants of the Flatpak? If only one version, then I'd suggest Test, as it's got debug console support if you want it, without any other notable difference.

…

On 14 May 2026 22:38:24 BST, Mike ***@***.***> wrote: mcarans left a comment (OoliteProject/oolite#627) > Ah. Ok. That's not at all obvious from the filename. Unfortunately I think that's a Flatpak naming convention. > Should we document somewhere how to make use of the file? If it is unusable, why do we provide it at all? It is not unusable - it works in conjunction with the other file so that you can use a debugger like gdb and have symbols (variable names, source code etc.) appear. It is only useful to developers. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #627 (comment) You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Message ID: ***@***.***>

[oocube]

Should we document somewhere how to make use of the file? If it is unusable, why do we provide it at all?

It is not unusable - it works in conjunction with the other file so that you can use a debugger like gdb and have symbols (variable names, source code etc.) appear. It is only useful to developers.

So let's create two pieces of documentation. One is for anyone so they know the file is only useful for debugging.
The other one is detailed instructions how to debug.

If you cannot create the documents themselves, would you be able to suggest content that someone could copy/paste to the right location?