Is the 5.2 User Directory in the same place for the various linux distributions?

Why can’t I find the 5.2 gramps.ini in the same approximate place anymore?

On my Linux Fedora (for user “districtsupport”), the 5.1 version of Gramps stored the gramps.ini in:
is wasn’t in:

While trying to update the wiki’s section about preferences, search tracked the 5.2 gramps.ini file to:

Is that right?

(On Windows, the User Directory moved … but the path just changed from %appdata%/gramps/gramps52 to %localappdata%/gramps/gramps52 … which is reasonable.)

It’s in the ‘right’ place when I run or install 5.2 from its source code. Are you running the Flatpak?

Ahhh… that’s it. Thanks.

I am new enough to Linux that “flatpak” read as no more than a term for a compression approach. Did not realize it sandboxed the application being installed.

Hadn’t really associated PortableApps implementations in those terms either.

If the legacy directory ~/.gramps exists, then it will continue to be used, otherwise we follow the XDG base directory specification.

The default locations are:

Configuration files: ~/.config/gramps
Cache files: ~/.cache/gramps
Data files: ~/.local/share/gramps

All these paths can be customised using environment variables. The legacy paths can also be forced by setting the GRAMPSHOME environment variable.

The defaults should be fine for most people though.


Me neither, but that’s because in that, there’s no difference between 5.1 and 5.2. They’re both inside K:\PortableApps\GrampsPortable\Data\settings

But maybe I read your remark wrong, and does the Flatpak for 5.1 use the same sandbox as 5.2.

But that is a change for 5.2, right?

(The “Is XDG Base Directory standard support in 5.2” came up as a question on the FaceBook group. It seemed important to the poster… so I saw an opportunity to add to the wiki. But after confirming there was bullet point was in the Change List, I asked what benefit it provides. They were uncertain beyond the impression that it “keeps my $HOME clean and organized”.)

(While searching for that XDG-related question, found an interesting Crostini (Linux on ChromeOS) Reddit thread about Gramps default image view from 4 years ago.)

Good question. Hadn’t used the FlatPak before.

I am trying gain a better understanding of the variations of installation. (Obviously, they must be significant… or there wouldn’t be so many distinctions of installing for different distributions.) Many of our answers are couched relative to the User Directory. So it is important to determine if the Gramps User Directory linkified content needs to be expanded.

Appended is a script that Perplexity composed for Fedora 39 to find which versions of Gramps are installed via various install methods. Can a generalized script be developed for any Linux distro?

# Search for Gramps applications installed via Flatpak
echo "Gramps applications installed via Flatpak:"
flatpak list --app --columns=application,version,arch,origin,installation,app | grep Gramps

# Search for Gramps applications installed via DNF
echo "Gramps applications installed via DNF:"
dnf list installed | grep gramps

# Search for Gramps applications installed via RPM
echo "Gramps applications installed via RPM:"
rpm -qa | grep gramps

# Add more commands here to search for Gramps applications installed via other methods if needed

There were various complaints for the Gramps 5.1 and earlier flatpaks opening too many holes in the flatpak sandbox. Specifically, there were complaints about the flatpak having access to the entire home directory even though a system install of Gramps would have that access too. So the first Gramps 5.2 flatpak has restricted the sandbox down to Pictures, Documents, and Downloads.

The easiest way to open up access to other directories in the first Gramps 5.2 flatpak is to install flatseal from flathub. Flatseal gives you a graphical interface to change sandbox permissions of any flatpak app on your system.

Another way of opening up more directories is to use cli commands to manually adjust permissions. If you need help with this, then please use the flatseal app instead because it is a lot easier with fewer chances of mistakes.

I am testing a second Gramps 5.2 flatpak with access to more data directories. I will make a new post and tag Nick.


I don’t think so, because they all have their own package managers. Debian and its derivatives often use apt, on the command line, and they also often have synaptic, and even dnf was new to me when I tried Fedora. I knew rpm from RedHat, and that’s about it.

If we want, we can also distribute things as Snaps, and Appimages:

1 Like

The Gramps 5.2.0-1 flatpak went back to full home directory access like the Gramps 5.1 flatpaks and any system installation.

1 Like

And I think it needs some expansion indeed, because with XDG, there is no single user directory anymore.

And that triggers another question: Are add-ons config or data?

1 Like

We have put them under the data directory.

1 Like