The documentation does not appear in the integrated PDF reader.

[NicoMrqt]

Environment

TeXstudio: 4.8.8 (flatpak) 
Qt: 6.9.2 R
OS: almalinux 10 & ubuntu 24.04.3
TeX distribution: texlive 2025

Hello.

The pdf documentation for a package (right-click on the package) should appear in the integrated PDF reader but in the Flatpak version, the documentation for a package does not appear in the integrated PDF reader. (but works fine with debian package 4..7.2 in Ubuntu).
Otherwise, the built-in PDF reader works well for displaying a compilation PDF.

Thank you for your work, it is precious to us.

[PunkPangolin]

Hi, thanks for the report! I just learned of that function; it would be great if it worked as intended. I can reproduce that with both TeX Live from the Flatpak SDK extension and with system packages on Debian and Fedora, but with different errors!?

With a locally installed TeX Live, TeXstudio reports that

(Screenshots from a VM running Debian 13)

And this error in the user shell: QPFSFileEngine::open: No file name specified

I assume this is related to the TeXstudio Flatpak sandbox, although it is unclear to me why, as the app has full host access and the file is there.

With TeX Live from Flathub, texdoc itself fails while running due to a missing library.

Process started: texdoc --list --machine graphicx

Info: Running Texdoc not installed in the current TEXMFMAIN.
/app/texlive/bin/x86_64-linux/texdoc:43: module 'texdoclib' not found:
	no field package.preload['texdoclib']
	[kpse lua searcher] file not found: 'texdoclib'
	[kpse C searcher] file not found: 'texdoclib'

Process exited with error(s)

The library is part of the extension but is not found for some reason. Besides that, I did not have any problems with the extension; I'm not sure where the problem is in this case. I tried adding the library to the Flatpak's PATH, but that did not help.

Will test some more ideas, but I am not sure if I will be able to solve that.

@jakobjakobson13 (sorry for the ping), I know you are not involved here anymore, but as maintainer of the TeX Live extension, do you know if that is an issue with the extension or TeXstudio?

[jakobjakobson13]

Well, I can only point out the difference between my mint installation and the flatpak extension.
The local mint installation has the following files

$ ls -la /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/scripts/texdoc
insgesamt 1628
drwxr-xr-x   2 root root    4096 Mai 17 00:05 .
drwxr-xr-x 170 root root    4096 Mai 17 00:35 ..
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root 1539671 Feb 14  2024 Data.tlpdb.lua
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root    3203 Feb 19  2023 texdoclib-alias.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root    6365 Feb  2  2024 texdoclib-cli.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root   21717 Feb 27  2023 texdoclib-config.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root   10441 Feb  2  2024 texdoclib-const.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root   10863 Feb  2  2024 texdoclib-score.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root   24629 Mär  3  2022 texdoclib-search.tlu
-rw-r--r--   1 root root    1320 Feb 19  2023 texdoclib.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root    7844 Feb 19  2023 texdoclib-util.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root   11629 Feb 19  2023 texdoclib-view.tlu
-rwxr-xr-x   1 root root    1382 Feb 21  2020 texdoc.tlu

whereas the flatpak extension has only one file

insgesamt 12
drwxr-xr-x   2 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096  1. Jan 1970  .
drwxr-xr-x 161 nfsnobody nfsnobody 4096  1. Jan 1970  ..
-rwxr-xr-x   3 nfsnobody nfsnobody 1382  1. Jan 1970  texdoc.tlu

But I don´t know at the moment what to get out of that. Sorry.