1 point

Imagine flatpack did smth like this

permalink
report
reply
125 points

I don’t have a problem with snaps as a technology. If you want to use them, then who am I to judge?

But what I do have a problem with is when I don’t have a choice and I am being forced to use what the distro maintainers think is good for me. That is what finally made me quit Ubuntu and switch to Fedora.

permalink
report
reply
75 points

Also, Snap is proprietary. That alone is reason enough for me to steer clear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points

Well snap itself isn’t proprietary, the backend server distributing the snaps is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

Explain how this distinction matters in the real world?

Snap distribution is as much a part of snaps as Snapd.

Who cares that part of it is open source if other parts aren’t?

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

I do have a problem with them, the same problem was solved, better, with other technologies like appImage (which doesn’t litter your mount list with 100 meaningless entries).

Even flatpak is better, snap is an also ran they’re trying to force on us without being as good as any of the competitors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Couldn’t the same argument be made for any distro? They give you what they put in their repos. If you want a deb package, use the mozillateam PPA (which is built on Canonical’s hardware, same as Mozilla’s snap of it).

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

the difference is that the folder/package structure for other package manager is open and well known
everyone can host their own i.e. apt, pacman or Flatpak repository with little effort

the required folder/package structure for snaps is no longer open and you cannot change the default snap repository either easily

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The package structure for snaps is very much open, as is the API for a snap store. There was for a long time an open source snap store implementation, but it died out due to lack of interest by others in actually hosting their own stores, which to me says a lot about whether people actually want to host their own repo or just want to use it as a way to complain.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

IIRC, the issue was that - unless you take steps to explicitly prevent it - Ubuntu would occasionally reinstall the snap version. I don’t remember the details, been a while since I had to dance that dance, but I recall it being one of the things that put me off snap in particular, Ubuntu in general and sparked my search for a different distro.

I’m now on Nobara, a Fedora-based gaming-oriented distro maintained by GloriousEgroll (who also maintains the popular Proton-GE)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Like with any time you’re trying to select a specific source for a package, you need to set apt configuration to prefer that source. It’s standard apt behaviour with a standard way to configure it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

when I don’t have a choice and I am being forced to use what the distro maintainers think is good for me.

That’s the case on literally any distro.
And just like on literally any distro, you can also install Firefox from FlatPak, the Mozilla repo or from source.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Except on Ubuntu it just installs the snap regardless. If you don’t pay attention you may not even realize that it is a snap. Also the snap store is controlled exclusively by one company with a questionable history.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Read my comment again:

install Firefox from FlatPak
the Mozilla repo
or from source

In none of these cases will Ubuntu be able to install it from snap instead.
Only the Firefox “package” in the Ubuntu repos actually just links to a script that installs the snap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Welcome to the gang. I think you’ll like it here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points

This is why I switched from Ubuntu to Debian.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

Same here. What especially irritated me was that even though I installed the .deb firefox and followed the directions to disable snap firefox, occasionally Ubuntu went ahead and reinstalled snap firefox for me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Ubuntu was great, until Unity debacle, when I switched to Mint DE. Few years later I returned to an Unity free Ubuntu just to be welcomed with snaps and Ubuntu pro.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Canonical have made the same mistake three times as far as desktop environments are concerned, IMO:

  1. 2004: went with GNOME
  2. 2010: made Unity as a way to rid themselves of the hostility of the GNOME devs
  3. 2017: Instead of leaving GNOME in the dust, they went back.

IMO using GNOME is an abusive relationship.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

debian is the best

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

For me it was when I was trying to use some Android tools and it tried to install the snap version. The snap version was broken of course.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

When I first returned to Linux several years ago I started with Ubuntu, since it was the only distro I had used. I got confused when I installed Firefox and other apps via apt but instead got snap versions. This (very miniscule) gripe is enough of a reason for me to not recommend Ubuntu to new users anymore.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s not a miniscule gripe tho. Snap is still broken for many users, and relying on it for something as critical as a web browser is asking for trouble. Experimental technologies like snap should be opt-in for users who are willing to deal with the issues they create. Do they really expect a novice to see firefox’s filepicker not behaving correctly, and think “Aha, an XDG desktop portal issue! Let me drop everything I’m doing and go troubleshoot that” ? Ubuntu is meant to be linux for normies, they don’t have the time or the knowledge to deal with snap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Ubuntu is dead on the desktop.

permalink
report
parent
reply

How has your experience been so far?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Exactly that same, really. There were a few things I did that I liked about Ubuntu, like the tray icon extension, but otherwise its nearly identical minus snaps.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

installs Firefox LSR

(I am still very happy having made the switch to debian, although I would like to switch to plasma 6 at some point xD)

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

One of my friends spent like a month distrohopping just to find a debian-based distro that fits these two criteria:

  • First-class support for KDE

  • Isn’t broken all the time

Ubuntu fails both. KDE Neon excels on the first one, but fails harder than ubuntu on the second one. Kubuntu as well. Debian has horridly outdated packages, and he refuses to use nix/flatpak. Tuxedo OS is obscure and broken. Mint is great, but installing KDE takes some effort.

He finally settled on Ubuntu Server with the native KDE package. Still has to do some weird incantations to banish snap tho.

How did things get this bad?

permalink
report
reply
1 point
*

I’d love to know what’s consistently breaking on KDE Neon for you. I’ve got some specific bugs I’m working through with their team, but I’ve never found it to be “always broken” (although I will say it is easier to break than Kubuntu IME).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why not try Void. It’s fairly up to date regarding all packages, including KDE and it’s rock solid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

He really insists on debian-based, I don’t really know why. And, while Void IS really solid, it isn’t exactly known for the most expansive package collection. Xournal, for example, is not available through XBPS (there is a xournal package, but it just installs xournal++), which is one of the programs he likes a lot. I told him it’s on nix, but he doesn’t want to use nix.

But I agree, Void is amazing, I use it on my laptop. One little-known cool feature of Void is that its official docker images come in busybox/musl libc, busybox/glibc, and coreutils/glibc variants, it gives you a nice scale from most minimalist to most compatible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

He could make his own templates for the packages… he doesn’t even have to rebuild. If he could at least find a .deb or .rpm package of the app/package he likes, he could use that and just repackage. That’s what I do for stuff I can’t find… and update them from time to time (like every few months or so).

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

How did Pop!_OS fare?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You are about to do something potentially harmful.
To continue type in the phrase ‘Yes, do as I say!’

But speaking seriously, I think he tried it for a while and didn’t like it either… not sure why specifically tho, I’ll ask him

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

When I used Mint, it felt like packages are outdated just like on Debian (based on Ubuntu LTS + needs time to rebase onto a new one).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

ok, what is snap and why should I care?

permalink
report
reply
2 points

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(software)

As to “why should I care”, you don’t have to… unless you use Ubuntu.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I didn’t really understand what I just read, but it sounds like flatpack but different. I’m on mint, so I’m pretty sure it doesn’t affect me. The memes I’ve seen on the subject give me the impression that people don’t like it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Snap is far more like nix. Flatpak deals with a limited subset of what nix and snap do (e.g. it can’t distribute kernel packages).

While snap is certainly not without its problems, people repeatedly make massive negative claims about it that, while often based on a core of truth, are highly embellished to the point of being misinformation. (This is the same tactic I see with bad-faith political trolls, and with a similar result really - they’ll consistently try to use that core of truth to make far stronger claims than are defensible and, when it’s pointed out to them, they move the goalposts to a smaller, more defensible claim, only to repeat the bigger, debunked, claim later.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Yeah, it’s basically flatpak but with more problems and bugs. It’s from Canonical and some parts of it are closed source.

permalink
report
parent
reply

linuxmemes

!linuxmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:
Community rules
  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

Community stats

  • 7.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.2K

    Posts

  • 68K

    Comments