Live data from Hacker News

Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

jatan.blog

471–480 of 645 posts

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#471
post #441
post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just disable snapd after you have achieved your ideal configuration. But yes, this should be a setting somewhere...

The problem with that is you are fighting the platform. That's not a great place to be. Unless your disagreement with the platform's design is small enough you are likely to be better choosing a more appropriate platform.

I'm currently on Kubuntu 19.10. I don't have any snaps. So they can't autoupdate. BTW: After installation of Kubuntu there were automatic security updates. But it was possible to turn these off in the Muon Package Manager (Settings | Software Sources | Updates | Automatic Updates)

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#472
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have misjudged who actually uses Linux. This setting would be ideal for all the billions of people Canonical wishes used Ubuntu.

Yes... Isn't that what I said?

If you agree that it's not the current userbase of Ubuntu, then you're saying people should quit using Ubuntu en masse, only a fraction staying behind.

The idea that you "misjudged who actually uses Linux" was based on the assumption that you think a product should generally cater to its users. If instead you think most of the users should leave, then okay, that's a valid opinion, it's just surprising.

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is. Hard, but possible, just the way it should be.

Enterprise and Education only.

I got Windows Long-Term Service Branch (LTSB, now LTSC for Long-Term Service Channel) for precisely this reason.

After having an update happen at a bad time, one closing a file I hadn't yet saved, and another killing a process of computations I had been leaving to run overnight, I decided that I wanted to use my computer the way I saw fit, not the way someone else saw fit. If someone cannot wrap their head around the idea that I might leave a process running while I sleep, or that I might forget to save something in a program that doesn't have an autosave feature, well, they're not considering all of the use cases.

For giggles, after LTSB I did "all the things" to get rid of forced updates on one particularly infrequently-used tablet and, as an experiment, left it unpatched for slightly over a year before seeing what would happen once I finally let it do its thing. For one, the updates took about three and a half hours, which I thought was interesting; just re-installing would likely be faster.

More interesting, though, was that the world did not end because I had not patched this tablet.

I get aiming at the eighty percent of your users who just would not think to update, but being that hostile to the other twenty percent who are aware of updates and still would like that control is annoying. It is sad to see that this kind of thinking has made its way to Linuxland, which I had imagined to be the last bastion of "we're doing this for your own good."

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#474
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is the exact reason I use Linux instead of Windows 10 or macOS Not sure about win10, but macOS won't autoupdate apps if you turned it off. If the app is not from an app store - it's up to the devs to have option to (auto) update. Most apps allow you to turn autoupdate off (in fact I can't think of single one without this option)

This is from another user in this thread: > I've used both Windows and OSX for my professional work and while Windows is the worst offender when it comes to automatic updates, OSX is pretty horrible as well. At least with Windows you can expect some sort of backwards compatibility, while on OSX, one day you have to upgrade your entire OS, otherwise Notes or some stupid application won't launch. - capableweb I used to…

You can still postpone updates, but yes, they've got more pushy than in the past. The issue is that iOS is the priority, and that has to be updated every year to support new models; so MacOS is also pushed to update in order to keep integrated systems (e.g. notes) in sync. This said, one can simply postpone upgrades indefinitely and just ignore the bits that break. I don't really use most of them, so I'm still not on the latest release despite it having been released some 6 months ago.

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#475
post #457
post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is particularly bad during the freeze before the new stable version comes out. Some updates can be delayed for months.

Also security updates? Wouldn't that make the new version insecure at launch until someone pushes a thousand security updates at once (making it kind of 'testing' again because none of these were in testing before and thus haven't been widely tested)? You raise a good point since I notice I don't know the process as well as I thought I did, but it seems odd that the frozen testing repo would only get all security upd…

IIRC, Debian testing doesn't have a separate channel for security updates. Security updates are handled like regular updates: they start on Debian unstable and then flow down to Debian testing.

The Debian wiki mentions that delays can be specially large after a new release comes out. I don't know if I was misremembering it or if it can be problematic both before and after a stable release comes out. Hopefully someone with more Debian experience can clear this up.

https://www.debian.org/security/faq#testing

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some downsides (footprint, forced updates, speed, etc.), though depending on what you're installing those may not be deal-breakers. I'm using plain Ubuntu 20.04 and I tend to install stuff via apt and not snap in general (but I am fine with installing non-essential things via snap). The software store has a subtle toggle in the upper right for choosing to install a package as a snap or via apt when both are…

Yeah, is there a plan for it to long-term replace apt? I've just always used apt as my first choice and then snap for random things like spotify.

They are making a very big bet on snap, I would expect most of their desktop apps to be slowly moved there in the next few years. At that point apt would be kept around strictly for essential system packages and (hopefully) for server usage.

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#477
post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

snaps are intended for non-power-users that don't want to deal with dependencies. Those users want things to mostly work without worrying about murky downsides. Auto-updating is exactly the right behavior. If this is of concern to you, why are you using snaps? And why Ubuntu? What's the value-add over Debian?

The concern is that there's no simple way to disable auto-updates. If you want Ubuntu to turn into Windows, why not just use Windows?

Because there are so many different Linux distorts out there. I feel like at least one of them should be as newb friendly as possible.

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#478
post #411
post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Set your system up to have like 90% of the available disk space for /home. Rest is root. You can replace your whole system within half an hour.

Personally, and I'm not new to this, I find these partitioned setups to be quite a pain. On server systems I can see the point of limiting /var/log and /tmp and such, but on simple desktops, I only know of people dreading the decision to go with that historical setup instead of one big root.

When I do it, anymore I refuse to do it with standard partitions. LVM makes this whole setup much more painless in the end since you can nearly endlessly change the splits without dealing with copying and moving partitions around when a change is needed. I wouldn't recommend thin provisioning for this kind of setup though since it carries some burdens when things fill up.

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#479
post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ubuntu tried shipping wayland on by default already and it was a clusterf* and made that release all but unusable. Wayland isn't ready for an LTS release yet.

Wayland is the default display server for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. I have been running Wayland for the last 2 years and have never had any problems. (Admittedly I haven't used Nvidia)

It may well be Canonical's fault and they just screwed things up...but regardless, if they haven't managed to ship it in usable form in an off-cycle release, it's not ready for LTS. In fact after the last time, they said they would only try again when they could go a full cycle of 3 non-LTS releases with reasonable results before it would land in LTS. And their expectations before shipping in the off-cycle didn't seem too crazy (ie the X11 compatibility layer not constantly crashing the whole session and taking out all the user's applications) but still weren't met in time for 18.10. I think they're slated to try again now for 20.10.

> Admittedly I haven't used Nvidia

Yeah, that. Not supporting ~half the video cards in the world sounds like a clusterf*. I know it's largely nvidia's fault, but at the same time, I have a lot of investment with them, and none w/ wayland.

Re: Ubuntu 20.04 LTS’ snap obsession has snapped me off of it

#480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we all agree that on the whole auto-updating software is generally better and more secure than manually updated software, why not single out the applications that haven't migrated instead of blaming the whole standard? Everyone certainly don’t agree on that. It really depends on the situation. And if that’s what you want, you had that already with unattended-upgrades. I really prefer to manage what updates, how,…

Unattended upgrades is a great example. You must manually install it, it's difficult to configure (you must edit some complex text file) and even then with it on and set to update all types of packages it often still doesn't. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but in my long experience with Ubuntu I've found unattended-upgrades very unreliable. I get that some people prefer a less secure ecosystem and never want to upda…

> I've found unattended-upgrades very unreliable.

The solution to that would be to fix unattended-upgrades and ship it as working by default, with an easy-to-use script to remove it. I bet that would have been orders of magnitude easier than developing snap.

But that would have kept the onus of packaging, testing, and delivering updates on Ubuntu. Instead, with snaps, they can offload all that to upstream developers. That is really the endgame here. Snap is a play for developers, not for users.

Ubuntu are saying to developers "if you build a snap, you don't have to worry ever again about distro differences! And you can update anything you need, at will!" and in exchange Ubuntu get to reduce their support costs. Win-win, right? And it is... except for power-users, who will get autoupdates shoved down their throats and their mount tables polluted up the wazoo. But nobody in Ubuntu ever cared about power-users on the desktop, really, so no news there.

Post reply on HN