111–120 of 297 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The latest POP!_OS release integrated Flatpak instead of Snap into their package manager. It's very well done in that you can choose if you want the deb or the flatpak version and it defaults to the deb as long as one is available.
POP!_OS is a fork of Ubuntu though, right? In that case if I try to install chromium using apt-get will it install the snap or the .deb?
The main reason why I use Linux for some of my work is reproducibility. A docker image with the same apt packages installed in it will work the same every time. Snap breaks this. A snap package can update itself whenever it wants and then you the user are just screwed when things don't work together anymore. So in effect, snap breaks the main benefit of Linux for deployment and the reason why I use Linux in the first…
There are keys to control when these snap updates will happen, https://snapcraft.io/docs/keeping-snaps-up-to-date It is immutable systems that help you with reproducibility. There is no actual change between the snapd setup in Ubuntu 18.04 and Ubuntu 20.04. Where do you get info on unreliable docker deployments? It looks to me that the dislike is emotional in nature.
But people seem to like flatpaks, so I don't think it's emotional. More a poor implementation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What distro? I use Ubuntu because I just want an OS, not a hobby.
What's wrong with either of Fedora or Debian?
Example rolling out pulseaudio when it didn't work well. One version I recall went from acceptable font rendering to can't stand to start at it levels of horribleness. The release of gnome 3.0 the release of KDE 4.0.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What distro? I use Ubuntu because I just want an OS, not a hobby.
Mint. It's Ubuntu without the nonsense. I switched when the Unity thing happened, and haven't looked back. This news about snaps reaffirms my confidence in Mint.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Selenium has standalone images with the browser so that you can use them with Docker. It is too fragile to install yourself all the pieces.
I'm actually quite happy with my Ubuntu 18 based homemade docker image. And lucky for me, 18 still has some years of support ahead of it. It's just that I know that I cannot update it to Ubuntu 20 without snap breaking things for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're never forced to update. I'm don't even think Arch natively supports automatic updates. You can also tell pacman to skip a package from being updated if you're aware of a problematic update but you want to update the rest of your system. And yes, Arch takes in the upstream vanilla packages, though there are testing phases before updates reach stable repos. I'm not sure any of this is a bad thing. It also means…
I think what he/she means is that core maintainers (or AUR maintainers) might be able to change a package without another core maintainer (or AUR maintainer) reviewing it.
- Linux Mint
- ElementaryOS
- Pop!_OS
Take a hint, Canonical. You guys made some great strides towards being less silo'd by dropping Unity and Mir in favor of vanilla GNOME + Wayland, but you're still all-in on snaps for some reason. Are the handful of proprietary software companies that want an easier installer for Linux really worth it?
I can understand Canonical pushing for snaps. It's their product and they want it to succeed. That said I hate their dirty ways. I find it even morally wrong. How can "sudo apt install chromium-browser" not install the apt package but install instead a snap? How I, as a user and also as a professional, trust Ubuntu if when I use their package manager I'm being tricked? I don't use Windows for a reason, more than one…
snap has problems that exist for years. It will upgrade a running application without telling the user. Then it will remount all folders in use by the running application in read only mode. As such, your chromium will start misbehaving, crashing, extensions will start failing, it won't save cookies or remember tabs after restart. DBeaver won't be saving your .sql scripts. Snap developers think users are precogs. That…
Snap support is evolving. There are keys to configure when, and if, you get updates, https://snapcraft.io/docs/keeping-snaps-up-to-date The total Linux desktop installation base is around 2.7%. Without automation, the Linux desktop does not look like it will attract any significant number of Windows users.
Do you mean the obvious `sudo snap set system refresh.hold="$(date --date=+100years +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S%:z)"`? (no error)
edit: Ah, that silently stops working after 60 days, nvm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my perspective Manjaro seems like Arch+added nonsense. I honestly don't see what are you trying to say regarding Manjaro with "I really don't want to waste time troubleshooting my own shit" or "Arch just requires way too much fiddling". On the other hand I could understand if you just wanted something that requires less knowledge to set up the first time, but then why not go with Debian or something? To clarify,…
Manjaro is install and go. Arch Linux is ... well, if you haven't done it before, you're going to waste at least an hour going through the awful documentation trying to piece together what the installation flow is supposed to be. The beginner's guide was scrapped and the replacement is awful. So if you're new, it's going to be painful. And if you aren't new, it's still painful if you just want to install your OS and…
EDIT:
> I'm tired of all the tinkering. I'm tired of the additional cognitive load of all the things I have to make sure is configured right. I already waste hours of my day just getting tooling to work for whatever god awful language I have to work with that day. I just want things to work. Manjaro just works.
I definitely understand that, but I feel that if I went to Manjaro or Debian or whatever the added complexity would make debugging much more annoying.