Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 538 posts

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#2

Post by ed25519FUUU »

> The Linux Mint project has made good on previous threats to actively prevent Ubuntu Snap packages from being installed through the APT package-management system without the user's consent. This move is the result of "major worries" from Linux Mint on Snap's impact with regard to user choice and software freedom. Ubuntu's parent company, Canonical, seems open to finding a solution to satisfy the popular distribution's concerns — but it too has interests to consider.

An excellent and succinct summary of the issue in the first paragraph. I have to hand it to LWN for excellent synopsis/summary paragraphs in the articles. This is a lost art in today's clickbait headline where the lede is buried in the center of the Earth.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#3

Post by Spivak »

Canonical's decision to abuse the power of apt packages to make it some "universal installer" is kinda gross. I get the thought but I would consider is surprising that, say, installing python-* actually installed pip and ran pip install.

This is totally going to break Gnome Software's UI since it has plugins for snap, flatpack, apt, dnf, pacman, etc.. and making it so that Chromium from apt is doing a run-round with snap makes it really confusing to the user.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#6

Post by jrockway »

I've been kind of disappointed by Snap. It seemed like it was a way to always have the latest version of software you care about available, but in practice, nobody updates their Snaps. I used it to get a newer version of Go, and while it is more recent than what comes with Ubuntu, it's still not the latest version. Apparently Some Guy updates it on a volunteer basis when he remembers, so it's nearly useless.

Even if people do update the Snap, it's clear that it provides too many features. It has some sort of isolation model... that every Snap I've ever installed requires you to disable.

It's also surprisingly expensive to run something in a snap. For example, getting the name of my current k8s context with "kubectl config current-context":

    $ sudo execsnoop.bt
    Attaching 2 probes...
    TIME(ms)   PID   ARGS
    7603       29266 kubectl config current-context
    7612       29272 /usr/sbin/apparmor_parser --preprocess
    7614       29266 kubectl config current-context
    7626       29280 /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-seccomp version-info
    7630       29266 /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-confine --classic snap.kubectl.kubectl /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-exec kubectl config current-context
    7632       29266 /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-exec kubectl config current-context
    7634       29266 /snap/kubectl/1561/command-kubectl.wrapper config current-context
    7635       29266 /snap/kubectl/1561/kubectl config current-context
This adds 32ms of latency before the app runs for absolutely no good reason.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#7

Post by psanford »

From the linked announcement: https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906

> Applications in this store cannot be patched, or pinned. You can’t audit them, hold them, modify them or even point snap to a different store. You’ve as much empowerment with this as if you were using proprietary software, i.e. none. This is in effect similar to a commercial proprietary solution, but with two major differences: It runs as root, and it installs itself without asking you.

This is a great summary of why people rightfully feel nervous about Snap. People run linux because they want visibility and control into what is happening on their systems. Canonical seems to want to take away that visibility and control from their users.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#10

Post by aphexairlines »

This seems like a problem:

> Snap packages are effectively black-boxes; they cannot be reproduced independently as the packaging data is controlled by the package maker alone.

One of the nice properties of debian packages is the ability to `apt-get source` and build it locally. Would be a shame to lose that.

Maybe Nix and Guix can provide the best of both worlds here: self-contained software but reproducible builds too.

Post reply on HN