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

341–350 of 538 posts

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#341

Post by xet7 »

blendergeek wrote: post #218
pjfin123 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is offering to build an alternate store for snaps, Flatpak is building an entirely different executable.

Why would anyone offer an alternate store for snaps? Ubuntu seems to have made clear that the snap client will not be able to connect to alternative stores. What is the point of building an alternative store. Further snap is controlled by one company. Canonical has a history of developing groundbreaking new things for the Linux community before unceremoniously killing them off. * Ubuntu One * Unity Desktop * Ubuntu T…

Continuing Ubuntu One was not sustainable: https://ubuntu.com/blog/shutting-down-ubuntu-one-file-servic...

Ubuntu One file syncing, also server part, has been Open Sourced with much effort from Canonical: https://ubuntu.com/blog/ubuntu-one-file-syncing-code-open-so...

Ubuntu Touch https://ubports.com is run by community and has rapid progress, it's running on PinePhone etc.

Canonical would have liked to continue Unity: https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/10/why-did-ubuntu-drop-unit...

I would presume Upstart Init system was changed to systemd because other distros started using systemd.

I don't see a trend here.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#342

Post by galgalesh »

lawl wrote: post #94
jonquark wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see why Snap is like it is from Canonial's perspective - but from the User perspective it seems like FlatPaks[1] are much better and address the issues that this article raises [1] https://flathub.org/home (Disclaimer: I'm talking in a personal capacity but the company I work for in my day job now owns Red Hat - I don't work on Linux Operating Systems).

> but from the User perspective it seems like FlatPaks[1] are much better and address the issues that this article raises This is interesting, because the last few days I was actually working on packaging an application of mine as a snap/flatpak. From my PoV, they both have their fair share of issues. Snaps enforce a sandbox, which I think is actually a good idea, because the desktop security model is somewhat broken…

In case this eases your worries: the approval process for permissions is formalised and does not depend on how mature or well-known the app is.

In addition: users always have the option to override permissions. The approval process is for automatic (default) permission grants. Even if these are not granted, users can grant them manually.

The specific processes for approval are listed at the bottom of this page: https://snapcraft.io/docs/permission-requests

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#343

Post by totetsu »

_y5hn wrote: post #229
danudey wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From an IT perspective: I can set up an internal APT mirror for my users, servers, test systems, etc., but I can't set up an internal snap mirror as far as I can tell. This means that despite having an internal repo that I can whitelist, some package installations will now arbitrarily require internet access. I can no longer install chromium on a system without access to the internet, and package installation will fa…

Snap can't seem to access my mounts. They're not very special mounts, but it happens in linux that you mount something, but snap just won't access. That made "no-go" a no-brainer.

For the longest time Snap chromium couldn't access files it had downloaded. So I would click to open a pdf when it was completed and get an error. I had to go whitelist my home dir in some config somewhere ..

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#344

Post by xet7 »

curt15 wrote: post #48
kd913 wrote: post #12

The reason for why the backend for the snap store hasn't been opensourced has been explained multiple times. Namely that it would be expensive to open source it with little benefit in return. Canonical already spent a large amount of investment opensourcing launchpad and nobody other than them operate it. Mainly because the majority of the costs are for operating an instance which most other distros aren't willing to…

>The reason for why the backend for the snap store hasn't been opensourced has been explained multiple times. Namely that it would be expensive to open source it with little benefit in return. Perhaps a business reason left unsaid is that an open source snap store would undermine Canonical's paid "enterprise edition" snap store. Why would an organization pay $30000 ( https://ubuntu.com/internet-of-things ) for a priv…

That revenue funds bandwidth, server etc costs of those downloading Snap packages for free.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#345

Post by rvz »

gitgud wrote: post #326
dzonga wrote: post #316

snap vs flatpak vs appimages once again shows the fragmentation within the linux desktop ecosystem. as a user, it makes me sad, cz I can't have one good solid experience. snap, updates might break, flatpak is not fully supported. And my strong belief, is Microsoft is going to eat Linux Desktop. WSL to run your server apps and coding environment. windows for user apps. as someone who hasn't used windows in over 10 yea…

> "snap vs flatpak vs appimages once again shows the fragmentation within the linux desktop ecosystem." A common misconception about the FOSS ecosystem is that many similar projects is "wasted effort". In reality, diversity is what allows for progress and flexibility. Otherwise you end up with a single package manager which nobody can change AKA mono-culture. > " Microsoft is going to eat Linux Desktop. WSL to run yo…

> A common misconception about the FOSS ecosystem is that many similar projects is "wasted effort".

From a developers and users perspecive, it is a wasted effort. Users still keep wasting time 'choosing' a distro. There's 1 form of Windows and macOS to choose and support. For a software vendor, you need to 'define support'. I can support all Windows and macOS users, but I can only target a certain amount of Linux users on some selected distros which isn't all Linux users.

Perhaps the reason the Linux desktop has failed is because of the lack of a standard desktop or common SDKs other than the Linux kernel itself.

> In reality, diversity is what allows for progress and flexibility. Otherwise you end up with a single package manager which nobody can change AKA mono-culture.

Just look at the tons of distro configurations that a software vendor needs to test for which is why many companies place some Linux distros as under having 'unsupported' status and have to target a select few, unlike Windows and macOS.

The best "Linux Desktop" to support is WSL.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#347

Post by quadrifoliate »

clktmr wrote: post #263
emerongi wrote: post #220

Snaps are super laggy. GNOME calculator on Ubuntu runs in a snap and it is baffling that whoever made the decision to package it in a snap by default was OK with the fact that it takes 2 seconds to launch a basic calculator on a 2017 laptop (edit: re-tested, it took 5 seconds). To top it off, a couple months ago my calculator disappeared. For some reason I have been having problems with snap applications disappearing…

This is exactly my experience. On top of that snap creates visible directories in $HOME, f-up my loop devices and snap applications can't even access /tmp. Never had any problems with flatpak and appimage. I will however use it solely for proprietary software.

> On top of that snap creates visible directories in $HOME, f-up my loop devices

This. snap seems to spew traces of itself all over the place on an Ubuntu install, and it's less than clear why any of them are there.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#348

Post by mixmastamyk »

philliphaydon wrote: post #336
mixmastamyk wrote: post #73

It's interesting in that I quite like the idea of snap packages, just not their implementation. I recently purged snaps from my Ubuntu Mate machines after a few years of use because of the realization of only using two: 1. The micro terminal editor. 2. Chromium, because it was forced. Well, #1 was packaged for 20.04 so I didn't need it any longer. That left Chromium. For that single package, I had to tolerate my syst…

Just install chrome without snaps?!? Works fine?!?

Not anymore. I found a chromium PPA, and while not perfect, it doesn't do any of the irritating things listed above.

Re: Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

#349

Post by waon »

tankenmate wrote: post #248
danudey wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From an IT perspective: I can set up an internal APT mirror for my users, servers, test systems, etc., but I can't set up an internal snap mirror as far as I can tell. This means that despite having an internal repo that I can whitelist, some package installations will now arbitrarily require internet access. I can no longer install chromium on a system without access to the internet, and package installation will fa…

You might want to look at ungoogled-chromium,[0] there are downloads for most non Windows platforms. Also packages are available in repos for apt/deb, yum/rpm, etc. [0] https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium

That wouldn't solve the root of the problem, though. The real solution would be to use other distros.

Besides, there are quality concerns with browser forks maintained by an understaffed project. The fact that ungoogled-chromium asks for internet randos to provide its own binary releases doesn't inspire confidence either. If someone desperately needs to use Ubuntu, they'd be better off using Firefox.

Post reply on HN