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

Why is there only one Snap Store?

merlijn.sebrechts.be

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 362 posts

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#61

Post by Conan_Kudo »

simion314 wrote: post #42
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish, but the signature is actually compiled into the snapd (the software on your system)'s binary. Deliberately impossible to reconfigure. Like I said, you can change the signature... by distributing a forked binary to users that would be incompatible with the main store.

Isn't this good? I mean if you are a distribution you compile the software yourself so you can add the distribution keys (there are some that don't compile stuff ). Probably you are thinking there should be atext file in your home where you could add new signature to be sued, but that could be a security issue so probably needs to be something more safe,did any serious patch was sent to improve this and was it reject…

No, this is incredibly bad. Think about the pain we're all going through to rotate UEFI certificates. There is almost no system where this is worth it.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#64

Post by Conan_Kudo »

"Although they invested significant resources in open sourcing Launchpad, there is still only one instance of Launchpad running and they have not received any significant contributions from non-Canonical employees."

For what it's worth, there is another Launchpad instance in existence: https://quickbuild.io/

From personal experience, I found it functionally impossible to get a local instance working when I tried a few years ago. I applaud someone else managing to pull it off.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#65

Post by Thaxll »

war1025 wrote: post #9

Semi-related: Does anyone else feel like Ubuntu has lost a lot of its momentum over the past few years? I don't hear about things they're doing nearly as often anymore.

I mean it's the most popular distro, it's the most used on desktop and in the cloud. So I would say they're doing pretty well.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#66

Post by ppseafield »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #30
acoard wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you list some examples? The more the better. Much appreciated.

Red Hat: Hires Alex to work on Flatpak. Loved by Community, almost a dozen distros supporting Flatpak as a next-gen package format by default. Snap: Loved only by Canonical devotees. Zero distros supporting Snap exclusively by default. Red Hat: SystemD Canonical: Upstart, dead to SystemD. Red Hat & Others: Wayland Canonical: Mir. Dead to Wayland. Red Hat & Others: GNOME 3 Canonical: Unity1-7. Dead to GNOME.

Upstart existed before systemd. I used to think it was NIH syndrome, but its initial release was in 2006, whereas systemd's was in 2010.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#67

Post by 1_person »

That reminds me of the stake Ubuntu Core was born with in its heart:

> An Ubuntu SSO account is required to create the first user on an Ubuntu Core installation.

They just keep flinging shit at nothing and hoping to hit a wall they can build a gate in.

They're trying to boil the frog slowly with Snap on the Server/Desktop branches.

There is no possible genuine motive for these maneuverings to be in the position of gatekeeper.

If anyone at Canonical is listening, you should be aware it doesn't matter how slowly and carefully you approach this, or how you justify it, the first time I'm forced to kiss the ring to get my software to work, your software is gone from any system I own or manage, immediately and forever.

You're not going to get within a thousand miles of monetizing the ecosystem by gatekeeping it -- the moment you even so much as assert the position of gatekeeper you're trying to create for yourselves you're dead to me.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#68

Post by psanford »

1_person wrote: post #67

That reminds me of the stake Ubuntu Core was born with in its heart: > An Ubuntu SSO account is required to create the first user on an Ubuntu Core installation. They just keep flinging shit at nothing and hoping to hit a wall they can build a gate in. They're trying to boil the frog slowly with Snap on the Server/Desktop branches. There is no possible genuine motive for these maneuverings to be in the position of ga…

I was excited for Ubuntu Core and then "noped" out as soon as I saw the Ubuntu SSO account requirement.

I'm not going to use an OS that you can't login to without it phoning home to a third party.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#69

Post by gravitas »

abrowne wrote: post #54
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Red Hat: Hires Alex to work on Flatpak. Loved by Community, almost a dozen distros supporting Flatpak as a next-gen package format by default. Snap: Loved only by Canonical devotees. Zero distros supporting Snap exclusively by default. Red Hat: SystemD Canonical: Upstart, dead to SystemD. Red Hat & Others: Wayland Canonical: Mir. Dead to Wayland. Red Hat & Others: GNOME 3 Canonical: Unity1-7. Dead to GNOME.

Red Hat did use upstart before adopting systemd FWIW.

> Red Hat did use upstart before adopting systemd FWIW

RHEL added support for Upstart as a hybrid with SysV, however it was never heavily used and not by most of their own packaged RPMs. Spin up a CentOS 6 server, install a bunch of daemons then go compare /etc/init/ to /etc/rc.d/init.d/.

Post reply on HN