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

Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

techtudor.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 198 posts

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#111

Post by licebmi__at__ »

hn_throwaway531 wrote: post #13
nerdbaggy wrote: post #7

One of my big things with snap is how it locks the snap into the home directory. I get why they do that but it would be nice to override[1]. In my case I want to play audio files outside of my home directory but VLC doesn’t have access. And VLC now only updates the snaps and not it’s repos so you have to use the snaps.[2] [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapd/+bug/1643706 [2] https://www.videolan.org/vl…

>> In my case I want to play audio files outside of my home directory but VLC doesn’t have access You can try using soft links as a work around.

Is this possible? Softlinks is just an indication of where to look for the file, but if the process can't see the file, a softlinks won't help.

A hard link should be able to see the file, but they need to be in the same file system, and I don't know much about ubuntu's default partition scheme to say if it's doable for most of the users.

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#112

Post by BiteCode_dev »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #94
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an opt out feature: diversity. You can always use only the system package manager, or use a distro that doesn't use snap. All those complaints feel so moot. It's really hard to be in FOSS nowaday: you can't make a move without your users judging you all along the way, because a lot of them are idealists that expect a lot from you, yet don't think about the non tech saavy users. It's way easier to make propri…

> It's way easier to make proprietary software: most of your users don't criticise any single decision you make, you don't have to justify yourself, you get much more users, and you make money out of it. Why on Earth would you think that users of proprietary software don't criticize it? I'm pretty sure that Windows gets more criticism than Ubuntu...

Take zoom: in HN we heard a lot of complains for ethical reasons, but the biggest part of the user base doesn't care and are just happy with it.

On FOSS, you'll have complains about the software it self AND ethics from most of your users, because they are mostly technical, and contains way more idealists than the average user sample.

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#113

Post by krastanov »

slezyr wrote: post #109
gentleman11 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find gnome to be pretty configurable. The opinionated defaults aren’t so bad because you can just replace the environment if you dislike it

No. NO. You can't even change language shortcut from default (Win + Space). As I understand this comes from MacOS, which gnome devs brainlessly copy. https://askubuntu.com/questions/41480/how-do-i-change-my-key...

Your example is dead wrong. I run Gnome and my language shortcut is CapsLock. I used the Tweaks configuration software which is part of Gnome (it is the one you are supposed to use for more invasive configuration).

I do find Gnome plenty configurable. You just need to go in order of Settings -> Tweaks -> their weird registry -> custom extensions. I would agree this is convoluted, but I do not mind it (as a power user it took me 5 minutes to google how to do it, while it probably makes sense to have only the first state (Settings) visible by default).

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#114

Post by schmichael »

zrm wrote: post #107
schmichael wrote: post #25

I think there are some very good critiques of snap (performance, provenance, reproducibility, namespacing, etc), and the first couple points in this article seem reasonable. However I can't agree with this: > apt/deb is a wonderful package management system and everyone is happy with it, at least the majority of Ubuntu/Debian users. Besides, dnf/rpm is also a similar packaging system for Fedora/RH systems and everyon…

> I want all of the QT libs embedded in the package. I don't understand why anybody wants this. Libraries should have major versions and the latest of each major version should be compatible with anything using that major version, because that's what major version means for a library. You might then need to have more than one major version of the library installed, but any two applications using the same one should b…

> I don't understand why anybody wants this.

Because creating debs is largely a completely distinct undertaking from the dependency and build management the developer of an app does.

Bundles, whether via images or static binaries, allow app developers to distribute their app against the exact dependencies it was developed against -- potentially using the same build system.

There's obviously tradeoffs to each approach, which is why I don't think there's one right way to distribute every bit of executable code on a system.

> People want containers to be magic but they're actually a hard problem.

I work on a container orchestrator, so I understand some of the difficulty. :) Mobile apps are years ahead of desktop apps when it comes to containerizing in a user friendly way. Obviously there's plenty of work still to be done, but the problem is far from intractable and the benefits are enormous.

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#115

Post by superkuh »

Snaps, flatpacks, and other containerization solutions only work on systems with OSes set up in the last 5 years. Most of the containerization is justa symptom of the real problem: future shock re: underlying libraries (c++whatever,glibc, etc) and new features being used.

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#116

Post by noisy_boy »

zdragnar wrote: post #41
noisy_boy wrote: post #26

The whole snaps business was already annoying. Then my external monitor stopped being detected due to some issue with Nvidia graphics on (which probably is more Nvidia's fault then Ubuntu's). I'm using Thinkpad X1 Extreme Gen 2. Tried Fedora 32's live usb and basically everything worked but the installer didn't detect all partitions and didn't give a choice of choosing exactly what goes into which partition without o…

Say what you will of their hardware, but the system76 team really nailed pop_os. So many little things I was used to suffering through manually configuring on a fresh install were just "right" straight out of the box. Supposedly they're working on tabbed and stacking layouts for tiled windows- if that is the case I don't know if I'll go back to i3 or sway again!

I don't have any experience with their hardware but I'll have to agree on the software front. I have a multi-port hub that I also connect the HDMI cable for monitor to; I connect the hub to the laptop its actually plug-n-play. I haven't had to run one command to hack/override configs etc.

I tried their tiling option but didn't stick to it because when I maximized a window and toggled to another, the original window went back to being tiled. Too lazy to remember shortcuts for tiling WMs (probably to my own detriment)

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#117

Post by cg505 »

ludamad wrote: post #58
gentleman11 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find gnome to be pretty configurable. The opinionated defaults aren’t so bad because you can just replace the environment if you dislike it

The problem is configuration churn. A lot of gnome2 stuff didn't carry over if I recall and had to be reinvented for gnome3

Gnome 3 has been out for 9 years now, which is longer than the time between the releases of Gnome 2 and 3. I don't think there is a lot of config churn. (It may have been worse in the early days of Gnome 3.)

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#118

Post by kemonocode »

In my opinion, AppImage solved the problem Snap tried to solve, yet without being horribly intrusive.

Kudos to Linux Mint for taking a stand in regards to it, and hopefully more Ubuntu-based distros do the same until Canonical gets the idea.

I don't think they're out there trying to be malicious, but they need to be set back to the correct path as it has been the case with odd monetization choices for Ubuntu before that didn't really benefit anyone.

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#119

Post by mnm1 »

dheera wrote: post #23
SweetestRug wrote: post #5

I had been an Ubuntu user for almost 16 years, on servers, laptops, and recently containers. The snap situation with Ubuntu is just plain unpalatable, both in principal and in practice. I became so disappointed in the move by Canonical that I finally left Ubuntu altogether and no longer recommend it to friends and colleagues. It takes years to cultivate a garden, but only minutes to destroy it.

There are also these "AppImage" files. They launch, but there is no guidance on how to install them to the system. Launching Chrome: I click the Chrome icon. Launching PrusaSlicer: Start a terminal and type chmod 755 ~/Downloads/PrusaSlicer-2.2.0+linux-x64-202003211856.AppImage ~/Downloads/PrusaSlicer-2.2.0+linux-x64-202003211856.AppImage That doesn't seem like progress to me from a UX perspective.

And flatpack. So now there's apt, snap, appimage, and flatpack. 4 fucking systems that need to be maintained just to update apps on an OS. Frankly, it's ridiculous and the apps from all those alternate systems all have some issues too. None work as well as apt. I don't understand what is wrong with apt. If they want newer packages provide a repo for newer shit. Problem solved.

Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu

#120

Post by nialv7 »

krastanov wrote: post #113
slezyr wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. NO. You can't even change language shortcut from default (Win + Space). As I understand this comes from MacOS, which gnome devs brainlessly copy. https://askubuntu.com/questions/41480/how-do-i-change-my-key...

Your example is dead wrong. I run Gnome and my language shortcut is CapsLock. I used the Tweaks configuration software which is part of Gnome (it is the one you are supposed to use for more invasive configuration). I do find Gnome plenty configurable. You just need to go in order of Settings -> Tweaks -> their weird registry -> custom extensions. I would agree this is convoluted, but I do not mind it (as a power user…

You do understand that them being extensions means they are not part of GNOME.
Post reply on HN