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

141–150 of 362 posts

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#141

Post by galgalesh »

clvx wrote: post #14

I do like the snap concept, but some implementations are just not that great. For instance, kustomize as snap doesn't let you read anything outside that is not in the snap fs. Not even in --classic mode. A similar issue happens with nextcloud which is good on paper, but if you tweak something inside the snap fs it will be overridden in the next update(expected behavior); however, for services that require mutable con…

> For instance, kustomize as snap doesn't let you read anything outside that is not in the snap fs. Not even in --classic mode.

Classic snaps have complete access to the host filesystem. It is up to the publisher, however, to request classic confinement. If the publisher creates a `strict` snap, users cannot override this (because strict snaps would break when their container and dependencies suddenly disappear)

> for services that require mutable configuration there needs to be a way to preserve that data (I tested that nextcloud behavior more than half a year ago).

Snaps have access to multiple locations to store mutable data like `SNAP_COMMON`, `SNAP_USER_COMMON`, `SNAP_DATA` etc. Snaps can optionally also access regular directories.

Afaik, Nextcloud stores its configuration in one of those directories. I think what you experienced might be an issue with the NextCloud snap because snapd itself already supports this.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#142

Post by unixhero »

hannasanarion wrote: post #120
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they spent several years on Unity8+Mir, and then abandoned it went that went nowhere. They then pivoted to Snaps, where they are so proud of themselves on their echo chamber of a forum that they can't see that the end users are less than impressed. Honestly, I've stopped paying attention because Ubuntu is great at building technology with critical, mind-bogglingly obvious flaws that sink the project every time.

Don't forget Upstart, Juju, and Ubuntu Phone

Wait JuJu is dead?

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#143

Post by unixhero »

eikenberry wrote: post #78
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least for now, there are no plans to change this because Flatpak (if I recall) requires dbus. You might find some interesting info on that.

You seem to be suggesting that servers don't run dbus. It is currently running on all my servers and I'm pretty sure it is standard on all major server oriented distros.. Am I mistaken or did I misunderstand your point?

Traditionally you don't want to have xorg installed on a server.

If you do have it installed then yes, you would have dbus.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#144

Post by michaelmrose »

jeroenhd wrote: post #92
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…

To be completely honest, if Canonical ever wants the theoretical "year of the Linux desktop" to happen, they need a way to get proper cloud accounts working. A big part of the value of Apple's ecosystem is iCloud. Microsoft has done the same thing with the syncing and cross platform capabilities of their Microsoft Accounts. Most Linux users today don't care much if they need to create separate email, cloud storage, b…

The only cloud accounts users care about are logins for all their web based services which are synced by Firefox or Chrome.

They already have for example an email any web based services that come with Ubuntu are just something the people who actually use Ubuntu have to click through.

Normal people who by and large do not actually use Ubuntu would probably be more likely to sign up for such options if they are the default option but no more likely to actually use them.

The comparison to side loading is particularly badly made. On mobile platforms you need a platform specific account to install even free apps because ultimately also the way you consume paid for content.

Linux desktops all come with a platform specific app store that requires no particular integration because it is used to consume free content.

Paid content is consumed in the web browser.

Games are largely consumed via steam.

Paid apps are a harder sale because of the Linux desktops 3% market share and major apps that do offer support not wanting to give 30% to and platform.

Only people trying to make hundreds of thousands to millions of small sales via access to the massive ios or Android markets are willing to give up 30%.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#145

Post by galgalesh »

acgkmopvvgvmgv wrote: post #119

It's not for nothing that Snap is considered dangerous by SUSE and is not officially supported. They even fail basic upstream responsibilities. https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906 > A year later, in the Ubuntu 20.04 package base, the Chromium package is indeed empty and acting, without your consent, as a backdoor by connecting your computer to the Ubuntu Store. Applications in this store cannot be patched, or pinned.…

> 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.

This is not entirely correct. Distributions can use a "brand store" to have complete control over which packages their users get.

> You can’t audit them

Many Snaps contain a build manifest in `/snap/snap-name/current/snap/manifest.yaml`. This manifest contains a log of everything that is used to build the package. For snaps built on Launchpad, this is automatically enabled and includes a link to the Launchpad build log for that snap. This is one of the build logs for the Chromium package, for example: https://launchpad.net/~osomon/+snap/chromium-snap-firstrun-n...

Using Launchpad as the source of truth, you can be 100% certain that the snap you're running is built from the source it presents. This is the same infrastructure that builds and provides trust for Ubuntu itself.

The snapcraft build service uses Launchpad in the background, so any snap built using that can be audited just like regular Ubuntu packages. Snaps built on third-party infrastructure can enable this manifest using an environment variable.

I don't know why Linux Mint is spreading such misinformation, but this is harmful.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#146

Post by boogies »

spanhandler wrote: post #109
PaulBGD_ wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not understanding the English keyboard complaint, am I missing something?

Look up how you type: those • characters I used in my post, an m-dash (—), a c-cedilla (ç), a german double-S (ß), basic accented characters for various Western European languages (we have many, many loan words and phrases from those in English—façade, résumé, áñ∂ §ò öñ), punctuation for French and Spanish (no, you don't strictly need these for English—but in practice, depending on the register you're writing in, act…

> Look up how you type: those • characters I used in my post, an m-dash (—), a c-cedilla (ç), a german double-S (ß), basic accented characters for various Western European languages

No thanks! I already new how to type — (Compose - - -), and I was able to guess how to type the others simply by trial and error in less time than it would take to duck/google how to type them:

Compose + . + - → · (close enough for me Edit: Compose + . + = → •) ┃ Compose + c + , → ç ┃ Compose + s + s → ß

Compose + e + ` → è ┃ Compose + e + ' → é ┃ Compose + ` + e → è ┃ Compose + ' + e → é

Bonus: Compose + - + > → → ┃ Compose + = + / → ≠ ┃ Compose + / + = → ≠ ┃ Compose + : + ) → ┃ Compose + L + L + A + P → (Edit: HN seems to have stripped out the last two, a smiley face emoji and the \\// / Star Trek/Live Long And Prosper hand. So I guess the compose key can type more characters than HN even allows.)

ß°ηυ5 þē 5€¢•ηⅾ: Pressing the alt key reveals underlines under selectable gui elements. Press any letter that's underlined (while still holding alt) to activate the element (menu item, button, etc.). Try this in every GUI you use regularly and then race a macOS user stuck with reaching for a trackpad or mouse everytime they need to click something. Јоⅰη ⅿе ⅰɳ wօɳԁеrⅰηg Һօw ɳօ‐օɳе аt Аррⅼе tҺօυgҺt tо аⅾԁ tҺіѕ, wҺⅰϲҺ іѕ ɳօt ѕоⅿе rесеɳtⅼу‐аԁԁеԁ fеаtυrе ⅰɳ ԌΝU⁄Ⅼіɳυⅹ, Ьυt ⅰѕ рrасtіϲаⅼⅼУ аɳсіеηt ⅰη ϲоⅿρυtⅰɳg tеrⅿѕ (¡ΝаѕtУ Wⅰηԁоwѕ, рrеҺⅰѕtоrіс Wіηԁօwѕ 95, Һаⅾ tҺеѕе υηⅾеrⅼіɳеѕ аⅼwаУѕ ⌵іѕⅰЬⅼе!).

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#147

Post by Izkata »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #80
abnercoimbre wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To go back to Snap for a second: didn't Linux Mint drop it recently? I'm not happy on Ubuntu with snap because of what seems to be auto-updates -- maybe it's another thing that's auto-updating? I use Hugo [0], whose binaries are still [0] https://gohugo.io

Snap is auto-updating and you can't stop it [0]. I actually liked the idea of the snaps on paper, especially combined with Ubuntu Core for running lightweight VMs (via LXD). But the tone on that exchange and the "we know best" attitude put me off it. I have an Ubuntu 20.04 installed for tests on one of my home machines, and from time to time I catch doing who knows what. What tips me off is seeing the drive light goi…

> Snap is auto-updating and you can't stop it

Kill the daemon and make it non-executable. Only restore it when you want to manually do an install.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#148

Post by galgalesh »

justaguy88 wrote: post #5

What does snap do that flatpak doesn't?

Snaps can contain _any_ piece of Linux software, from kernels to the printing stack, to PulseAudio and finally desktop applications.

Flatpak only focuses on Desktop Apps. For more information, see :https://merlijn.sebrechts.be/blog/2020-07-03-snap-vs-flatpak...

Another big difference is that the sandbox of Snap is much more granular. Snap uses AppArmor to mediate the _existing_ Linux api's. This allows you to give an app access to usb-serial devices but deny it access to a USB webcam, for example. Or to give an application access to joysticks and controllers, but deny it access to a webcam.

Both Snap and Flatpak support XDG Desktop Portals to give desktop applications secure access to features such as a webcam, but this is a new API, application need to be ported to the new API before they can use these features.

As a result, most snaps have much less permissions than their Flatpak counterpart because the Flatpak sandbox needs to be largely disabled for the applications to work.

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#149

Post by danshick »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #84
eikenberry wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be suggesting that servers don't run dbus. It is currently running on all my servers and I'm pretty sure it is standard on all major server oriented distros.. Am I mistaken or did I misunderstand your point?

My memory is foggy, but there was something about dbus which rendered it unsuitable for systems without a running GUI on X/Wayland. Not sure what though, it's been years.

There's nothing about D-Bus in general that is problematic, but rather that flatpak relies on the D-Bus session bus and systemd --user instances[0]. It can be made to work just fine on a server, but it may not be the most convenient arrangement due to this dependency on user sessions.

[0] https://flatpak.org/faq/#Can_Flatpak_be_used_on_servers_too_

Re: Why is there only one Snap Store?

#150

Post by danshick »

unixhero wrote: post #143
eikenberry wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be suggesting that servers don't run dbus. It is currently running on all my servers and I'm pretty sure it is standard on all major server oriented distros.. Am I mistaken or did I misunderstand your point?

Traditionally you don't want to have xorg installed on a server. If you do have it installed then yes, you would have dbus.

You can certainly have D-Bus without Xorg or wayland present.
Post reply on HN