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

Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 624 posts

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#541

Post by the_third_wave »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #497
addingnumbers wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All it takes to get rid of snaps forever is `sudo apt purge snapd`. That's not enough. Some package could eventually drag it back in. $ apt show firefox Package: firefox ... Pre-Depends: debconf, snapd If you really want to keep it off your system for good, you need something like this: $ cat /etc/apt/preferences.d/no-snapd Package: snapd Pin: release a=* Pin-Priority: -1 $

When I try to remove snapd it says it'll also remove ubutu-server-minimal. And that scares me.

Use the moment to replace ubuntu-server with Debian and you'll be glad you did when Canonical decides on its next move to ensnare users. Even when I used Ubuntu - back in the early brown-desktop days when they sent out free CD-ROMs to anyone who wanted one - I never felt tempted to use it on a server since it was never clear to me what it offered that Debian could not deliver while it was clear that keeping Debian up to date was (and is) far easier than doing the same with Ubuntu.

Ubuntu had its place in popularising Linux but they jumped the shark a long time ago, now they are just another player jostling for their own niche.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#542

Post by necovek »

jzb wrote: post #112
necovek wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And lets not forget an even more prominent example: Upstart by Canonical that RedHat replaced with Systemd. Basically, Canonical will start at a project first, but RedHat specifically will look for ways to not join them, and start their own project instead. Part of that is certainly due to Canonical itself, but I can't help but think a lot of it is RH making a call and then throwing more developers at something.

Upstart’s CLA was a non-starter. Canonical has quite a history of the behavior you're dinging Red Hat for: Mir, Unity, LXD, Juju/Charms, Launchpad, and I'm sure I'm forgetting several. Also it’s Orwellianly named “Harmony” effort to popularize CLAs because Canonical has long sought to control upstream technologies - and consistently failed because they do not play well with others.

Sure, I have acknowledged there are plenty of missteps by Canonical too.

Though I don't think CLAs are a problem (FSF requires them for GNU projects too), but lack of committment not to switch to a non-free license.

Unity happened as GNOME 3.0 already went in an entirely different direction (mostly led by RH engineers) from 2.x series and as Canonical simply couldn't influence GNOME design. With a paradigm shift one way or another, it was a sensible move.

Launchpad was created as a tool to develop Ubuntu and free software: there was nothing else (and there still isn't) quite like it. Sure, it took a while to get it open sourced, but lack of contributions afterwards kinda proved the point that that wasn't really important (I mean, GitHub wasn't and still isn't).

Mir/LXD/Juju were attempts to improve on the incumbents (Wayland/Docker mostly).

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#543

Post by bravetraveler »

npteljes wrote: post #538
bravetraveler wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fedora supports two releases at a time, that stability is in N-1 I try to give the new release about a month to bake

Yeah, me too. I don't like to adopt early, don't have the energy, I'll just let them figure it out.

Ouch, and still some woes? The latest (37) wasn't too monumental if memory serves. 38 is being tested now, I'm not ready!

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#544

Post by bravetraveler »

jklinger410 wrote: post #475
remram wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the Linux ecosystem likes Flatpak that much more than Snap. They are both pretty terrible.

People love flatpak and hate snap, actually.

Indeed! The temperature generally favors Flatpak, no doubt. Personally... I tolerate it.

It's useful for things I can't manage otherwise. Though I'll admit I'm in an incredibly small niche -- I maintain RPMs on COPR for fun... and at work.

I part with an anecdote! We weren't too careful on some Ubuntu systems and ended up with critical networking services in Snap.

The saving grace was: these systems are completely offline, so it couldn't sneak in updates. Note: this usually shouldn't be a big worry, but we have some debt

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#545

Post by zamubafoo »

Daegalus wrote: post #477
nunodonato wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gave Fedora a try some years ago (4-5?) and had a couple of issues with nvidia drivers. Whats the status these days? I also have a long history with debs, so going to rpm is a mystery for me :)

It's vastly better nowadays. Also with `dnf` RPMs are as easy as DEBs. And some of the commands are similar. I find dnf is even smarter and better at managing dependencies. I only ever run 2-3 commands. `dnd install` `dnf update` and `dnf remove`. Update handles the repo refresh and actually updating packages. And force refreshing repos you just add `--refresh` to the command. Otherwise it does it every few hours on…

And dnf5 is around the corner making the "slow" dnf issue a thing of the past!

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#546

Post by unsungNovelty »

If you are looking for a Linux distro, here is my recommendation. If you have the freedom, pick something that is independent + community driven(CD)/community oriented (CO) like Arch Linux(CD)/Linux Mint(CO) or which is not independent and depends on another distro's packages/infra but is still community oriented like Linux Mint or Elementary.

It's not some tinfoil stuff. Community oriented or driven (entirely community driven like Arch) always listens to the community. This snap and flatpaks wouldn't happen in the first place.

Use Linux Mint if you don't have time to initially set it up. Else use Arch Linux if you have initial time and patience to read. Arch is not scary like community is bad. There is a wall of text and it is intimidating. It needs time like a couple of days when you do it for the first time. But it is just about RTFM.

Flatpak and Snap are unneccessary abstractions which adds a hell a lot of bloat and for what? To make a point release distro work similar to rolling release. Nothing else. So just use a rolling release distribution like Arch or OpenSuse Tumbleweed (which I haven't used but have been hearing good things. Especially since last week here in HN).

But but, point release is bleeding edge and unstable!

NO! They are stable versions of packages and not development streams.

We seriously need to clear this confusion between a Linux distro's stable, testing, unstable repos and upstream's development branches. These two things are completely different.

When you say for eg; Firefox v222222.1 with a serious security patch is in testing branch for your distro, it means it is not tested with YOUR distro which did some hacks to make it work cos it is a point release and froze your package for a point release. *AND NOT BECAUSE OF THE UPSTREAM DEVELOPMENT BRANCH HAS BUG.* Majority of the time, it is fixed already in upstream. And even if it is a bug which is new, your package needs to be an important one. Otherwise you will have to wait till your next point release update or version bump before receiving the update. This backporting and picky patching on point releases is creating a huge amount of unneccessary overhead on upstream because hacks/patching differ on each distro.

Use any rolling release, Arch, Open Suse Tumbleweed, PCOSLinux, Void or a point release which uses unstable/testing branches (which ever is closest to upstream) like Debian unstable (Or whatever is being the distro's repo which is closest to upstream stable versions) which is essentially closer to upstream.

These are for desktop users. AND NOT SERVERS. FYI.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#547

Post by wkat4242 »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #265
lumb63 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canonical seems to be trying to push users off of Ubuntu. I switched to Arch from Ubuntu about 6 years ago after seeing how aggressively Ubuntu would auto-update, and because of Zeitgeist. I would never look back. Arch is customizable, simple (in the sense that there are no surprises; things work as expected), and has a great community. Folks here can argue about snaps or flatpaks, and I can happily use AUR to instal…

I also switched to arch for a bit, but then I was left with an unbootable system after the arch devs shipped grub's master branch as stable. The arch devs were completely unapologetic and told me 'well maybe you shouldn't use arch if you can't recover a system who won't boot' Immediately formatted and switched to pop OS and I've never been happier.

Yeah this is what keeps me off arch personally. The community that instantly goes 'just get good' when you have an issue. While I never needed any help, I didn't like how the community treated other newbies. I know it's not always meant in a bad way, there's some tough love 'don't give a man a fish but teach him how to fish' sentiment there that makes sense. But the elitism is pretty strong too in my experience.

Also I wanted a distro without systemd and the init system is the one thing you can't choose or change on arch. I tried it but didn't like arch, in the end I moved my stuff to alpine which still runs my docker server.

In the end I chose FreeBSD which has a really nice combo of stable OS but rolling packages which is not common on Linux at all. And the community is much nicer IMO.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#548

Post by wander_homer »

JohnFen wrote: post #522
zorr wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's kinda what the distros ARE For the base system and libraries, yes. But why should the distro maintainers be burdened with additional work for every possible enduser application out there? If I write a GTK app and want to make it available for Ubuntu/Debian users through official repositories, I need to make sure it gets added to the official package list, and every time I make a new release, someone else som…

> If I write a GTK app and want to make it available for Ubuntu/Debian users through official repositories, I need to make sure it gets added to the official package list, and every time I make a new release, someone else somewhere else has to do additional work just to repackage the application so it is available in the repository. Yes, and that's a good thing for a whole bunch of reasons. If you don't want to leave…

> Yes, I get that it's convenient for maintainers. But it kinda sucks for users (at least for me), which is why I avoid using software packaged that way.

My browser, mail client, rss reader, music player, video player, image viewer, steam, ... all have been working incredibly well as Flatpaks. I also get free sandboxing for all of them, so for example Steam and its games, don't have access to my ssh and gpg keys or documents.

The only applications which don't work that well with Flatpak are things like my IDE or file manager.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#549

Post by CoolCold »

wilonth wrote: post #161

Wow they're still pushing snaps, the project with some the worst engineering I've ever seen. - Extremely slow at doing anything, even the most basic commands. - Ridiculous auto-update mechanism (you can't even disable it wtf). - Random, nonsense limitations (why can't I open dot files and dot directories???). So terrible that for most apps that I installed with snaps I end up installing the deb version later on. What…

On my servers I use LXD and certbot from snaps, cannot say I have any noticeable complains here.

Re: Ubuntu stops shipping Flatpak by default

#550

Post by WirelessGigabit »

the_third_wave wrote: post #541
WirelessGigabit wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I try to remove snapd it says it'll also remove ubutu-server-minimal. And that scares me.

Use the moment to replace ubuntu-server with Debian and you'll be glad you did when Canonical decides on its next move to ensnare users. Even when I used Ubuntu - back in the early brown-desktop days when they sent out free CD-ROMs to anyone who wanted one - I never felt tempted to use it on a server since it was never clear to me what it offered that Debian could not deliver while it was clear that keeping Debian up…

Thanks for the recommendation. Before I do that I'd have to check which binary drivers I have so I don't end up with a server that has no internet.

And by server I mean that dusty NUC...

Post reply on HN