There are real issues with snaps but “apt/deb is a wonderful package management system and everyone is happy with it, at least the majority of Ubuntu/Debian users” is such an immature argument.
Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
71–80 of 198 posts
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#72The anti-features of snap seem like business decisions. Making it easy for users to use alternative stores would kneecap Canonical's paid IoT offerings https://ubuntu.com/internet-of-things. Also, I wonder if the ability for developers to force software updates could be marketed as a kill switch for proprietary software vendors.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Super users should be using Debian. Not being snarky.
I'd expect users who go into Debian expecting some power-user version of Ubuntu to be disappointed. To be happy on Debian, you need to adopt their philosophy that stability is better than having the latest-and-greatest. For those unfamiliar, Debian releases come out about once every two years, at which point all software in Debian's repositories is frozen at its current version. Software receives security updates bet…
Consider that LTS editions of Ubuntu, which are very popular and Canonical themselves recommend, work exactly the same way.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Super users should be using Debian. Not being snarky.
I'd expect users who go into Debian expecting some power-user version of Ubuntu to be disappointed. To be happy on Debian, you need to adopt their philosophy that stability is better than having the latest-and-greatest. For those unfamiliar, Debian releases come out about once every two years, at which point all software in Debian's repositories is frozen at its current version. Software receives security updates bet…
Debian has stable, testing, unstable, and experimental repositories.
If you only enable stable, then you are signing up for very outdated software.
If you add `testing`, you get quite a ways towards having an up to date system, while still not having to worry too much about odd bugs.
Adding in `unstable` gets you about as close to up to date as you can get without compiling the source yourself.
Experimental is good to keep around, but in my experience most things skip it and just hop straight to unstable.
The beautiful thing about Debian compared to Ubuntu is that it actually is a rolling release system. Ubuntu users have to worry about what version they are on. With Debian, you set what track you want to follow and just remember to install updates as they become available.
Because it's a rolling release, you're much more likely to catch small issues and be able to isolate what package is causing the problem, as opposed to doing a thousand package upgrades at once and then being snagged because one of them had an install issue.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#75I honestly like snaps. I like having spotify and discord working as to his other concerns I just don't care.
What's the problem with Spotify's deb package? Works fine for me.
Because adding a bunch of third party-repos/packages is annoying when I need to update or upgrade major releases. Also don't want to give spotify root, I just install it and stop caring about it.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#76> The backend is proprietary. GitHub is proprietary. I understand that some people don't accept that either. But if you accept and use GitHub, then you should have no problem with snaps on this basis. Also, on this topic, consider this quote[1]: "We did that experiment with Launchpad; the people who said they wouldn’t use it because it wasn’t open source were the same people promoting a closed source alternative. Whe…
If you don't like Github (or if they make a change in the future that makes you dislike Github), you can use Gitlab CE, Gitea, Gitorius, git over ssh, etc. all open source options while still using the upstream git client. If you don't like the Snap Store, well, get coding and be prepared to fork the client also.
> If you don't like the Snap Store, well, get coding and be prepared to fork the client also.
Given the amount of OSS projects submitting packages to winget on github it's pretty safe to say that most projects don't care if a web service is OSS or not. That boat sailed like 10y ago.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#77If Linux is going to have any chance of replacing OSX or Windows for the vast majority of users it needs to have a uniform executable which Snapcraft seems like the best candidate for. Without a uniform executable a lot of developers won't target Linux which is a deal-breaker for a lot of people. Clearly its preferable to install common packages from a standard package manager, and there should be better controls of…
Desktop Linux doesn't really have the goal of replacing Windows or OSX. It's a hobbyist thing, target more or less at software developers, and I think that's perfectly fine.
Plus, the desktop is becoming less and less relevant every year.
I spend easily 10 hours a day probably at a traditional computer. My wife spends an equivalent amount of time I'd guess in front of a screen, but it's her phone.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd expect users who go into Debian expecting some power-user version of Ubuntu to be disappointed. To be happy on Debian, you need to adopt their philosophy that stability is better than having the latest-and-greatest. For those unfamiliar, Debian releases come out about once every two years, at which point all software in Debian's repositories is frozen at its current version. Software receives security updates bet…
Debian has stable, testing, unstable, and experimental repositories. If you only enable stable, then you are signing up for very outdated software. If you add `testing`, you get quite a ways towards having an up to date system, while still not having to worry too much about odd bugs. Adding in `unstable` gets you about as close to up to date as you can get without compiling the source yourself. Experimental is good t…
Debian strongly advises against mixing repositories: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Don.27t_make_a_Frank...
Debian Testing is an option, but would you recommend that over a distribution focused on rolling releases, like Arch? From my vantage point (which isn't particularly good, as a non-Linux user myself), most of the Debian project's effort is concentrated on producing Debian Stable. Case in point, security updates for Debian Testing are sometimes significantly delayed.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#79> The backend is proprietary. GitHub is proprietary. I understand that some people don't accept that either. But if you accept and use GitHub, then you should have no problem with snaps on this basis. Also, on this topic, consider this quote[1]: "We did that experiment with Launchpad; the people who said they wouldn’t use it because it wasn’t open source were the same people promoting a closed source alternative. Whe…
> GitHub is proprietary. I understand that some people don't accept that either. But if you accept and use GitHub, then you should have no problem with snaps on this basis.
Which is a website and has nothing to do with software you install on a workstation.
Re: Snaps are an anti-pattern on Ubuntu
#80snaps and flatpaks are something I've wanted on Linux forever: self contained apps. supporting umpteen million Linux distros is a non starter for small isv's (or even large ones). if they aren't perfect, fix them... but don't throw out the best thing thats happened to software deployment on linux in forever.