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

Snaps. Why? Please Stop

forums.linuxmint.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 115 posts

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#71

Post by mhh__ »

MrDresden wrote: post #64
kalekold wrote: post #23

I use Ubuntu and i'm sick of having snaps forced on me. When I next install, i'm either completely ridding the system of snap or i use another distro. I'm fed up with it. The kicker is sometimes when you use apt to install a package, sometimes it installs a snap! It's madness!

What are the programs that you've had to install through snap? Or are you talking about the existence of snap on the system in general? Personally I have not a single snap packge installed, and am usually able to find sources for the programs I use elswhere than in the snap ecosystem.

Firefox is a snap by default

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#72

Post by drpixie »

baggy_trough wrote: post #29

Snaps are one of the two main reasons I'm ditching Ubuntu for basic Debian. The other is apt spam berating me to upgrade to their pay security service.

I now routinely install fake-ubuntu-advantage-tools.deb to remove Ubuntu "Advantage". It's an empty package that satisfies the dependencies.

I also remove some of the crap that Ubuntu put in /etc/update-motd.d. From memory 10-help-text, 50-motd-news, 88-esm-announce, 91-contract-ua-esm-status are pointless and annoying.

See https://github.com/Skyedra/UnspamifyUbuntu

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#73

Post by DiabloD3 »

creatonez wrote: post #70
DiabloD3 wrote: post #4

I won't use Snaps. Please stop trying to work around my chosen distro's package maintainers. If I want to use your program and there isn't a package for it, I'll build it from source myself.

> Please stop trying to work around my chosen distro's package maintainers. Is your chosen distro Ubuntu?

Ha ha, don't insult me.

I am a Debian user since 1999.

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#74

Post by addicted »

xet7 wrote: post #35

This is discussion at 2019-2021. There are many distros where snapd is not installed by default, including Linux Mint: https://snapcraft.io/docs/installing-snapd Nobody is forcing you to use distro that includes snapd by default. Snap has advantages for server software that are using Snap strict sandbox: - Strict sandbox does not allow read access outside of /var/snap/APPNAME/common . Only common directory is writeab…

Are there any advantages to using snap instead of docker for server software?

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#75

Post by pvaldes »

idontknowwhynot wrote: post #45

snaps is starting to give me a headache. I installed chromium in my ubuntu and it installed it as a snap (even through apt, it just a transitional package that installs the snap.), and for some reason it has a dependency with cups (printing software). Every time i delete cups it is reinstalled..again and again, i couldn't find any solution.

'hold package' option may help. Dunno if is implemented in Ubuntu, but you could take a look

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#76

Post by addicted »

xet7 wrote: post #35

This is discussion at 2019-2021. There are many distros where snapd is not installed by default, including Linux Mint: https://snapcraft.io/docs/installing-snapd Nobody is forcing you to use distro that includes snapd by default. Snap has advantages for server software that are using Snap strict sandbox: - Strict sandbox does not allow read access outside of /var/snap/APPNAME/common . Only common directory is writeab…

To the point, I completely agree that snap seems to work quite well for server software.

Which makes it additionally frustrating that Canonical is insisting on forcing it on all the desktop users.

No one is installing server software through the Software Center. So why does that have to prioritize Snaps?

Canonical could very well have promoted snap as an option to package server software and used flatpaks or even debs for desktop software. There is no reason the 2 couldn’t exist as primary options at the same time for different use cases.

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#77

Post by addicted »

apatheticonion wrote: post #34

Ignoring Snaps - what are Flatpaks like today? Totally understand the value in a distribution model like Flatpaks and am willing to adopt them but I haven't had the smoothest experience with them in the past so I tend to avoid them right now. The last time I tried them was longer than 12 months ago - I installed Discord and it was missing some features at the time due to sandboxing (I don't remember exactly, it was e…

I’ve found using FlatSeal eliminates my issues with flatpak. And that’s despite me running flatpak on an Ubuntu install which I try hard to de-snap (yeah, I should switch to another distro but I’ve been using Ubuntu off and on for 2 decades and old habits die hard).

That being said I don’t see FlatSeal as a solution to the permission issues but merely a bandaid until a proper first citizen solution is developed by flatpak.

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#78

Post by jcrben »

dark-star wrote: post #47

The thing I hate most about snaps is how they pollute the mount namespace with loop mounts. Install a few apps and 2/3rds of your `mount` output will be /dev/loopX devices. Especially annoying since I often do loop-mounts myself and picking them out from the flood of unrelated snaps is a pain. If they could somehow hide the mounts (in a different mount namespace maybe?) that would be cool. I mean still, I would prefe…

You can pass a flag to the commands to hide them.

Re: Snaps. Why? Please Stop

#79

Post by justsomehnguy »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #57
mike_d wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New Dells are using fixed storage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPBk9sIK-PQ Most (all?) Chromebooks use eMMC storage attached to the board. Even laptops with M.2 connectors still require a hundred screws, guitar picks, heat guns, and other insane things to "replace" storage.

>New Dells are using fixed storage Meh, that's just one model out of dozens form one of a dozen manufacturers. Hardly conclusive to validate the "a lot of laptops" claim. I'm sure someone else in the comments will point out some other obscure laptop from Acer or Lenovo that's thinner than a razor blade and has soldered storage. Fine, but still not "a lot of laptops". Just don't buy those 3 models in the world that so…

> nor would I know where to find one

Surface Go is available in eMMC version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpkT8JwgnAI

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=laptop+emmc

Basically anything under $700 has a chance to be an eMMC laptop.

Most? Nope.

Many? Yes, especially cheap and not so cheap ones.

Post reply on HN