91–100 of 201 posts
This is why people hate snaps. They don't fit user workflows, make extra work and even cause show stopping problems.
Snaps could be great but the team really needs to listen. For me I'm removing snaps from my configs before I get surprised.
(edit: mobile autocomplete typos)
I feel like I've never seen anybody actually like snap.
Can someone explain why I'd use snap or flatpak over the distros repo or manual install for something not in the repo or unavailable via adding a repo? Apart from auto-managed updates. Snap and flatpak are massive compared to "traditional" packages.
I use it for Spotify, Zoom, Slack among others.
Installing and updating Flatpak apps for proprietary software works very well.
Can someone explain why I'd use snap or flatpak over the distros repo or manual install for something not in the repo or unavailable via adding a repo? Apart from auto-managed updates. Snap and flatpak are massive compared to "traditional" packages.
In theory one gets better security. Distribution or manual apps can access and modify everything the user can do. Flatpack and Snap tries to address that with a security model similar to mobile apps. In practice for many apps the security protection is non-existent or very limited for compatibility reasons. So for now the benefits is indeed mostly a store model and auto updates. If one really needs to run an untruste…
Snap developers have refused to rename $HOME/snap to be less visible for nearly as long, they have and are shipping very broken software, all while using update methods that corrupted people's data unannounced until very recently (the update mechanism made data directories non-writable unless you enable some experimental option). They very much do not care about the end-user with Snap, only how to appear attractive t…
We don't have ~/ssh or ~/dconf do we? We've had the XDG spec for decades now - this selfish decision makes me so irrationally angry that it's the one reason I'd switch to Fedora to avoid snaps.
The only thing still keeping me on Ubuntu is the font rendering that somehow looks so much better than any other distro, otherwise I would've already switched to another distro because of snap. I feel like I've never seen anybody actually like snap.
I love Ubuntu, it's been my daily driver for over a decade now but if they continue with going against the community on this nonsense this will be a strong indication for people like me that an era has come to an end and it's time to move on. It used to be a community focused distro. This bs feels outright user-hostile.
Just switched to Fedora about a week ago because I was getting fed up with user hostile Ubuntu bs, I like it a lot.
All four times was an exercise in a lot of googling, hacking configurations,etc. Sadly it was always too much work and I eventually gave up.
Hopefully one day the experience is seamless and I never have to go back to Ubuntu.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I personally use ubuntu and have used snap enough to get thoroughly burned and annoyed by it. Slow starts, no auto-update controls with bad defaults corrupting running programs, spammed mount points... (edit: see comment below for some limited controls to reduce the frequency of auto-updates) But, unless I'm missing something about latest or future releases, isn't it still optional? Can't you use apt instead and unin…
> But, unless I'm missing something about latest or future releases, isn't it still optional? Can't you use apt instead and uninstall snapd altogether? There seem to be more and more things that are only delivered as snaps. I haven't used Ubuntu on the desktop in a while (and even then, it was just trying it out), but I remember that trying to apt install would say "use the snap". I think LXD is in that case, for exa…
Can someone explain why I'd use snap or flatpak over the distros repo or manual install for something not in the repo or unavailable via adding a repo? Apart from auto-managed updates. Snap and flatpak are massive compared to "traditional" packages.
Flatpak's benefits: - Cross-distro packaging (no need to provide N package formats - this one runs on all distros) - Faster update cycle for each app, if the package is maintained by the original developers - Sandboxing - Better compatibility all around, as the package runs the same on all distros (as opposed to some too-old or too-new module breaking something on X distro) - Some other goodies, like checking new rel…
I wish this were the case, but as a Flatpak user on Guix System I don’t think it’s entirely true. Flatpak apps still do seem to rely on some bits of the system, and they break in interesting ways when they aren’t where the app is expecting them to be.