12 ms·

I can understand Canonical pushing for snaps. It's their product and they want it to succeed. That said I hate their dirty ways. I find it even morally wrong.

I can understand Canonical pushing for snaps. It's their product and they want it to succeed. That said I hate their dirty ways. I find it even morally wrong. How can "sudo apt install chromium-browser" not install the apt package but install instead a snap? How I, as a user and also as a professional, trust Ubuntu if when I use their package manager I'm being tricked? I don't use Windows for a reason, more than one actually. I've been using Ubuntu even with all the "weird" stuff Canonical has been doing over the years but I think this is the nail in the coffin. Right now I'm using 20.04 but as soon as I finish some work I have left I'll install a fresh new distro.

jimhefferon 6y ago
What distro? I use Ubuntu because I just want an OS, not a hobby.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  Me too, but I'm staying on 18 for now because 20 breaks my workflows.
  - pmontra 6y ago
    I'm planning to upgrade so you have my attention. What did 20 change to break your workflow?
    - fxtentacle 6y ago
      Replacing the chromium apt with an empty package installing a random self-updating snap. In other words, pinning a specific chromium version, for example for selenium automation, is now broken.
      - pmontra 6y ago
        I didn't think about that. Thanks.
- __s 6y ago
  What's wrong with either of Fedora or Debian?
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    Centos is too slow moving to be suitable for desktop use. Fedora updates to a new version every 6 months. Updates in place have historically been less than awesome and it adopts new tech before it is ready with no practical way to run either the old version of fedora or the old version of the software. Example rolling out pulseaudio when it didn't work well. One version I recall went from acceptable font rendering to can't stand to start at it levels of horribleness. The release of gnome 3.0 the release of KDE 4.0.
    - dahfizz 6y ago
      I've had the same Fedora install on my laptop for years, at least 4 versions. Never any of the problems you described. Fedora was also the only thing that worked on my new laptop, because every other distro runs a super old kernel. I'm a super happy Fedora user :)
      - michaelmrose 6y ago
        I ran fedora from version 1 though I think version 14ish It's entirely possible its better now than it was.
        dahfizz 6y ago
        Fedora 14 is 10 years old. Linux in general has gotten so much better in that time IMO
        michaelmrose 6y ago
        I didn't fully give up on the red hat ecosystem for years after that I even ran stella based on centos and rebuilt rpms to have software that wasn't packaged for same. This is even still a thing based on Centos 7 and running gnome 2 not a gnome 2 derivative but actual gnome 2. I agree what you say is presumably so however Ubuntu LTS/Debian or arch update cadence, pick one, are still better than updating every 6 months for most users. If I want really up to date software I would like to have it now not months from now. If I have to wait I would like actual stability. Fedora is optimized for testing new tech to be rolled out by red hat not for usage by end users. As it stands you can benefit from the sweat of their brow while not actually using fedora by using something that actually is. Also note that if you install software from additional repos updates between versions may not be as smooth between versions. If you don't package choice is certainly going to be substantially inferior compared to arch or ubuntu.
- battery_cowboy 6y ago
  Pop!_OS is like Ubuntu (it's based on it), but easier to install and use and doesn't use snaps, it has flatpaks and the usual apt.
- quasarj 6y ago
  I'm not OP, but I tried Pop!_OS recently, and was quite pleased. It's basically just Ubuntu without the bad parts.
  - JaggedJax 6y ago
    The latest POP!_OS release integrated Flatpak instead of Snap into their package manager. It's very well done in that you can choose if you want the deb or the flatpak version and it defaults to the deb as long as one is available.
    - badRNG 6y ago
      The latest release also integrated an excellent window tiling manager into gnome, includes customizable gaps and everything.
    - troyvit 6y ago
      POP!_OS is a fork of Ubuntu though, right? In that case if I try to install chromium using apt-get will it install the snap or the .deb?
      - segf4ult 6y ago
        It will install the .deb because they don’t have snap in Pop OS.
  - mekster 6y ago
    I hear about it often lately but what is better with Pop OS? Couldn't figure it out after testing for an hour.
- dima55 6y ago
  Just use Debian. Ubuntu is quite literally Debian+bullshit.
  - laqq3 6y ago
    Seconding the recommendation for Debian. I switched from Ubuntu Mate to Debian (buster) and the experience is quite smooth; most everything works the same, which is no surprise.
  - mrighele 6y ago
    My issue with Debian that I don't want a rolling release, and Debian Stable feels more like "Debian Obsolete" to me (at least it was years ago, maybe now it is different...)
    - chipperyman573 6y ago
      I have used Debian for a while (2-3 years) and do not have that feeling.
    - zozbot234 6y ago
      It's an LTS, upgrading every two years. No different than many other distros. If you want a more frequently-upgraded distro, consider OpenSuSE Leap (yearly upgrades) or Fedora (upgrades every 6 months).
    - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
      Debian testing is basically my distro of choice: if sid is the rolling release, and stable is the LTS version, testing is roughly equivalent to non-LTS Ubuntu: the packages have been tested so you don’t usually get breakage, but they aren’t stale.
      - ckcheng 6y ago
        The packages are somewhat tested, but "you are participating in the development of Debian when you are tracking testing or unstable" [1]. My feeling is Debian testing is a little less stable than non-LTS Ubuntu. See, I'd like to use LXDE, and right now I use Lubuntu. I'm interested in switching to Debian, but then I read someone say Debian testing is "more stable than the name would suggest, as long as you follow a few reasonable best-practices" [2]. Then I look at these best practices [3] and I'm like, I don't really have time for all that... But maybe that person is just overly cautious. So I look at Debian's page [1] for best practices and it wants me to use btrfs or LVM snapshots in case an update puts the system into an unrecoverable position. I... don't think I have time for that. Maybe I can use Debian stable and just get software not available in Debian stable via... snap [4]. Ok, they also list Flatpak and docker, but this is getting frustrating... Is that really the best way to go about this? Because other than snap auto-updating on my machines behind my back, Lubuntu's been working great up to now. So basically, is there a Ubuntu / Lubuntu that just doesn't have snap auto-updates? If anyone knows, I'd really appreciate it! [1]: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable#What_are_some_best_practices_for_testing.2Fsid_users.3F https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable#What_are_some_best_pr... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23038222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23038222 [3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23044878 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23044878 [4]: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Snap https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Snap
- Darmody 6y ago
  I want a distro that I can trust. I don't know which one yet but I think I'll stay on the Debian family...I'm used to it.
- sunsetSamurai 6y ago
  I've been using Fedora Gnome for a few months now and it's' been great. Updates frequently and nothing's broken so far.
- dathinab 6y ago
  If you have linux experience Arch Linux can be a good idea. Sure the daunting setup process would fall into the "a hobby" category but once it runs it tends to just keep running as long as you update it from time to time. Using it now for ~5 Years and in that time I had two times problems one was that the new kernel version didn't work with my laptop and another which was fully my fault by doing some "special" boot setup with some custom self written package and not maintaining it. Oh and the only reasons they where problems was because I never setup recovery boot or boot prev. kernel version. Besides that I remember having more work with maintaining Ubuntu when I used it ~8 years ago. Also disclaimer I had some more work like setting up edurom with network manager without using any proper UI for it (nmtui...). It's doable but not properly documented. But non of this is a problem if you "just" use Gnome or KDE or at last part of the tooling from Gnome/KDE. EDIT: But Fedora is probably what you are looking for. Widely used, well maintained and normally up to date.
  - Sevaris 6y ago
    Ugh, no. Manjaro is the no-nonsense "I really don't want to waste time troubleshooting my own shit" version of Arch Linux. I stopped using Arch when I found Manjaro and I'm so glad I did. Arch just requires way too much fiddling for it to ever feel "complete" and or finished.
    - non-entity 6y ago
      Does Manjaro do pretty well with wireless and graphics drivers. I honestly want something I can live boot, install and use immediately. I dont mind customizing later, but I've had my fun fighting with getting linux set up.
      - Sevaris 6y ago
        I've tried it on nVidia and AMD systems, and I'd been using it to troubleshoot customer laptops as a technician. Never had issues with drivers.
    - pkulak 6y ago
      The cost of Arch over anything else is 100% in the installation. After that, it IS Manjaro except you are using the real thing, not a derivative. I've had to trouble shoot Arch far less than any other distro I've ever used.
- somewhereoutth 6y ago
  Mint. It's Ubuntu without the nonsense. I switched when the Unity thing happened, and haven't looked back. This news about snaps reaffirms my confidence in Mint.
  - theflyinghorse 6y ago
    I've switched from Ubuntu to Mint a few years back at home, at work I have to use Ubuntu. Functionally, the two are identical for my use case. I love Mint, it just works and there are no surprises as far as I can tell.
    - hvis 6y ago
      Do they do release upgrades yet?
  - amelius 6y ago
    Does Mint allow to safely roll-back package manager operations (i.e. without ever failing)? If not, what other distro allows this (other than Nix)? This is the main feature I'm looking for.
    - tams 6y ago
      Guix also has rollbacks (and a learning curve) like Nix(OS). https://guix.gnu.org/ https://guix.gnu.org/
      - amelius 6y ago
        Good to know, but they are not officially supported by NVidia. https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads?target_os=Linux&target_arch=x86_64 https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads?target_os=Linux&...
    - RMPR 6y ago
      Fedora Silverblue
- SweetestRug 6y ago
  Echoing others here: use Pop_OS or Manjaro. Pop_OS is really the best of Ubuntu, but with sane defaults that respect you. Manjaro just works, every time, every install I try.
  - foobazzy 6y ago
    Just wanted to chime in here and say Zorin is good too. It's based on Ubuntu 18.04 + Gnome + some extensions (which make it really beautiful to look at). It's fast and gets out of the way immediately when you want it to. But my laptop (ThinkPad X1 extreme) isn't charging anymore. That happened with other distros too (on MSI prestige). I can't figure out what the problem is.
- stanski 6y ago
  No one has suggested openSUSE so I'll go ahead and do that. Mature, stable and great-looking (with KDE). Been using it for years, including one installation of their rolling release, Tumbleweed, which is surprisingly stable for a bleeding edge distro.
  - type0 6y ago
    For some AMD hardware openSUSE has been more stable for me than Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora. And off course the best KDE support of the bunch is also a plus.
- jlarocco 6y ago
  I believe you, but I've better luck with other Debian. Until I started using FreeBSD on my desktop a few months ago, I had run Debian on most of my personal machines for ~15 years, and often on work machines. For the most part, I was able to track the testing repo and "apt-get dist-upgrade" once a month, and not really worry about anything. Very few breaking changes, and when there were, it was usually related to proprietary drivers (thank you NVIDIA). IME with Ubuntu on work computers, staying up to date is a much bigger hassle. Besides some of the out of the box settings being brain dead (IMO, of course), upgrading between releases is a pretty big deal with major changes and a lot of breakage. I don't use Gnome or KDE (on either OS), so that probably helps, but I still always plan for Ubuntu upgrades to break stuff on me. With Debian, I configure it how I want, and then it just stays out of the way. With Ubuntu, I feel like Canonical is always trying to change my mind and push things on me.
- jamieweb 6y ago
  Pop!_OS is what you're looking for IMO.
- rumanator 6y ago
  > What distro? I use Ubuntu because I just want an OS, not a hobby. That's very ironic, because I've found that Ubuntu's shenanigans always end up requiring more time and effort from the user than, say, install Debian and just get on with your life.
- freedomben 6y ago
  I highly recommend looking at Fedora. I used Ubuntu for years and put up with obnoxious things. I took a job where the deployment target was RHEL so most devs used Fedora. There was a bit to learn (such as apt v. yum) but overall thinks pretty much "just work" if you are using Fedora Workstation. If you don't want Gnome there are spins available and most are pretty solid, but if you really want a "just works" go with the official Workstation.
- apotatopot 6y ago
  mint is a great option, or debian imo. I've switched between debian, mint, and slackware for years now and its been a lot less overhead recently.
- balladeer 6y ago
  Back in 2015 I had installed and used Elementary OS - supposed to be a functional Linux distro (inspired by OSX UI 'd say). It wasn't stable at that time. Maybe it's better now.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
modzu 6y ago
Debian, brother
greendude29 6y ago
If you want to switch to Arch, I'd reco Manjaro
- SweetestRug 6y ago
  Seconded! Manjaro just works.
2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
Why does it matter that it's a snap? Does the program work?
- jedieaston 6y ago
  The really annoying thing about snaps is that they pollute the mountpoints on the system. I’ve had as many as 100 mounts on a box after installing just a few snaps, which is super annoying if you ever want to try to get an idea of disk usage. God forbid you want to figure out what lvm volume can get shrinked. There’s also not as much screening before an update is allowed, as there would be for the default Ubuntu repos (considering that 1-2 years into a LTS release you’re probably bringing in dependencies from PPAs anyway, I don’t know if this matters much).
  - m463 6y ago
    I wish there was a "df" had a flag for just "real filesystems" (maybe there is and I don't know it). sort of like df -t ext4 -t ext3 -t vfat ...
    - jcastro 6y ago
      `alias df='df -x"squashfs"'` should do it.
- desas 6y ago
  webusb doesn't work in chromium snap, I haven't noticed anything else.
hvis 6y ago
> How can "sudo apt install chromium-browser" not install the apt package but install instead a snap? Simple: they decided that maintaining the chromium .deb takes too much effort, and that snap is making that easier. So they moved it to Snap. But there are many users out there with existing installations who have selected chromium as one of their installed packages. And so as not to keep said users without updates, they decided to migrate them over the best way they found. I'm not completely sold on the snap ecosystem because of some technical issues, as well as the issues of fully automatic updates. But this particular question has been given a lot more air than it deserves.
- simosx 6y ago
  The announcement from 2019 is https://snapcraft.io/blog/chromium-in-ubuntu-deb-to-snap-transition https://snapcraft.io/blog/chromium-in-ubuntu-deb-to-snap-tra...
- rumanator 6y ago
  > Simple: they decided that maintaining the chromium .deb takes too much effort, and that snap is making that easier. So they moves it to Snap. Their whole distribution is copied from Debian. Is it too much effort to just copy and distribute the upstream package, like they have been doing from the very start?
  - hvis 6y ago
    See the link in the sibling comment. They don't copy.
    - scoot_718 6y ago
      No, they've got to meddle and mess with every damn thing to create unnecessary headaches for users.
      - hvis 6y ago
        FFS, they build newer packages than Debian. If you don't like that, use Debian directly. It's a good distro that has stood the test of time.
autocorr 6y ago
I started using Ubuntu in 2006 and really appreciated the ideals of "Linux for Human Beings" and accessibility (I get a bit nostalgic at that drum sound lol). Over the last several years though I have been migrating my systems to Debian. I like the greater commitment to free software and, nowadays at least, it's just as easy to install. A lot of knowledge carries over too, not surprisingly, and you can get away with most of the same troubleshooting solutions. I'd really recommend giving it a shot! The process for installing proprietary drivers like NVIDIA is the same for both. I just added an extra buster-backports channel then apt installed it. I chose KDE[1] as the default desktop at install time and I was off to the races for my workstation. It was also easy to install Debian on my Dell laptop too, I just had to use the special firmware-ISO to have the Intel WiFi driver built into the image. All of that's to say: one of the reasons to use Ubuntu for a while has been that they made installing proprietary drivers easy, and that could be a serious pain-point worth alleviating. But now it's just as easy on other distros too, perhaps due to the relevant drivers being better packaged/supported for Linux by hardware companies. [1] I was also really surprised how nice and smooth the latest KDE experience is after being on tiling window manager setups for years. It's fast, looks good, can configure absolutely everything, which I like, and it is really complete in terms of application coverage.
rlpb 6y ago
On Debian, "sudo apt install mysql-server" will get you MariaDB(tm), not MySQL(tm). This happens for a technical reason: without it, an upgrade from the older Debian that shipped MySQL will not transition you to MariaDB, but leave your database broken because Debian no longer ships MySQL. The package was adjusted to provide the upgrade path. apt provides no alternative. This mechanism is called a "transitional package". I'm providing the MySQL/MariaDB example not because I think it's wrong, but because hopefully you'll see that it's the same pattern being used by an entity you perhaps better trust, and that might give you some confidence that it's technically the best approach available. The same is going on here. Users who have Chromium installed on Bionic, upgrading to Focal, expect to still have Chromium. This is why installing "chromium-browser" in apt results in the snap being installed. It's not a dirty way, and it's not morally wrong. It's being done for a purpose. When you install Ubuntu you are consenting to receive the choices that Ubuntu has made for you. If you insist on using Ubuntu but never using a snap, you can configure apt to never install snapd. See apt_preferences(5).
scoot_718 6y ago
Ubuntu keeps making the setup work to go from install to a clean and usable linux system more and more work. I've got to disable global keybinds that shadow shortcuts for fucking readline and basic text editors. Fix their broken themes to shut up warnings that will drown out logs of applications that couldn't care less about themes. Fix XDG settings to remove turd directories in home directories that nobody on earth has ever used and applications ignore. Search the three or four different places they put configuration to fix whatever new setting has screwed things up, whether that be to move the close window button back where it always should have stayed, remove hot corners, or something new. And yes, remove snap so I have usable output from mount and similar. Not to mention how broken their LTS and distro upgrade process is. I shouldn't need to edit files to upgrade distros, and it shouldn't break basic applications or drivers.
abstractbarista 6y ago
Yikes, that's horrible.

jimhefferon 6y ago

What distro? I use Ubuntu because I just want an OS, not a hobby.

fxtentacle 6y ago
Me too, but I'm staying on 18 for now because 20 breaks my workflows.
- pmontra 6y ago
  I'm planning to upgrade so you have my attention. What did 20 change to break your workflow?
  - fxtentacle 6y ago
    Replacing the chromium apt with an empty package installing a random self-updating snap. In other words, pinning a specific chromium version, for example for selenium automation, is now broken.
    - pmontra 6y ago
      I didn't think about that. Thanks.
__s 6y ago
What's wrong with either of Fedora or Debian?
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  Centos is too slow moving to be suitable for desktop use. Fedora updates to a new version every 6 months. Updates in place have historically been less than awesome and it adopts new tech before it is ready with no practical way to run either the old version of fedora or the old version of the software. Example rolling out pulseaudio when it didn't work well. One version I recall went from acceptable font rendering to can't stand to start at it levels of horribleness. The release of gnome 3.0 the release of KDE 4.0.
  - dahfizz 6y ago
    I've had the same Fedora install on my laptop for years, at least 4 versions. Never any of the problems you described. Fedora was also the only thing that worked on my new laptop, because every other distro runs a super old kernel. I'm a super happy Fedora user :)
    - michaelmrose 6y ago
      I ran fedora from version 1 though I think version 14ish It's entirely possible its better now than it was.
      - dahfizz 6y ago
        Fedora 14 is 10 years old. Linux in general has gotten so much better in that time IMO
        michaelmrose 6y ago
        I didn't fully give up on the red hat ecosystem for years after that I even ran stella based on centos and rebuilt rpms to have software that wasn't packaged for same. This is even still a thing based on Centos 7 and running gnome 2 not a gnome 2 derivative but actual gnome 2. I agree what you say is presumably so however Ubuntu LTS/Debian or arch update cadence, pick one, are still better than updating every 6 months for most users. If I want really up to date software I would like to have it now not months from now. If I have to wait I would like actual stability. Fedora is optimized for testing new tech to be rolled out by red hat not for usage by end users. As it stands you can benefit from the sweat of their brow while not actually using fedora by using something that actually is. Also note that if you install software from additional repos updates between versions may not be as smooth between versions. If you don't package choice is certainly going to be substantially inferior compared to arch or ubuntu.
battery_cowboy 6y ago
Pop!_OS is like Ubuntu (it's based on it), but easier to install and use and doesn't use snaps, it has flatpaks and the usual apt.
quasarj 6y ago
I'm not OP, but I tried Pop!_OS recently, and was quite pleased. It's basically just Ubuntu without the bad parts.
- JaggedJax 6y ago
  The latest POP!_OS release integrated Flatpak instead of Snap into their package manager. It's very well done in that you can choose if you want the deb or the flatpak version and it defaults to the deb as long as one is available.
  - badRNG 6y ago
    The latest release also integrated an excellent window tiling manager into gnome, includes customizable gaps and everything.
  - troyvit 6y ago
    POP!_OS is a fork of Ubuntu though, right? In that case if I try to install chromium using apt-get will it install the snap or the .deb?
    - segf4ult 6y ago
      It will install the .deb because they don’t have snap in Pop OS.
- mekster 6y ago
  I hear about it often lately but what is better with Pop OS? Couldn't figure it out after testing for an hour.
dima55 6y ago
Just use Debian. Ubuntu is quite literally Debian+bullshit.
- laqq3 6y ago
  Seconding the recommendation for Debian. I switched from Ubuntu Mate to Debian (buster) and the experience is quite smooth; most everything works the same, which is no surprise.
- mrighele 6y ago
  My issue with Debian that I don't want a rolling release, and Debian Stable feels more like "Debian Obsolete" to me (at least it was years ago, maybe now it is different...)
  - chipperyman573 6y ago
    I have used Debian for a while (2-3 years) and do not have that feeling.
  - zozbot234 6y ago
    It's an LTS, upgrading every two years. No different than many other distros. If you want a more frequently-upgraded distro, consider OpenSuSE Leap (yearly upgrades) or Fedora (upgrades every 6 months).
  - fiddlerwoaroof 6y ago
    Debian testing is basically my distro of choice: if sid is the rolling release, and stable is the LTS version, testing is roughly equivalent to non-LTS Ubuntu: the packages have been tested so you don’t usually get breakage, but they aren’t stale.
    - ckcheng 6y ago
      The packages are somewhat tested, but "you are participating in the development of Debian when you are tracking testing or unstable" [1]. My feeling is Debian testing is a little less stable than non-LTS Ubuntu. See, I'd like to use LXDE, and right now I use Lubuntu. I'm interested in switching to Debian, but then I read someone say Debian testing is "more stable than the name would suggest, as long as you follow a few reasonable best-practices" [2]. Then I look at these best practices [3] and I'm like, I don't really have time for all that... But maybe that person is just overly cautious. So I look at Debian's page [1] for best practices and it wants me to use btrfs or LVM snapshots in case an update puts the system into an unrecoverable position. I... don't think I have time for that. Maybe I can use Debian stable and just get software not available in Debian stable via... snap [4]. Ok, they also list Flatpak and docker, but this is getting frustrating... Is that really the best way to go about this? Because other than snap auto-updating on my machines behind my back, Lubuntu's been working great up to now. So basically, is there a Ubuntu / Lubuntu that just doesn't have snap auto-updates? If anyone knows, I'd really appreciate it! [1]: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable#What_are_some_best_practices_for_testing.2Fsid_users.3F https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable#What_are_some_best_pr... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23038222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23038222 [3]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23044878 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23044878 [4]: https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Snap https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Snap
Darmody 6y ago
I want a distro that I can trust. I don't know which one yet but I think I'll stay on the Debian family...I'm used to it.
sunsetSamurai 6y ago
I've been using Fedora Gnome for a few months now and it's' been great. Updates frequently and nothing's broken so far.
dathinab 6y ago
If you have linux experience Arch Linux can be a good idea. Sure the daunting setup process would fall into the "a hobby" category but once it runs it tends to just keep running as long as you update it from time to time. Using it now for ~5 Years and in that time I had two times problems one was that the new kernel version didn't work with my laptop and another which was fully my fault by doing some "special" boot setup with some custom self written package and not maintaining it. Oh and the only reasons they where problems was because I never setup recovery boot or boot prev. kernel version. Besides that I remember having more work with maintaining Ubuntu when I used it ~8 years ago. Also disclaimer I had some more work like setting up edurom with network manager without using any proper UI for it (nmtui...). It's doable but not properly documented. But non of this is a problem if you "just" use Gnome or KDE or at last part of the tooling from Gnome/KDE. EDIT: But Fedora is probably what you are looking for. Widely used, well maintained and normally up to date.
- Sevaris 6y ago
  Ugh, no. Manjaro is the no-nonsense "I really don't want to waste time troubleshooting my own shit" version of Arch Linux. I stopped using Arch when I found Manjaro and I'm so glad I did. Arch just requires way too much fiddling for it to ever feel "complete" and or finished.
  - non-entity 6y ago
    Does Manjaro do pretty well with wireless and graphics drivers. I honestly want something I can live boot, install and use immediately. I dont mind customizing later, but I've had my fun fighting with getting linux set up.
    - Sevaris 6y ago
      I've tried it on nVidia and AMD systems, and I'd been using it to troubleshoot customer laptops as a technician. Never had issues with drivers.
  - pkulak 6y ago
    The cost of Arch over anything else is 100% in the installation. After that, it IS Manjaro except you are using the real thing, not a derivative. I've had to trouble shoot Arch far less than any other distro I've ever used.
somewhereoutth 6y ago
Mint. It's Ubuntu without the nonsense. I switched when the Unity thing happened, and haven't looked back. This news about snaps reaffirms my confidence in Mint.
- theflyinghorse 6y ago
  I've switched from Ubuntu to Mint a few years back at home, at work I have to use Ubuntu. Functionally, the two are identical for my use case. I love Mint, it just works and there are no surprises as far as I can tell.
  - hvis 6y ago
    Do they do release upgrades yet?
- amelius 6y ago
  Does Mint allow to safely roll-back package manager operations (i.e. without ever failing)? If not, what other distro allows this (other than Nix)? This is the main feature I'm looking for.
  - tams 6y ago
    Guix also has rollbacks (and a learning curve) like Nix(OS). https://guix.gnu.org/ https://guix.gnu.org/
    - amelius 6y ago
      Good to know, but they are not officially supported by NVidia. https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads?target_os=Linux&target_arch=x86_64 https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads?target_os=Linux&...
  - RMPR 6y ago
    Fedora Silverblue
SweetestRug 6y ago
Echoing others here: use Pop_OS or Manjaro. Pop_OS is really the best of Ubuntu, but with sane defaults that respect you. Manjaro just works, every time, every install I try.
- foobazzy 6y ago
  Just wanted to chime in here and say Zorin is good too. It's based on Ubuntu 18.04 + Gnome + some extensions (which make it really beautiful to look at). It's fast and gets out of the way immediately when you want it to. But my laptop (ThinkPad X1 extreme) isn't charging anymore. That happened with other distros too (on MSI prestige). I can't figure out what the problem is.
stanski 6y ago
No one has suggested openSUSE so I'll go ahead and do that. Mature, stable and great-looking (with KDE). Been using it for years, including one installation of their rolling release, Tumbleweed, which is surprisingly stable for a bleeding edge distro.
- type0 6y ago
  For some AMD hardware openSUSE has been more stable for me than Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora. And off course the best KDE support of the bunch is also a plus.
jlarocco 6y ago
I believe you, but I've better luck with other Debian. Until I started using FreeBSD on my desktop a few months ago, I had run Debian on most of my personal machines for ~15 years, and often on work machines. For the most part, I was able to track the testing repo and "apt-get dist-upgrade" once a month, and not really worry about anything. Very few breaking changes, and when there were, it was usually related to proprietary drivers (thank you NVIDIA). IME with Ubuntu on work computers, staying up to date is a much bigger hassle. Besides some of the out of the box settings being brain dead (IMO, of course), upgrading between releases is a pretty big deal with major changes and a lot of breakage. I don't use Gnome or KDE (on either OS), so that probably helps, but I still always plan for Ubuntu upgrades to break stuff on me. With Debian, I configure it how I want, and then it just stays out of the way. With Ubuntu, I feel like Canonical is always trying to change my mind and push things on me.
jamieweb 6y ago
Pop!_OS is what you're looking for IMO.
rumanator 6y ago
> What distro? I use Ubuntu because I just want an OS, not a hobby. That's very ironic, because I've found that Ubuntu's shenanigans always end up requiring more time and effort from the user than, say, install Debian and just get on with your life.
freedomben 6y ago
I highly recommend looking at Fedora. I used Ubuntu for years and put up with obnoxious things. I took a job where the deployment target was RHEL so most devs used Fedora. There was a bit to learn (such as apt v. yum) but overall thinks pretty much "just work" if you are using Fedora Workstation. If you don't want Gnome there are spins available and most are pretty solid, but if you really want a "just works" go with the official Workstation.
apotatopot 6y ago
mint is a great option, or debian imo. I've switched between debian, mint, and slackware for years now and its been a lot less overhead recently.
balladeer 6y ago
Back in 2015 I had installed and used Elementary OS - supposed to be a functional Linux distro (inspired by OSX UI 'd say). It wasn't stable at that time. Maybe it's better now.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

modzu 6y ago

Debian, brother

greendude29 6y ago

If you want to switch to Arch, I'd reco Manjaro

SweetestRug 6y ago
Seconded! Manjaro just works.

2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago

Why does it matter that it's a snap? Does the program work?

jedieaston 6y ago
The really annoying thing about snaps is that they pollute the mountpoints on the system. I’ve had as many as 100 mounts on a box after installing just a few snaps, which is super annoying if you ever want to try to get an idea of disk usage. God forbid you want to figure out what lvm volume can get shrinked. There’s also not as much screening before an update is allowed, as there would be for the default Ubuntu repos (considering that 1-2 years into a LTS release you’re probably bringing in dependencies from PPAs anyway, I don’t know if this matters much).
- m463 6y ago
  I wish there was a "df" had a flag for just "real filesystems" (maybe there is and I don't know it). sort of like df -t ext4 -t ext3 -t vfat ...
  - jcastro 6y ago
    `alias df='df -x"squashfs"'` should do it.
desas 6y ago
webusb doesn't work in chromium snap, I haven't noticed anything else.

hvis 6y ago

> How can "sudo apt install chromium-browser" not install the apt package but install instead a snap? Simple: they decided that maintaining the chromium .deb takes too much effort, and that snap is making that easier. So they moved it to Snap. But there are many users out there with existing installations who have selected chromium as one of their installed packages. And so as not to keep said users without updates, they decided to migrate them over the best way they found. I'm not completely sold on the snap ecosystem because of some technical issues, as well as the issues of fully automatic updates. But this particular question has been given a lot more air than it deserves.

simosx 6y ago
The announcement from 2019 is https://snapcraft.io/blog/chromium-in-ubuntu-deb-to-snap-transition https://snapcraft.io/blog/chromium-in-ubuntu-deb-to-snap-tra...
rumanator 6y ago
> Simple: they decided that maintaining the chromium .deb takes too much effort, and that snap is making that easier. So they moves it to Snap. Their whole distribution is copied from Debian. Is it too much effort to just copy and distribute the upstream package, like they have been doing from the very start?
- hvis 6y ago
  See the link in the sibling comment. They don't copy.
  - scoot_718 6y ago
    No, they've got to meddle and mess with every damn thing to create unnecessary headaches for users.
    - hvis 6y ago
      FFS, they build newer packages than Debian. If you don't like that, use Debian directly. It's a good distro that has stood the test of time.

autocorr 6y ago

I started using Ubuntu in 2006 and really appreciated the ideals of "Linux for Human Beings" and accessibility (I get a bit nostalgic at that drum sound lol). Over the last several years though I have been migrating my systems to Debian. I like the greater commitment to free software and, nowadays at least, it's just as easy to install. A lot of knowledge carries over too, not surprisingly, and you can get away with most of the same troubleshooting solutions. I'd really recommend giving it a shot! The process for installing proprietary drivers like NVIDIA is the same for both. I just added an extra buster-backports channel then apt installed it. I chose KDE[1] as the default desktop at install time and I was off to the races for my workstation. It was also easy to install Debian on my Dell laptop too, I just had to use the special firmware-ISO to have the Intel WiFi driver built into the image. All of that's to say: one of the reasons to use Ubuntu for a while has been that they made installing proprietary drivers easy, and that could be a serious pain-point worth alleviating. But now it's just as easy on other distros too, perhaps due to the relevant drivers being better packaged/supported for Linux by hardware companies. [1] I was also really surprised how nice and smooth the latest KDE experience is after being on tiling window manager setups for years. It's fast, looks good, can configure absolutely everything, which I like, and it is really complete in terms of application coverage.

rlpb 6y ago

On Debian, "sudo apt install mysql-server" will get you MariaDB(tm), not MySQL(tm). This happens for a technical reason: without it, an upgrade from the older Debian that shipped MySQL will not transition you to MariaDB, but leave your database broken because Debian no longer ships MySQL. The package was adjusted to provide the upgrade path. apt provides no alternative. This mechanism is called a "transitional package". I'm providing the MySQL/MariaDB example not because I think it's wrong, but because hopefully you'll see that it's the same pattern being used by an entity you perhaps better trust, and that might give you some confidence that it's technically the best approach available. The same is going on here. Users who have Chromium installed on Bionic, upgrading to Focal, expect to still have Chromium. This is why installing "chromium-browser" in apt results in the snap being installed. It's not a dirty way, and it's not morally wrong. It's being done for a purpose. When you install Ubuntu you are consenting to receive the choices that Ubuntu has made for you. If you insist on using Ubuntu but never using a snap, you can configure apt to never install snapd. See apt_preferences(5).

scoot_718 6y ago

Ubuntu keeps making the setup work to go from install to a clean and usable linux system more and more work. I've got to disable global keybinds that shadow shortcuts for fucking readline and basic text editors. Fix their broken themes to shut up warnings that will drown out logs of applications that couldn't care less about themes. Fix XDG settings to remove turd directories in home directories that nobody on earth has ever used and applications ignore. Search the three or four different places they put configuration to fix whatever new setting has screwed things up, whether that be to move the close window button back where it always should have stayed, remove hot corners, or something new. And yes, remove snap so I have usable output from mount and similar. Not to mention how broken their LTS and distro upgrade process is. I shouldn't need to edit files to upgrade distros, and it shouldn't break basic applications or drivers.

abstractbarista 6y ago

Yikes, that's horrible.