31 ms·

Linux Mint drops Ubuntu Snap packages

• GF53F545 6y ago
  https://globelinfo4u.blogspot.com/2020/07/unable-to-locate-package-kali-linux-2020.2.html https://globelinfo4u.blogspot.com/2020/07/unable-to-locate-p...
• chimen 6y ago
  The fact that you have to post on a forum and argue with people why you need permission X for your snap package was enough for me to abort publishing on this platform. I should ask permissions from the users not from the platform publishers on a forum post.
  • donmcronald 6y ago
    This is exactly the issue I have with it. It feels like an attempt to control app distribution on Linux. No thanks. I'm so sick of the app store model. The app stores usurp control of distribution from developers which adds risk which reduces willingness to invest and the result is that app stores attract low effort, low value apps unless they're coming from a huge company. Everyone loses except the app store owners, big platforms like Facebook and Spotify, and spammers / scammers. The app store model is one of the worst things to happen to tech in my lifetime.
  • simosx 6y ago
    By default you ask your users for these permissions, if you do not want to get them from the Snap Store. That is, create your snap package and publish it on the Snap Store. Do not request to pre-approve any permissions. Arrange with your users to enable those permissions on demand.
  • galgalesh 6y ago
    > The fact that you have to post on a forum and argue with people why you need permission X for your snap package was enough for me to abort publishing on this platform. I should ask permissions from the users not from the platform publishers on a forum post. The only reason to go on that forum is to ask for automatic permissions. If you do not do that, then it's your users who have to give you that permission.
• ed25519FUUU 6y ago
  > The Linux Mint project has made good on previous threats to actively prevent Ubuntu Snap packages from being installed through the APT package-management system without the user's consent. This move is the result of "major worries" from Linux Mint on Snap's impact with regard to user choice and software freedom. Ubuntu's parent company, Canonical, seems open to finding a solution to satisfy the popular distribution's concerns — but it too has interests to consider. An excellent and succinct summary of the issue in the first paragraph. I have to hand it to LWN for excellent synopsis/summary paragraphs in the articles. This is a lost art in today's clickbait headline where the lede is buried in the center of the Earth.
• Spivak 6y ago
  Canonical's decision to abuse the power of apt packages to make it some "universal installer" is kinda gross. I get the thought but I would consider is surprising that, say, installing python-* actually installed pip and ran pip install. This is totally going to break Gnome Software's UI since it has plugins for snap, flatpack, apt, dnf, pacman, etc.. and making it so that Chromium from apt is doing a run-round with snap makes it really confusing to the user.
  • tssva 6y ago
    Canonical solution is to remove the Gnome Software store and instead install the Snap Store which although based upon the Gnome Software doesn't support plugins for apt, flatpak, etc.
  • rlpb 6y ago
    > Canonical's decision to abuse the power of apt packages to make it some "universal installer" is kinda gross. This is a mischaracterization. "chromium-browser" is a transitional package that installs the chromium snap for one reason: it is to provide an upgrade path for users of Chromium in previous Ubuntu releases to the latest Ubuntu release without breaking Chromium. I use an example of where Debian does the same thing: on the latest Debian release, install "mysql-server" and you'll get MariaDB, not MySQL. Granted this doesn't bridge across from a deb to a snap, but the mechanism is the same and the technical reasoning is the same. It is to stop users from ending up with a regression in available software following an upgrade. There is no "to make it some "universal installer"" going on here. You may not like the decision, but please do not make it out to be for reasons that do not exist - at least without providing the facts to allow readers to decide for themselves. (I work for Canonical but don't work in an area related to the Chromium snap, Snap Store, this decision, etc. I speak for myself, and not Canonical).
    • Spivak 6y ago
      Sorry, I should have been more explicit. I understand that it follows the pattern of transitional packages and that this was a practical decision to not break people's existing setups. But I don't necessarily agree with the decision because "install Chromium via apt" now doesn't make any sense. It really should be something like "Ubuntu doesn't package Chromium anymore, but a Canonical supported package is available in the Snap store." Because Chromium via snap isn't a drop-in replacement: it automatically updates, it's not versioned with the distro, the usual file paths you would expect to exist aren't there anymore. I use "universal installer" because Canonical has made apt do something really unexpected. Canonically has effectively made apt a frontend for snaps. I wouldn't expect that if I tried to install a package what wasn't in Ubuntu's repos that it would try to find some PPA that has that package, automatically enable and trust it, and install it from there.
• pkaye 6y ago
  Why do they base it on Ubuntu instead of Debian anyway?
  • unixhero 6y ago
    They have a Debian base as well. Just incase Ubuntu relationship goes sour. It's called LMDE.
  • michaelmrose 6y ago
    To derive substantial value from software which is packaged specifically for Ubuntu but not Debian? To have relatively up to date software without running unstable?
• ColanR 6y ago
  I've been putting off my next OS reinstallation, but I think I'll be moving away from Ubuntu and over to Mint this time.
  • rocky1138 6y ago
    Pop!_OS is another choice to consider. Apparently they are sticking with Ubuntu but are stripping the Snap stuff before pushing any updates.
    • gavinray 6y ago
      Seconding Pop!_OS, utterly fantastic distro. Based on Ubuntu but with a bunch of manual patches + tweaks and driver support additions (particularly Nvidia). Really solid stock UI, and it even comes with a tiling WM built in. https://github.com/pop-os/shell https://github.com/pop-os/shell
    • fullstop 6y ago
      I've been using Pop!_OS on a System76 laptop since February, and like it quite a bit. I use plasma desktop on all of my other systems, but left this one with the defaults.. so far I really like it, but I have a problem with gnome-shell leaking memory over time, since I tend to not shut down or log out over long periods of time. If I don't restart / log out, /usr/bin/gnome-shell eats up more and more memory (as the gdm user). I let it get up to about 7GB before I updated some firmware and rebooted the laptop. I mean, I put 32GB of RAM in the thing in an attempt to future-proof it, but this is kind of bonkers.
      • philliphaydon 6y ago
        Going to fire this up in a VM now and give it a go, maybe replace Ubuntu 20.04 with it. I just tried out Mint but it installs SO much rubbish. It installs mysql?!? I don't mind it installing some useful software but Mint goes overboard. With 20.04 I'm constantly sitting at 20-27gb of used memory when doing dev work.
        • 6y ago
• jrockway 6y ago
  I've been kind of disappointed by Snap. It seemed like it was a way to always have the latest version of software you care about available, but in practice, nobody updates their Snaps. I used it to get a newer version of Go, and while it is more recent than what comes with Ubuntu, it's still not the latest version. Apparently Some Guy updates it on a volunteer basis when he remembers, so it's nearly useless. Even if people do update the Snap, it's clear that it provides too many features. It has some sort of isolation model... that every Snap I've ever installed requires you to disable. It's also surprisingly expensive to run something in a snap. For example, getting the name of my current k8s context with "kubectl config current-context": $ sudo execsnoop.bt Attaching 2 probes... TIME(ms) PID ARGS 7603 29266 kubectl config current-context 7612 29272 /usr/sbin/apparmor_parser --preprocess 7614 29266 kubectl config current-context 7626 29280 /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-seccomp version-info 7630 29266 /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-confine --classic snap.kubectl.kubectl /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-exec kubectl config current-context 7632 29266 /snap/core/9436/usr/lib/snapd/snap-exec kubectl config current-context 7634 29266 /snap/kubectl/1561/command-kubectl.wrapper config current-context 7635 29266 /snap/kubectl/1561/kubectl config current-context This adds 32ms of latency before the app runs for absolutely no good reason.
  • fractal618 6y ago
    Some will argue that 32ms is negligible, but I don't believe it is.
    • PNWChris 6y ago
      Agreed, that’s 4 round trips to Google from my main box at home! You can round-trip ping nearly halfway across the U.S. in that kind of time.
    • skykooler 6y ago
      And that's just for command line programs. GUI programs packages as snaps have much greater startup costs. It takes the Ubuntu calculator 4-5 seconds to launch. It takes Mumble 12 seconds to launch. The latter launches in 2 seconds as a native package, and the former, well, is a calculator app - I don't have access to a non-snap version of the Ubuntu calculator anymore but is should launch virtually instantly.
• psanford 6y ago
  From the linked announcement: https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906 https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906 > Applications in this store cannot be patched, or pinned. You can’t audit them, hold them, modify them or even point snap to a different store. You’ve as much empowerment with this as if you were using proprietary software, i.e. none. This is in effect similar to a commercial proprietary solution, but with two major differences: It runs as root, and it installs itself without asking you. This is a great summary of why people rightfully feel nervous about Snap. People run linux because they want visibility and control into what is happening on their systems. Canonical seems to want to take away that visibility and control from their users.
  • ncr100 6y ago
    Is there no way to sandbox these packages - "have you cake and eat it too?" I'm a noob to modern Linux. Edit: Are snaps images? ...like containers? Edit 2: answer: > mounted dynamically by the host operating system, together with declarative metadata that is interpreted by the snap system to set up an appropriately shaped secure sandbox or container for that application
    • solarkraft 6y ago
      The main (and better supported) competitor is Flatpak, which at least doesn't have the terrible marketing.
      • ncr100 6y ago
        Thank you - :) Reading about the cons of Snap now - "auto-updates cannot be turned off" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(package_manager)
        • nawgszy 6y ago
          Just what we all want on our production hosts.
• whalesalad 6y ago
  One of the first things I do on any Ubuntu-based box is remove snap completely.
• aphexairlines 6y ago
  This seems like a problem: > Snap packages are effectively black-boxes; they cannot be reproduced independently as the packaging data is controlled by the package maker alone. One of the nice properties of debian packages is the ability to `apt-get source` and build it locally. Would be a shame to lose that. Maybe Nix and Guix can provide the best of both worlds here: self-contained software but reproducible builds too.
  • superkuh 6y ago
    Any distro where you have to write a little haskell-ish 30 line script to set up an environment just to be able to start compiling (or even running!) things is not going to be widely popular for desktop use.
    • Shared404 6y ago
      Indeed. I am however curious to see if there will be a Nix made easy type distro, similar to Ubuntu's relation to Debian.
    • 6AA4FD 6y ago
      `nix-shell -p ghc` does it for me.
    • ghostwriter 6y ago
      For desktop use, any shortcut icon on a desktop would just be a wrapper script for `nix-shell -p <package> --run <package-binary>`
      • superkuh 6y ago
        I was thinking more things you find on the internet and then do a bit of ./autogen or mkdir build;cd build;cmake ../;make; and the like. Without a file system you really do have to write that script and manually pull in the relevant libraries, and you have to figure out what those are. No autotools will be capable of doing it automatically because no global filesystem exists.
    • 6y ago
• osd5 6y ago
  Installed ubuntu 18.04, purged snapd. It was back after `do-release-upgrade` to 20.04
  • the_af 6y ago
    I installed 18.04 a couple of weeks ago, after software I needed didn't work for 16.04. I don't need snaps and want to continue using .debs (which so far I'm doing, but some snap apps come preinstaled). What is the cleanest way of ditch the snap system and its preinstalled apps? I'm assuming this won't break anything important. PS: I'm not planning on installing 20.04 any time soon. At least not until the dust really settles. I don't see the point of running the absolutely latest version until there is a strong, evidence-backed consensus on its strong and weak points.
    • lioeters 6y ago
      sudo rm -rf /var/cache/snapd/ sudo apt autoremove --purge snapd gnome-software-plugin-snap rm -fr ~/snap From: https://askubuntu.com/questions/1035915/how-to-remove-snap-store-from-ubuntu https://askubuntu.com/questions/1035915/how-to-remove-snap-s... --- ..Or.. sudo apt purge snapd rm -vrf ~/snap # following may not be required as apt purge already removes them sudo rm -vrf /snap /var/snap /var/lib/snapd /var/cache/snapd /usr/lib/snapd # trying to install some package like chromium-browser will bring back snapd # make sure snapd is not installed as a dependency anymore # downside is that some package installation might fail because of dependecy on snapd sudo apt-mark hold snapd From: https://www.kevin-custer.com/blog/disabling-snaps-in-ubuntu-20-04/ https://www.kevin-custer.com/blog/disabling-snaps-in-ubuntu-...
  • DoofusOfDeath 6y ago
    I think it's reasonable that the installer for a new LTS release would go with the default package-management scheme. Especially if the people authoring the do-release-upgrade scripts weren't aware of this being a hot-button issue.
  • andrewshadura 6y ago
    You need to write a bit of config to prevent it from being installed. See the apt_preferences manpage.
• kd913 6y ago
  The reason for why the backend for the snap store hasn't been opensourced has been explained multiple times. Namely that it would be expensive to open source it with little benefit in return. Canonical already spent a large amount of investment opensourcing launchpad and nobody other than them operate it. Mainly because the majority of the costs are for operating an instance which most other distros aren't willing to spend. Not even Mint operate run or operate their own launchpad infrastructure. They experienced large backlash back then, open sourced it and nobody contributed. The same problem applies here. Snap store specifically from what I gather is a bunch of operational machinery that doesn't make sense without also operating launchpad. Such a cost operating would benefit nobody but Canonical because nobody else is bothering footing the bill to run an instance. Second aspect that they wanted to avoid was the same pitfalls that they experienced previously with ppas and now being experienced with flatpak. Namely they want one location to find software, and one location to serve software. If users have to use the command line to add a external repo that has unfetted access, then that defeats any usability gains. That and the whole aspects of malware/trust goes out the window. I will remind people that the most popular PPA to this day is a Java PPA being run by some 3rd party that doesn't offer Java. That PPA has root access to thousands of machines.
  • blendergeek 6y ago
    > Namely that it would be expensive to open source it with little benefit in return. Would you describe exactly what will be expensive in releasing the source code to software that was developed in house? Does it have lots of dependencies on proprietary software? If so, why? > Namely they want one location to find software, and one location to serve software. And this, is the killer. This is exactly what the people at Linux Mint do not want. This is why F-Droid exists on Android. Yes, free software can be distributed on the snap store or on Google Play, but ultimately these are proprietary platforms controlled by one corporate entity whose interests may not be aligned with those of the community. Users of community Linux distros demand choice in where they obtain software. > That and the whole aspects of malware/trust goes out the window. Malware has already been successfully pushed to the Snap Store. The idea of "trust" here is also antithetical to open-source and software freedom. Rather than trusting software because it has verifiable source code, we now trust software because it came from a store that removes well known malware.
• fractal618 6y ago
  I am hoping that they switch over to Clear Linux. I just switched over on my personal laptop, and it's been terrific.
• fractal618 6y ago
  I'm hoping they will switch their base to Clear Linux. I have been using Clear Linux on my personal laptop, and it's been a fantastic experience so far.
  • entropicdrifter 6y ago
    Isn't Clear Linux an Intel project? Kinda defeats the purpose if you're trying to reduce the influence of one corporation by replacing it with an even bigger, more monopolistic one
    • fractal618 6y ago
      It's open source. In a way the linux/GNU initiative has won, because they finally have hardware manufacturers and large companies developing source code in an open way.
  • Shared404 6y ago
    Why would they switch to Clear Linux? They already have a Debian edition for those who don't want an Ubuntu base. I personally don't see the issue with using Ubuntu as a base, _if_ you remove all of the offensive bits. iirc one of the Pop!_OS dev's was asked if they were going to rebase on Debian. The response was something akin to "We already change everything on the end user facing side, so there's not really a need."
  • pyrophane 6y ago
    What's been fantastic about it? I'm genuinely interested. My only real familiarity with Clear is that I see it dominating those Phoronix benchmarks, but I didn't know it was a complete end-user distro.
    • fractal618 6y ago
      I've been using it for a few days now, and it's solid. My personal laptop is getting older, so it's hard to comment on perfomance, but i was able to install a steam video game "path of exile without touching the terminal or file manager.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• jefft255 6y ago
  I wonder if it is finally time for me to give Arch a try. It's a shame that all my lab's machines run Ubuntu; although I find it solid, this sort of controlling behavior by Canonical seems against the spirit of FOSS.
  • bhhaskin 6y ago
    I am honestly thinking the same thing. Still a bit hesitant as I mainly use Linux for work.
    • jefft255 6y ago
      Same for me. ROS in particular only supports Ubuntu officially; although I know people can run it on Arch, it’s much more hacky and you have to build every package from source.
      • knowhy 6y ago
        There are packages for ROS in the aur. And there are wrappers for the commands needed to install packages from AUR. To install ros on my system I just need to execute pacaur -S ros-noetic-desktop-full In this case it will indeed compile the package with cmake. But there are also many binary packages on the aur. The user experience is not like Gentoo. I have never had problems finding a package with Arch.
        • jefft255 6y ago
          I wasn't aware of that, thanks!
    • 6AA4FD 6y ago
      I would try fedora or centos. They have good stability and documentation. In my admittedly limited experience centos has worked better for me than debian or ubuntu.
      • 1_player 6y ago
• pyrophane 6y ago
  I immediately thought of Linux Mint Debian Edition when I saw this. They describe it as something they are developing just in case, you know, "Ubuntu was ever to disappear." Well, excepting for some kind of Microsoft acquisition of Canonical ("we will be shifting our focus to developing Ubuntu for WSL"), I don't think Ubuntu will disappear, but it certainly might become so unfriendly to downstream distros that they have to move off of it.
• jwlake 6y ago
  I'm unclear why ubuntu needs the chromium package in apt. Seems like they should just stop publishing apt packages for chromium, only publish in snap, and steer users into using snap for installs and not apt. Seems less confusing and wins or loses on its merit.
  • berkes 6y ago
    On latest LTS (Ubuntu 20.04 LTS) the apt version is simply a transitional package. It installs the snap for you. It says so on the description directly next to the name: "Transitional package - chromium-browser -> chromium snap" There only for people upgrading, so they are not suddenly surprised seeing their browser gone.
    • jwlake 6y ago
      Just seems like an unintended consequences confusing situation. I think a pretty rational policy would to _never_ have an apt package install a snap package. Moving to snap is a breaking change, effectively, so you have to bite the bullet at some point. Mixing your distribution systems with references to each other seems like a recipe for confusion and anger. And it looks like they got the expected outcome.
      • rlpb 6y ago
        I believe the reasoning is that Ubuntu users do not care about the technical mechanism used to ship the software that comes with Ubuntu. I mean: clearly some people do care, given that that this thread exists. I think you'll find that they aren't your typical Ubuntu user though. Users who do care are quite capable of adjusting their configuration, and Ubuntu doesn't get in the way of that (configure apt not to install snapd ever, and it won't). This is only an issue for users who want to push their political opinions on to other Ubuntu users.
      • berkes 6y ago
        > seems like a recipe for confusion and anger. People where "suddenly Chrome is gone" will be angry too. Just imagine the outrage of a title like "The update to Catalina wiped all mac users' browsers with all their bookmarks and history. Forever". And those are the people that cannot easily solve it. The person being able to know what a "Transitional package" or the difference between snap and apt is, is also the person who knows how (to google for) to move the old ~/.config/chrome/ directory into the snap. This is also the person being enraged that Ubuntu offers a mechanism for all the people who cannot do that themselves. That sounds quite selfish to me.
• red_admiral 6y ago
  Snap sounds to me like the latest of many decisions by Canonical that are more like what you'd expect from a commercial vendor than a FOSS one. This is Microsoft-level coercing people into your own ecosystem. I don't doubt for a moment that it makes business sense for Canonical, but I really wonder whether there's a market for this - the huge majority of people who don't care about this kind of thing are on Windows or Mac, or even just working happily away on their phones and tablets. Linux' selling point for me was always that I was in control and could make the system work the way I wanted to; people more ideologically pure than me have slogans like "free as in freedom" or "binary blobs are bad". I really don't see the market for "linux, but with commercial vendor practices". I switched from ubuntu to mint a while ago and I'm really happy about that right now.
  • Miraste 6y ago
    I'm not sure I see how it even makes business sense. Trying to compete with with Apple and Microsoft by eliminating your strengths to focus on your weaknesses isn't a good play. Gnome and Ubuntu are not and will never be as smooth and integrated as MacOS, and that's okay because that's not why people use them. Take away the openness and you have a slower, uglier Mac with a worse app store.
• nullc 6y ago
  To call Ubuntu snap a security disaster would be a tremendous understatement.
• mixmastamyk 6y ago
  It's interesting in that I quite like the idea of snap packages, just not their implementation. I recently purged snaps from my Ubuntu Mate machines after a few years of use because of the realization of only using two: 1. The micro terminal editor. 2. Chromium, because it was forced. Well, #1 was packaged for 20.04 so I didn't need it any longer. That left Chromium. For that single package, I had to tolerate my system being spammed all over: - Multiple irrelevant loopbacks cluttering my mounts list - Dedicated folders in filesystem: /snap ~/snap - Very slow startup, for chromium. - Lots of disk space taken - An always running daemon! (Wasn't it root too? Can't remember). apt doesn't need a daemon. Sheesh! That's not even mentioning the store issues which others have described already. Sorry, but a few newer packages here and there are not worth all that. I'll handle it myself, thanks. What snap does isn't actually that hard. I'd keep it around if it wasn't so obnoxious at putting itself in front and center of everything.
  • boring_twenties 6y ago
    ~/snap is really just wholly unacceptable, how did that even become a thing? Do the people who develop this software never use their own systems?
    • Avamander 6y ago
      I have no nice words about the person who thought that folder is acceptable to use. Seriously, what the fuck even?
      • mixmastamyk 6y ago
        It's definitely irritating but I consider the root daemon the primary offender. Kill it with fire! Oh, forgot to mention: /var/cache/snapd/
      • ccmcarey 6y ago
        That and their utter refusal to permit controlling the updates of snaps. They had an announcement where they noted that the community wanted to control their own damn machines, and their solution was something like permitting delayed updates for up to a week. What the heck is this, windows?
• pjfin123 6y ago
  If desktop Linux is ever going to be mainstream there needs to be an easy to use "app store" where users can use a GUI to install apps which need to be sandboxed like on a mobile phone with defined permissions. Snapcraft is way ahead of Flatpak on this and the current Ubuntu setup works well. On Ubuntu you can go to the Ubuntu software app (gui) search for software and it blends apt results with snap results. This really seems like the best way to do things, common packages can be installed through a traditional package manager while more niche ones can be installed with snap. A lot of people are mad at Canonical for not open sourcing the backend but no one seems to be offering to build one. Anyways the really important part of snap is having a unified executable for Linux (which Canonical has made open source).Snap makes it really easy for developers to target Linux with a unified executable which they won't do otherwise due to Desktop Linux's small market share.
  • fullstop 6y ago
    Pop!_OS integrates flathub into their "app store" [0] [0] https://blog.system76.com/post/616861064165031936/whats-new-with-popos-2004-lts https://blog.system76.com/post/616861064165031936/whats-new-...
  • commoner 6y ago
    > On Ubuntu you can go to the Ubuntu software app (gui) search for software and it blends apt results with snap results. GNOME Software and KDE Discover support both Flatpak and the distribution's native package manager together. For example implementations on Ubuntu-based distributions that work out of the box, see the elementaryOS AppCenter and the Pop!_OS Pop!_Shop: https://github.com/elementary/appcenter https://github.com/elementary/appcenter https://github.com/pop-os/shop https://github.com/pop-os/shop
    • qchris 6y ago
      Just wanted to +1 Pop's Pop!_Shop. I have machines running both Ubuntu and Pop!_OS, and for some reason (not sure if it's because of the underlying tech/architecture differences, System76 curation, or what), the Pop package management has always been a better experience than Ubuntu's.
• seemslegit 6y ago
  Canonical was overdue for cancellation ever since they pulled the "Amazon shopping lens" crap.
• addicted 6y ago
  I usually go with Ubuntu on cloud platforms because it’s one of the defaults. Any suggestions on what’s a good alternative distributor go with that is widely supported and easily available on the variety of cloud platforms?
  • TekMol 6y ago
    Debian
  • john-shaffer 6y ago
    I'm very happy with Debian. I mostly like Ubuntu, but I can't have snapd restarting things whenever it feels like it.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• flavor8 6y ago
  I haven't been impressed with snap as a user. The jetbrains stuff keeps several versions around by default, which eats disk space. I'm sure there's a way to change that, but I haven't cared enough to dig. The other day I ran `apt install chromium-browser` on a brand new install; it chose to install via snap (grr) and then snapd promptly crashed ("Waiting for restart" -- https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/installing-the-chromium-snap-in-test-environment-results-in-snapd-being-oom-killed/13864 https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/installing-the-chromium-snap-in...), but apt's wrapper wasn't notified. I ended up ctrl-Cing, which left dkpg (somehow involved) in an inconsistent state. Took several iterations of dkpg reconfigure and apt update to recover. I've been on linux for 20 years, so not a big deal for me, but my experience has been that snap is less newbie friendly than apt.
  • simosx 6y ago
    By default, snapd keeps three copies of older versions of a snap package. It does so, so that you can revert easily to a previous version if the latest version does not work. You can disable this feature by setting the appropriate key to `1`. There is a negative sentiment around snap packages. Even if you are an experienced Linux user, you fall into that negative sentiment and even if an issue is small, it is a deal-breaker for you. The "chromium" issue has been explained in 2019. Ubuntu 20.04 does not plan to package "chromium" as a deb package (too difficult to maintain properly), therefore there was a need for a backup plan if users were trying to install it.
    • flavor8 6y ago
      > Even if you are an experienced Linux user, you fall into that negative sentiment and even if an issue is small, it is a deal-breaker for you. I don't think that's fair. Apt/deb is solid, battle tested, and works. Introducing snap with this kind of instability is the source of the negativity. > The "chromium" issue has been explained in 2019. And the fact that it still crashes in 2020, on a flagship package on a modern laptop, is really really bad. In fact I had the same crash happen during a dist-upgrade on another laptop(!) which locked up the entire dist-upgrade. If apt is going to call snap, it needs to be rock solid.
  • 6y ago
• unethical_ban 6y ago
  I haven't used Snap much, but I would like to add this: The Ubuntu Software Center (and debian packaging in general) is not gen-pop friendly. There are library packages, support packages, metapackages, and when you search, the results are shaky, non-existent, or overwhelmed by results no end-user would be interested in installing standalone. There is also the issue of dependencies, and there is some elegance in the design philosophy of "package everything for a program and install it standalone" vs. having shared libraries. So I see the benefit in an app-store. Someone below said "snap is horrible" because it's lock in. It isn't! Ubuntu hasn't taken away apt. But simple, easy package distribution to nontechnical users, for the benefit of stability and ease of use, is a noble one.
• emerongi 6y ago
  Snaps are super laggy. GNOME calculator on Ubuntu runs in a snap and it is baffling that whoever made the decision to package it in a snap by default was OK with the fact that it takes 2 seconds to launch a basic calculator on a 2017 laptop (edit: re-tested, it took 5 seconds). To top it off, a couple months ago my calculator disappeared. For some reason I have been having problems with snap applications disappearing for a while now, even though I have made no configuration changes. How fun it is to discover that such a basic tool just no longer exists on your machine, way to fuck up a morning. I get that snaps make application distribution easier, but please don't do it at the expense of the user. I've had more success with Flatpak and AppImages, but not enough experience with any of them to judge which is best.
  • CSDude 6y ago
    I think it's because they extract compressed rootfs tar each time to be mounted in LXC container. Even with a beefy computer, it takes considerable time.
    • emerongi 6y ago
      What is weird to me is that apparently there has not been someone in a position of power in this project that would go "Wait guys, this is not good. Any other ideas? How can we improve?" No, just roll on with it. There was a period of time, around 2010-2015 when I really felt that computers were fast. SSDs were getting more affordable and that was a huge improvement, every action was immediately responsive. In 2020, that has somehow been undone. It takes 5 seconds to launch a calculator. Software guys really like to undo all the advances that the hardware guys are doing.
      • Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
        In that period, computers made a significant leap forward, and it took developers some time to catch up and fully utilize surplus performance.
      • randomdude402 6y ago
        Somebody somewhere is probably running a calculator as an electron app that takes 10 seconds to open.
• rootbear 6y ago
  I dislike how snap clutters up my df listings. I have to pipe them through grep to get rid of the noise: df -h | grep -v /snap An option to ls to suppress all loopback mounts might be a nice option.
  • Symbiote 6y ago
    alias df='df --exclude-type=tmpfs --exclude-type=devtmpfs --exclude-type=squashfs'
    • mixmastamyk 6y ago
      sudo apt autoremove --purge snapd # ;-)
      • kakd 6y ago
        && sudo apt-mark hold snapd
• CrankyBear 6y ago
  Ancient news. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23433794 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23433794
• trashburger 6y ago
  It's very funny that this article is two places above the article about how Canonical is bringing Flutter to Linux via the Snap Store. Some choice quotes from that article: > Flutter’s native cross-platform story is growing rapidly and Canonical wanted to be at the vanguard. > By making Linux a first class Flutter platform, Canonical is inviting application developers to publish their apps to millions of Linux users and broaden the availability of high quality applications available to them. > Canonical will continue to collaborate with Google to further improve Linux support and maintain feature parity with the other supported platforms.
• williesleg 6y ago
  Bravo! I switched from Ubuntu to Debian to escape the Snap Crap.
• darksoulzz 6y ago
  Great
• Swastikadb 6y ago
  Great
• renewiltord 6y ago
  I like the App Store functionality etc. It's good to have a trusted store and all that. It's just that Snap packaged stuff is slower to open than stuff otherwise. A user on lobste.rs[0] showed what it was like and mine is just as bad Also by `df` and `mount` are unusable with this stuff. 0: https://lobste.rs/s/aktv9k/problem_ubuntu_20_04_snaps_where_your_home#c_fysair https://lobste.rs/s/aktv9k/problem_ubuntu_20_04_snaps_where_...
• Darmody 6y ago
  Just today I switched from Ubuntu to Pop_OS (I hate that name). Unity was giving me some trouble as it's starting to conflict with all the newer stuff so I had to make a decision. I dislike Gnome Shell. It's clean and fast but the GUI is "locked" to the main monitor and I can't even switch windows without looking at it. But I love how the distro is made focusing on a good user experience. To give you an example, the shop (software center) allows me to choose between deb packages and flatpak if available. Sounds like something obvious, but after having snaps shovelled down my throat when I was thinking I was installing deb packages, this means I can finally trust my distro again. Now the only thing I need is a good DE. Maybe the next decade.
  • dTal 6y ago
    https://support.system76.com/articles/desktop-environment/ https://support.system76.com/articles/desktop-environment/ I don't use Pop!_OS, but I recommend Plasma.
    • Darmody 6y ago
      I know Plasma, I can't stand the inconsistency and the ugliness.
  • gitgud 6y ago
    > "I dislike Gnome Shell. It's clean and fast but the GUI is "locked" to the main monitor and I can't even switch windows without looking at it." In case you didn't know, check out the workspaces feature, it can make managing lots of windows much easier via the keyboard: - Change Workspace: ctrl + alt + up/down - Move Window to Workspace: ctrl + alt + shift + up/down You can lock a workspace to a particular monitor too, while cycling other monitors
• marvinblum 6y ago
  Thanks god.
• falcrist 6y ago
  From the July 2 Mint blog post: https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3766 https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3766 > When Flatpak came out it immediately allowed anyone to create stores. The Flatpak client can talk to multiple stores. Spotify is on Flathub and they can push towards it. If tomorrow they have an argument with Flathub they can create their own store and the very same Flatpak client will still work with it. When Snap came out, it was only a client. The server was behind closed doors and the client couldn’t talk to multiple servers. and > Ubuntu is planning to replace the Chromium repository package with an empty package which installs the Chromium snap. In other words, as you install APT updates, Snap becomes a requirement for you to continue to use Chromium and installs itself behind your back. Yea that seems to me to be a problem. From the June 1st Mint blog post: https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906 https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3906 > ...in the Ubuntu 20.04 package base, the Chromium package is indeed empty and acting, without your consent, as a backdoor by connecting your computer to the Ubuntu Store. Applications in this store cannot be patched, or pinned. You can’t audit them, hold them, modify them or even point snap to a different store. You’ve as much empowerment with this as if you were using proprietary software, i.e. none. This is in effect similar to a commercial proprietary solution, but with two major differences: It runs as root, and it installs itself without asking you. If I'm reading this right, Snap is basically trying to fix the problem of software dependencies on older packages by bundling things together (a la flatpack)... but it ALSO replaces the various repositories in different distributions of linux with a closed-source, centralized repository that points towards cannonical, and advertises ubuntu to people using other distros and potentially gives cannonical control over the distribution of sotfware in the linux ecosystem. AND it can do this behind the scenes without the knowledge of the users, who may think they're still using their normal repo system. The whole scheme seems completely antithetical to the principles of FOSS. You don't have to go full Stallman to see this as a bad thing IMO. From that perspective, Mint's decision to drop support for Snap makes a LOT of sense. Also, one of the reasons I enjoy running linux (I dual-boot with windows) is that it does what I tell it to do, and ONLY what I tell it to do. There's no BS like Cortana auto-installing or onedrive automatically uploading a bunch of my pictures to the cloud (yes that actually happened). I already have a linux distro that takes that benefit away, but I accept that (for now), because it's a phone. I'm not ok with losing that on my desktop.
• lifeisstillgood 6y ago
  should I just give up and go back to FreeBSD ?
• hamandcheese 6y ago
  My only brief experience with Snap packages was installing golang (on Ubuntu). I was just dabbling, and the snap package seemed to be a lot more recent than the apt version, so I went for it. A week or so later, I guess the snap package auto-updated itself, because my go installation broke with an error about how the go tool version no longer matches the currently running version of go. That pretty much ruined Snap in my mind, particularly for system software.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
• Animats 6y ago
  Is it time to switch from Ubuntu to Mint? Does Mint have enough repositories that work? I'm at Ubuntu 18.04 LTS, and Ubuntu 20 seems to have a host of unwanted Canonical-oriented features. I'd appreciate comments.
  • opdahl 6y ago
    Well since Mint is also a Debian distro you can basically run anything that you can run on Ubuntu. I've used it for 3 years and still haven't come across any situation where this isn't the case.
  • gitgud 6y ago
    > "Ubuntu 20 seems to have a host of unwanted Canonical-oriented features." I'm curious, what "Canonical-oriented" features are you referring to? (besides snap) After the move to Gnome, I've found Ubuntu to be less and less "Canonical-oriented"... which is good
  • philliphaydon 6y ago
    I just spun up an instance with Mint and there's no minimal install. There's alot of junk to cleanup on a fresh install :(
• suff 6y ago
  'efficiency' over community? Fine. Looks like Ubuntu gets kicked out of the community. There's the door, Ken VanDine. Bye bye.
• einpoklum 6y ago
  This snap business is what we get when commercial interests try to warp the concept of FOSS distributions. That's what we get for letting companies such as Canonical and Red Hat control so much of the distribution space (and I mention Red Hat because of systemd, which has made its inroads much more successfully). And snap is bad not just because you can't patch, or pin, or set up a snap mirror etc. The whole concept is bad. That
• speakspokespok 6y ago
  Suse has been around just as long as RedHat, put out a great suite of products, went for-profit, and seems to do well in the EU market. They've never generated as much buzz - good or bad - though. Is that just my perspective from being in the American linux bubble? Centos, RHEL, Debian, Ubuntu, Arch even; I hear about those players all the time.
• tom_devref 6y ago
  You can avoid snaps by using Synaptic Package Manager. I learned this the hard way after installing Xubuntu 20.04 and finding every piece of software I installed from Ubuntu Software Center was either a slow, buggy or completely broken snap image.
• mastrsushi 6y ago
  Can someone explain the need for Linux Mint? It's derived from Ubuntu which is derived from Debian which just sounds ridiculous. Is Ubuntu considered difficult to install? Does it not support older hardware as well as Mint? Wouldn't Ubuntu be more supported if they just ended Mint and jumped aboard?
  • indymike 6y ago
    Originally, it was user interface.
    • mastrsushi 6y ago
      Haha, that's like when they developed Pantheon, slapped it on Ubuntu and called it Elementary"OS". There are people who lack so much ambition that they refer to sets of scripts and preconfigs with an OS branding.
• dzonga 6y ago
  snap vs flatpak vs appimages once again shows the fragmentation within the linux desktop ecosystem. as a user, it makes me sad, cz I can't have one good solid experience. snap, updates might break, flatpak is not fully supported. And my strong belief, is Microsoft is going to eat Linux Desktop. WSL to run your server apps and coding environment. windows for user apps. as someone who hasn't used windows in over 10 years, day by day seems windows is gonna be the future. sad to say, but true.
  • gitgud 6y ago
    > "snap vs flatpak vs appimages once again shows the fragmentation within the linux desktop ecosystem." A common misconception about the FOSS ecosystem is that many similar projects is "wasted effort". In reality, diversity is what allows for progress and flexibility. Otherwise you end up with a single package manager which nobody can change AKA mono-culture. > "Microsoft is going to eat Linux Desktop. WSL to run your server apps and coding environment. " Only if Microsoft make their OS free, otherwise you're buying windows to run a translation layer of Linux (WSL) on top of it... doesn't make sense to a lot of people...
    • rvz 6y ago
      > A common misconception about the FOSS ecosystem is that many similar projects is "wasted effort". From a developers and users perspecive, it is a wasted effort. Users still keep wasting time 'choosing' a distro. There's 1 form of Windows and macOS to choose and support. For a software vendor, you need to 'define support'. I can support all Windows and macOS users, but I can only target a certain amount of Linux users on some selected distros which isn't all Linux users. Perhaps the reason the Linux desktop has failed is because of the lack of a standard desktop or common SDKs other than the Linux kernel itself. > In reality, diversity is what allows for progress and flexibility. Otherwise you end up with a single package manager which nobody can change AKA mono-culture. Just look at the tons of distro configurations that a software vendor needs to test for which is why many companies place some Linux distros as under having 'unsupported' status and have to target a select few, unlike Windows and macOS. The best "Linux Desktop" to support is WSL.
• rammy1234 6y ago
  what's in for canonical for backing snap when most can see through the pain points it poses ?
• gitgud 6y ago
  Snap isn't too bad, at least Ubuntu are trying to make it easier for new software to run on older machines... they might even swap it out if they get enough backlash I've used Ubuntu since 2014 and have been impressed at most of the decisions they've made, mainly: - [1] Sticking to 6 month release cycles. Any features not ready, go into the next release. (Windows copied this, but constantly miss release dates) - [2] Trying Unification of all applications, across desktop and mobile OS. But abandoning the project when it became clear it wasn't working. - [3] Trying their own desktop manager Unity, then abandoning it when everyone was complaining and focusing on better Gnome integration. I especially like how they try developing a technology and if it's not working or being adopted/liked, then it's abandoned by the core team... which is better than focusing on hated/dead technology... [1] https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39490848 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39490848 [3] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/05/ubuntu-18-04-the-return-of-a-familiar-interface-marks-the-best-ubuntu-in-years/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/05/ubunt...
• macinjosh 6y ago
  Nowadays I don’t know if drops means released (like an album), or stopped supporting. Guess I will have to RTFA. :)
• FpUser 6y ago
  Good riddance. This nanny security encroachment got to stop
• roryokane 6y ago
  I think the LWN article misunderstands what Ken VanDine meant by “pressure” in the following quote: > By shipping such a key application as a snap it will continue to keep pressure on to ensure we keep improving the experience while also reducing our maintenance burden for the LTS and future releases of Ubuntu. The article takes the quote to mean that “Canonical … is using [Snap] to apply pressure where it wants to see change” and implies that Canonical is trying to pressure distros like Linux Mint to support Snap. But I think VanDine meant only that using Snap in a high-profile package puts pressure on Canonical to make Snap easier to use in Ubuntu. That’s a less controversial goal than the one implied by the article. Of course, whether Canonical’s actions are truly motivated by that goal is a separate discussion topic.
• totetsu 6y ago
  Is anyone using ubuntu-core and snaps in backend production? Automatic updates seems like a pretty big show stopper.
• freetime2 6y ago
  > The problems with Linux Mint came to a head when Ubuntu moved Chromium to Snap distribution in Ubuntu 19.10. On the surface, that isn't a problem in and of itself — the Linux Mint project can always start providing its own Chromium APT packages. The problem was the decision to change the Ubuntu chromium-browser APT package itself upstream in Ubuntu. Previously, that package would simply install Chromium directly. With the change, it would instead install the Snap package-management tools first and then install the Snap equivalent of the Chromium package — without making it clear to the user what was happening. I don't have any issues with this behavior. I find it really annoying when I find a package I am looking for on apt and install it, only to realize that it's way out of date, and I'm supposed to install it via snap or some other means to get a reasonably up to date version. Pointing apt at the snap store is a nice convenience in my opinion.
• Tepix 6y ago
  I am still running Ubuntu 18.04 because of snap. Is there some way to upgrade in-place to something that doesn‘t force snap upon me?
• datashaman 6y ago
  Hate snapd. Statically linking every dependency is a step backwards, I don't need to have duplicates of common shared libraries in every binary. It's the first thing I uninstall with Ubuntu.
• jeffdavis 6y ago
  I've been wondering for a while whether the concept of "open source" and its connection to freedom are becoming meaningless. Source code has been a dynamic thing for a while, and I think that's part of the reason the GPL (at least v2) is not very popular any more. I mean, nobody really even wants source code, it's just a maintenance headache. Even after complexity started to take over, there was still the argument that you could audit your computer if it was doing something funny, or ask a different company to maintain it for you, instead. But that seems less and less practical as time goes on. The company that wrote the software is really the only game in town to keep it useful. Snaps are a logical extension of this phenomenon. They cross a line in the sand, perhaps, but basically just continue a trend already going on. Also, the unix security model seems fundamentally bad. The idea that any code you execute can delete everything in your home directory is insane. It imposes a huge burden of trust on your software distribution system for the most trivial things. That reduces the practicality of using third-party sources. I'm not really defending snaps and I will probably avoid them as long as I can. But I sort of feel like the battle might already be lost.
• leommoore 6y ago
  I did find it particularly annoying when I upgraded to Ubuntu 20.04 and seemed to duplicate applications. Adding a snap version side by side with my old applications.
• zelphirkalt 6y ago
  Anyone using Snap to get more up-to-date versions of packages might be interested in trying out Guix package manager on "foreign distro". Has a lot of free (as in freedom) software in latest or close to latest versions ready to install and I find myself using it more and more.
• djeiasbsbo 6y ago
  Lately i've been using flatpak to install many applications and then `flatpak-override` to remove any unwanted permissions from those apps. Usually i try to completely sandbox them by only giving them access to a specific folder on disk. However, here on HackerNews i've seen many articles about how "flatpak is dangerous" lately. Is there any real concern? If yes, what would be another option? Appimages? I definitely don't want to rely on snaps now...
• ho_schi 6y ago
  Use Flatpak. It just another bad move from Canonical in a long list of terrible failures, which weakend Linux fundamentally: * Upstart vs Systemd * Mir vs Wayland * Snap vs. Flatpak * Unity vs. GNOME and Gtk * Ubuntu Phone vs. you should have teamed up with Nokia and Maemo before... Looks like they don't learn. The fork and fight against the others and always lose. Nowadays Ubuntu is upstreaming usefull patches to GNOME, again. Thank you! But imagine what GNOME and Gtk could be look like already, when Ubuntu had "helped" them earlier. I could be already a lot of better years ago? Mutter, Gtk, Terminal and Nautilus. GNOME is healthy! But they could so much better years ago. Forking is good thing, when it aims initially for a merge.
• rdfi 6y ago
  The Ubuntu podcast has a very recent episode about this: https://ubuntupodcast.org/2020/06/25/s13e14-ace-of-spades/ https://ubuntupodcast.org/2020/06/25/s13e14-ace-of-spades/ The conversation around snaps starts at 5:20. It sounded to me that they genuinely tried to put themselves in both side's shoes.
• teekert 6y ago
  Actually Canoncial employees claim that many things claimed here are false. I.e., you can set up your own back-end and you can set-up proxies of to block/allow snaps that from entering an organization. You can also provide patched snaps that are presented from a store proxy that are not visible outside the organization for example. Source: The Ubuntu podcast Telegram channel
• vyuh 6y ago
  When I removed snapd from Ubuntu, all installed snaps and their mount points still remained. Then I reinstalled snapd to remove the snaps. I could not find a command to force remove a snap if other snaps depend on it. So I had to delete each snap one by one manually, taking care of dependency tree.
• znpy 6y ago
  yesterday I finally decided to investigate why gnome-calculator was so slow at starting up in my ubuntu-based xfce desktop. It's a snap. instead of just launching a stupid binary (it's a f-ing calculator for christ's sake) somebody decided it was better to use a snap, mount a filesystem, add a cgroup and everything. For me that was the last straw: I eradicated all the snaps in my system, uninstalled snapd and everything gnome-related that I could. Jesus christ. Again, it's a f-cking calculator. I don't need a snap for that. That's what get people hating snaps. For the record, I'm now using xcalc. It's less pretty but it starts IMMEDIATELY.
• tkuraku 6y ago
  For me, flatpaks are a better user experience in just about every way. The one feature they are missing is that there is no equivalent to the snap --classic confinement. That means that for applications like vscode the flatpak experience is very poor. You cannot easily access command line tools from the editor. For instance using the anaconda python distribution from the vscode flatpak is a pain.
• dreamcompiler 6y ago
  Seems like Canonical is taking a page from the old Microsoft playbook: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. Will this stop them before step 3?
• iso1631 6y ago
  Between VLC, Snap and Ubuntu I'm seriously considering installing Windows - last time I did was Windows 98. Given up trying to compile VLC thanks to usual the usual python mess (ImportError: No module named 'nasm') VLC don't bother distributing debs any more, just these shit snaps. In years gone by distributions used to do a good job of keeping systems healthy. They no longer seem to care about the old way of doing that though, things like debs and make just aren't cool any more. Instead you have 160 different package managers all fighting each other, which you then install to update your build environment to install another package manager to build a new build system to eventually dig down to generate some shitty python crap which runs a gcc command.
• Thaxll 6y ago
  Funny coming from Mint the worst distro security wise.
• rotterdamdev 6y ago
  How come Debian can package chromium but Ubuntu cannot?
  • mixmastamyk 6y ago
    > Google tracks you even in incognito via AdSense. There is an EU case on it. It's just snakeoil. (Replying here because your comment I quoted above is dead! Vouching didn't help. Must have made someone mad.) I don't believe the very few sites (mostly work related) I use chromium with have adsense, but it is possible here and there.
• Kliment 6y ago
  Also see here for all the snap-specific bugs in chromium (bugs that only exist in the snap version, and not with the normal one) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bugs?field.tag=snap https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+...