3 ms·
Yeah. I wanted to like snap (Easy sandboxing for all users? great!) but at least when I've tried it, it has some annoying problems: 1. The way it installs stuf
by ReactiveJelly 5y ago
Yeah. I wanted to like snap (Easy sandboxing for all users? great!) but at least when I've tried it, it has some annoying problems:
1. The way it installs stuff in the background is confusing and opaque. Apt is 1,000 years old and well-understood, but if snap breaks, I can't easily find the fix on SO.
2. The snap version of Chromium passes its own argument for the user profile directory, so I can't run multiple instances of Chromium in separate profiles. If I try, it just opens a new tab in the only profile directory snap allows. Maybe they fixed this, but it's super-annoying.
3. They are pushing it for stuff like cmake where I can't possibly imagine the benefit. Maybe they just want their own non-Debian package manager?
4. If they wanted to break with tradition so badly, why couldn't they accept something cool like Guix...
I have a green-blue rootfs setup and I'm trying to figure out if there's a clever way I can manually install Mint or Debian on that blue rootfs without having to 'burn' and plug in a USB drive.
- GekkePrutser 5y agoIn regards to 3, I think that's exactly what canonical is doing. It feels like they want to insert their own IP into mainstream Linux just like Red Hat has (more successfully) done and benefit from this somehow. The way that they don't open source the snap store (server side) so they're the only ones that can run it is another clue. They always seem to be up to something in this regard. Upstart, mir, unity. Now snap.