3 ms·

Dr Roy on HN. This will be interesting. - - - First thing I did on my Ubuntu install was remove the Firefox snap, add the Mozilla ppa, and install Firefox fro

Dr Roy on HN. This will be interesting. - - - First thing I did on my Ubuntu install was remove the Firefox snap, add the Mozilla ppa, and install Firefox from there via apt. If Mozilla maintains its own ppa and they do all the hard working of getting everything working, I don’t understand why Canonical has to push a snap option instead. I did give it a try, but only to get obnoxious popups about being forced to restart Firefox every other day for snap to update, and these popups would even bring my monitor out of dpms (and maybe my machine out of sleep?) to inform me of this. But even heeding these prompts, Firefox would still update in the background leaving me unable to open a new tab because IPC broke since the master and slave processes were now running different Firefox versions..

gjsman-1000 3y ago
This is the same guy who claimed that you should "never, ever, use DuckDuckGo" which was quickly flagged to oblivion for being absurd. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31237822 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31237822
tracker1 3y ago
FYI, Mozilla also maintains the snap and the flathub images, so that part of the argument doesn't have much traction imho. Can't speak to waking from a sleep state (even just screen off)... that said, having an evergreen browser is pretty important, given how bad 0-day exploits can be. This is also part of why Snaps instead of the repo/ppa for such things as GUI apps. Snap and Flatpak both have advantages and disadvantages over each other, technical and ethical. That said, by using such an abstraction for common applications, it allows for the applications to be released ahead of core OS changes. It allows the delivery of both application features and security updates without risk to the core os running. I know some really hate AppImage/Flatpak/Snaps etc. In the end, it's better in a lot of ways and there are distros for those that don't want to participate. It's still likely the best option for most apps for most people. It allows for developers of software to generate releases that can be consumed from any Linux distro without having to worry about specific downstream distros potentially breaking things, or worse, running unmaintained, years old, versions that are broken.

gjsman-1000 3y ago

This is the same guy who claimed that you should "never, ever, use DuckDuckGo" which was quickly flagged to oblivion for being absurd. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31237822 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31237822

tracker1 3y ago

FYI, Mozilla also maintains the snap and the flathub images, so that part of the argument doesn't have much traction imho. Can't speak to waking from a sleep state (even just screen off)... that said, having an evergreen browser is pretty important, given how bad 0-day exploits can be. This is also part of why Snaps instead of the repo/ppa for such things as GUI apps. Snap and Flatpak both have advantages and disadvantages over each other, technical and ethical. That said, by using such an abstraction for common applications, it allows for the applications to be released ahead of core OS changes. It allows the delivery of both application features and security updates without risk to the core os running. I know some really hate AppImage/Flatpak/Snaps etc. In the end, it's better in a lot of ways and there are distros for those that don't want to participate. It's still likely the best option for most apps for most people. It allows for developers of software to generate releases that can be consumed from any Linux distro without having to worry about specific downstream distros potentially breaking things, or worse, running unmaintained, years old, versions that are broken.