5 ms·

I don't really understand why this is such a big problem. You don't have to use snaps.

by mmcnl 1y ago

wkat4242 1y ago
Yes you do. Some packages aren't available anymore in apt
yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago
You really have to work to avoid them; ex. `apt install firefox` will install the snap
bayindirh 1y ago
You're right. You don't have to use snaps. Ubuntu migrates packages slowly in behalf of you. Using apt to install some packages installs snap plumbing and downloads the package as a snap automatically. You don't have to install it manually. There's no malicious intent though, it's made to "impose a positive pressure on the snap team to produce better work and keep their quality high" (paraphrased, but this was the official answer).
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago
  And one of these migrations broke my workflow substantially enough that a dist-upgrade turned into a complete system reformat to Debian and cost hours that I couldn’t afford. Debian has been a safe haven since.
- ants_everywhere 1y ago
  Installing the inferior snap packages when you apt get is one of the worst cases of a Linux distro refusing to respect the user's intent that I've experienced.
  - splatter9859 1y ago
    Preach. This has got to be the most user-blind self-imposed preference in a modern operating system outside of Microsoft's BS. If you're going to use an OSS operating system, the control of what is placed on the system should be inherently with the user. If the developer has a question if a new package should be added or is required, throw a prompt and ask -- with a default to not use application containers and the default packaging system. Really not hard.
LeoPanthera 1y ago
You sort of do. It's really hard to avoid them, because they've modified "apt" to install snaps by default without asking.
npteljes 1y ago
Defaults matter a lot, and snaps are the default in Ubuntu. The topic is not whether snaps are avoidable or not, but the Ubuntu is going downhill. And snaps are purported to be part of that downhill, which would be Ubuntu's NIH syndrome. As far as I know, Ubuntu's only successful development is Ubuntu itself - the other projects have all failed over the years, and snap, while ongoing, is not winning any popularity contests either.
- Santosh83 1y ago
  Snaps per se are no better or worse than flatpak. Canonical's mistake, IMO, was to make their store the only place snaps can be hosted. That is the "proprietary" bit everyone keeps talking about. But in practice even for flatpak the only realistic place you can publish your flatpak if you want any traction at all would be flathub, so both formats have only one store right now. But flatpak allows a custom store while for some strange reason Canonical decided not to allow snap that freedom.
  - bayindirh 1y ago
    Another problem is, Canonical promised to release server components and enable alternative stores, and just forgot that they made that pledge. Also, rugpulling users and migrating things to snaps without asking their users in order to "create a positive pressure on snap team to keep their quality high" didn't sit well with the users. > But in practice even for flatpak the only realistic place you can publish your flatpak if you want any traction at all would be flathub But, for any size of fleet from homelab to an enterprise client farm, I can host my local flathub and install my personal special-purpose flatpaks without paying anyone and thinking whether my packages will be there next morning. Freedom matters, esp. it that's the norm in that ecosystem. I was neutral-ish about Ubuntu, but I flat out avoid them now, and migrate any remaining Ubuntu server to Debian in shortest way possible. I'm using Debian for the last 20 years or so, BTW.
    - npteljes 1y ago
      Yes, same. I started with Ubuntu back in the day, because the server I inherited ran Ubuntu, and it was just natural after that for me to run it on the desktop as well. I grew to dislike their NIH over the years, tried distro hopping, and settled on Debian.
tasuki 1y ago
I'm with my neighbor comments. How do you use Ubuntu without snaps? The base Ubuntu install already comes with several snaps. Installing random things through apt leads to snaps. I personally do not know how to avoid snaps on Ubuntu.
- justinclift 1y ago
  I made this snap "alternative" to solve this exact problem: https://github.com/justinclift https://github.com/justinclift Packaged as: https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/releases/download/v0.1/snapd-empty-0.1.deb https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/releases/download... It's just an empty package that tells the system snap is installed, to stop the broken dependency chains you otherwise get from force uninstalling snap. It's been working fine on a handful of Ubuntu 24.04 systems I've been handed and can't change the OS of, for about half a year now.
  - justinclift 1y ago
    Ugh, I somehow managed to paste an incorrect repo url in my comment above. It should be this: https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/ https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/
- mkesper 1y ago
  You migrate to Debian. Everything else is a bandaid that can be rug pulled any time Canonical feels like doing so.
  - tasuki 1y ago
    I've done that some years ago and couldn't be happier.
- L3viathan 1y ago
  You uninstall all snaps, uninstall snapd, and block it from being installed via APT. Then you add e.g. the mozilla PPA such that its firefox package gets installed instead.
superb_dev 1y ago
If you use Ubuntu, yes you do. It’s why I ditched Ubuntu

I don't really understand why this is such a big problem. You don't have to use snaps.

by mmcnl 1y ago

I don't really understand why this is such a big problem. You don't have to use snaps.

wkat4242 1y ago

Yes you do. Some packages aren't available anymore in apt

yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago

You really have to work to avoid them; ex. `apt install firefox` will install the snap

bayindirh 1y ago

You're right. You don't have to use snaps. Ubuntu migrates packages slowly in behalf of you. Using apt to install some packages installs snap plumbing and downloads the package as a snap automatically. You don't have to install it manually. There's no malicious intent though, it's made to "impose a positive pressure on the snap team to produce better work and keep their quality high" (paraphrased, but this was the official answer).

hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago
And one of these migrations broke my workflow substantially enough that a dist-upgrade turned into a complete system reformat to Debian and cost hours that I couldn’t afford. Debian has been a safe haven since.
ants_everywhere 1y ago
Installing the inferior snap packages when you apt get is one of the worst cases of a Linux distro refusing to respect the user's intent that I've experienced.
- splatter9859 1y ago
  Preach. This has got to be the most user-blind self-imposed preference in a modern operating system outside of Microsoft's BS. If you're going to use an OSS operating system, the control of what is placed on the system should be inherently with the user. If the developer has a question if a new package should be added or is required, throw a prompt and ask -- with a default to not use application containers and the default packaging system. Really not hard.

LeoPanthera 1y ago

You sort of do. It's really hard to avoid them, because they've modified "apt" to install snaps by default without asking.

npteljes 1y ago

Defaults matter a lot, and snaps are the default in Ubuntu. The topic is not whether snaps are avoidable or not, but the Ubuntu is going downhill. And snaps are purported to be part of that downhill, which would be Ubuntu's NIH syndrome. As far as I know, Ubuntu's only successful development is Ubuntu itself - the other projects have all failed over the years, and snap, while ongoing, is not winning any popularity contests either.

Santosh83 1y ago
Snaps per se are no better or worse than flatpak. Canonical's mistake, IMO, was to make their store the only place snaps can be hosted. That is the "proprietary" bit everyone keeps talking about. But in practice even for flatpak the only realistic place you can publish your flatpak if you want any traction at all would be flathub, so both formats have only one store right now. But flatpak allows a custom store while for some strange reason Canonical decided not to allow snap that freedom.
- bayindirh 1y ago
  Another problem is, Canonical promised to release server components and enable alternative stores, and just forgot that they made that pledge. Also, rugpulling users and migrating things to snaps without asking their users in order to "create a positive pressure on snap team to keep their quality high" didn't sit well with the users. > But in practice even for flatpak the only realistic place you can publish your flatpak if you want any traction at all would be flathub But, for any size of fleet from homelab to an enterprise client farm, I can host my local flathub and install my personal special-purpose flatpaks without paying anyone and thinking whether my packages will be there next morning. Freedom matters, esp. it that's the norm in that ecosystem. I was neutral-ish about Ubuntu, but I flat out avoid them now, and migrate any remaining Ubuntu server to Debian in shortest way possible. I'm using Debian for the last 20 years or so, BTW.
  - npteljes 1y ago
    Yes, same. I started with Ubuntu back in the day, because the server I inherited ran Ubuntu, and it was just natural after that for me to run it on the desktop as well. I grew to dislike their NIH over the years, tried distro hopping, and settled on Debian.

tasuki 1y ago

I'm with my neighbor comments. How do you use Ubuntu without snaps? The base Ubuntu install already comes with several snaps. Installing random things through apt leads to snaps. I personally do not know how to avoid snaps on Ubuntu.

justinclift 1y ago
I made this snap "alternative" to solve this exact problem: https://github.com/justinclift https://github.com/justinclift Packaged as: https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/releases/download/v0.1/snapd-empty-0.1.deb https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/releases/download... It's just an empty package that tells the system snap is installed, to stop the broken dependency chains you otherwise get from force uninstalling snap. It's been working fine on a handful of Ubuntu 24.04 systems I've been handed and can't change the OS of, for about half a year now.
- justinclift 1y ago
  Ugh, I somehow managed to paste an incorrect repo url in my comment above. It should be this: https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/ https://github.com/justinclift/snapd-empty/
mkesper 1y ago
You migrate to Debian. Everything else is a bandaid that can be rug pulled any time Canonical feels like doing so.
- tasuki 1y ago
  I've done that some years ago and couldn't be happier.
L3viathan 1y ago
You uninstall all snaps, uninstall snapd, and block it from being installed via APT. Then you add e.g. the mozilla PPA such that its firefox package gets installed instead.

superb_dev 1y ago

If you use Ubuntu, yes you do. It’s why I ditched Ubuntu