6 ms·

Ubuntu testing Snappy for Desktop Next

72 points by baldfat 12y ago

colindean 12y ago
Before anyone gets up in arms about apt going away for the next release... no. Ubuntu Desktop Next is Canonical's playground for testing new ideas. 15.10 Desktop Next will use Snappy for sure, and IIRC 16.04 will be an LTS that may use Snappy if 15.10 DN works out exceptionally well. Snappy's insufficiently mature yet, IMO, and the effort to convert packages without a Snappy target for some equivalent of `alien` seems a bit gargantuan.
- caio1982 12y ago
  https://launchpad.net/deb2snap https://launchpad.net/deb2snap
  - ZoF 12y ago
    So this lets you convert debian packages into a snappy friendly format? Is that why you're posting this link? Does it have a more specific meaning in this context? I'm just curious and wish you had posted at least a short explanation with the link. I don't like feeling stupid fellow human.
    - caio1982 12y ago
      Colin's comment touched a few different topics but in the end he talked about the effort of converting existing Debian packages to Snaps, and even mentioned Alien, which is an old converter of packages formats. This deb2snap is still WIP but it works fine.
baldfat 12y ago
I feel that this has been needed in Linux for a long time BUT it has to be something that is picked up by the majority of the distros similar to the way SystemD has been picked up. It seems so much better to have a user space container system for packages and a separate DEFINED standard config area.
lqdc13 12y ago
I don't get it... What's wrong with apt? I wish everyone just used one package manager.
- cbhl 12y ago
  Requires root access, has a global lock, have to build a new package for each distro/version because the deps change (even though the binary itself might not need changes), etc.
  - lqdc13 12y ago
    I guess those things could be a configuration thing within apt? Basically I can see it being frustrating in the future with only being able to get a version of something through apt and then trying to not install dependencies that you have through another package manager. That's an issue I sometimes have with homebrew and macports on macs plus python pip. Basically, some things you can only get through macports, some things only through homebrew and some things only through pip. Then you have to reorder the imports to not fuck up compiling something for every single thing you are trying to compile from source. And it is extremely annoying because you actually have no idea which imports are causing the issues. Now add to that that different packages may require the dependencies to be compiled in a certain way and you are in a world of pain.
    - cbhl 12y ago
      Code talks. Show us a version of dpkg that doesn't have those problems and maybe someone will adopt it.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- jcastro 12y ago
  Do an upgrade or install an application on your laptop ... while that is in progress pull the battery out. Package manager breaks. Atomic commits, rollbacks, and the big one, decoupling the OS from the applications. Developers can just publish their apps directly on their own schedule.
jdnier 12y ago
In case you're wondering what Snappy is... http://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/ http://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/
Scarbutt 12y ago
The title or the link needs to be change, I click on it to learn about Snappy's features, was disappoint.
- reddotX 12y ago
  meh, just read the source code (go) http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~snappy-dev/snappy/snappy/files/head:/snappy/ http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~snappy-dev/snappy/snappy/files/...
chris_wot 12y ago
This sounds awful, but what is Desktop Next? Simple google search is unenlightening, I'm asking the lazy-web here...
- reddotX 12y ago
  Mir + Unity8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mCPxkPqiUc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mCPxkPqiUc
  - azinman2 12y ago
    Ok so I don't mean to be a hater but that demo looks like I'm supposed to be impressed by stuff that apple had in os x in 2001, as well as recent iOS additions in 2007. It's 2015 and this is just beginning development now. Diff priorities, diff resources, blahblahblah. But come on -- there ARE quite a bit of man hours since 2001 in gnome, kde, X11, Mir, compviz, Maemo, etc. Enough that recognizing Apple started doing things right so long ago that a unified response to at least copy let alone improved would have yielded significant results at least by 2010. </hate>
    - ikawe 12y ago
      Are you referring to nextstep ideas like the app bundle? This quote in particular sounds like an app bundle: Creating snappy Ubuntu apps is much easier than traditional packaging, simply bundle all the files you need in a single package and publish, then users can download it instantly. Snappy packages can be statically linked and include their own copies of any file they need.
      - azinman2 12y ago
        No I was referring to the UI work with Mir shown in the YouTube video linked by the parent.
anon3_ 12y ago
Ubuntu will eventually fade away, Canonical will run out of money. Have you ever noticed every project they have: Mir, Phone, Unity, Bazaar, Launchpad Are all virally licensed, lack portability and drive people away in droves? Ubuntu has the widest gap in users : developers, yet they're funded. Now: - So long Debian compatibility. That's the one principal thing Ubuntu had going for it. - Exodus / dam-breaks: I see Mint moving to Debian, as well as many {K,L,X}ubuntu developers. "Enough". - It's GPLv3. So there goes a lot of developers / potential for portability. Just like Mir. You can't write modules for GPLv3 software. Commercial vendors will be scared away from investing in it. What do you really gain by using such a restrictive license? Can you see it means we have to rewrite everything over again from scratch in a permissive one?
arthurcolle 12y ago
this seems stupid apt-get is great, so why change whats great?
- anon3_ 12y ago
  To be fair, from a packagers perspective, it's hell. https://wiki.debian.org/IntroDebianPackaging https://wiki.debian.org/IntroDebianPackaging http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html Compare that to gentoo / archlinux / BSD ports. If they actually simplified* their system and made it permissively licensed and POSIX portable, maybe people would bite. But GPLv3 is just a way to make suckers develop for Canonical for free - at the end of the day - you have no rights over your own contributions and they have 100% ownership.
  - vezzy-fnord 12y ago
    GPLv3 makes no such impact. Now, if they had a CLA (which Canonical's projects infamously often do), you could make that argument.
    - anon3_ 12y ago
      GPLv3 makes no such impact. Now, if they had a CLA (which Canonical's projects infamously often do), you could make that argument. http://www.canonical.com/projects/directory http://www.canonical.com/projects/directory The following projects are covered by Canonical’s contributor agreement. If you want to contribute to any of the projects below, please contact the project contacts listed in the third column. Sanppy:: (sic), snappy
  - davidgerard 12y ago
    > But GPLv3 is just a way to make suckers develop for Canonical for free - at the end of the day - you have no rights over your own contributions and they have 100% ownership. This is the text of the GPLv3: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html It doesn't contain anything of the sort.
pervycreeper 12y ago
So how will they push security fixes to the bundled dependencies?
noo5Tool 12y ago
This looks to be a package manager that will have the concept of an "app store"[1]. Has anyone found how someone can build and namespace their own app store? From a brief read-through of the docs it looks like the namespace of applications is "owned" by Ubuntu which means it is difficult to add external sources. For example it is `snappy install vim` instead of `snappy install ubuntu.com/vim` [1] https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-format-apps/ https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-form...
- Ezhik 12y ago
  I know Cydia for iOS does the "app store" thing, paid apps and all. Don't really know how that's implemented, but other than that, it's APT based.
  - comex 12y ago
    Cydia has repositories just like Debian, but there are multiple independently operated ones in a default install; they accept proprietary software .debs, and don't take as active a role in shaping the system into a coherent whole as a standard Linux distro (to avoid clashes, packages get reverse-DNS style names), but they do cooperate with each other and with saurik (the developer of Cydia) - I'm sure other people could tell you more about what that looks like. They manually review package submissions before adding them, but they don't have the resources to subject every one to an Apple-like testing procedure. Adding custom repositories is exposed in Cydia's UI and is common. (Among many legitimate uses, this is also commonly used to add repos which host pirated copies of paid Cydia packages and App Store apps. Oh well.) Cydia has some additional functionality compared to stock APT: - Purchases - are basically handled as a separate layer; they're the only part of Cydia which is centralized, and are done through a web UI hosted by saurik. IIRC, once the package is purchased, Cydia's version of APT sends a device identifier header when requesting .debs, and repositories have to check with saurik's server to decide whether to return 403 or not. By itself this is pretty easy to crack, so many popular packages add their own DRM (yuck). - In addition to the short textual descriptions, package metadata can contain a "depiction" header containing a URL which Cydia will display in a web view when the user navigates to the package. This is intended to (a) allow each repo to design their own UI and maintain independence, (b) provide richer package info more flexibly than a fixed description UI would allow, e.g. including videos, and (c) allow repos to display ads, which they need to survive as payments aren't handled through them. (I originally had a somewhat long paragraph here on how utterly horrid a UX this is in practice, but it's not really on topic, so I'll leave it at that.)
orf 12y ago
I don't see what all the hate is about. The developer documentation[1] looks really interesting. 1. https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-format-apps/ https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-form...
jethro_tell 12y ago
Yes!! Another soon to be half finished project from Ubuntu that breaks compatability with everyone else. They don't seem to have the devs to finish the projects they have, and they keep removing the Debian and ubuntu community in favor of in house development. They are half finished writing a full new userland, but most of the time it's just broken shot that never quite works and never quite gets finished.
- vezzy-fnord 12y ago
  So not too different then from another major Linux software vendor that cannot be named, except significantly more honest about catering to its own specific direction, and thus less popular and less adopted by the broader developer community.
- madez 12y ago
  I think your critique is unjustified and uninteresting. Competition and innovation is interesting. If you don't agree with their development, ignore it. There is no need to ridicule their decision like you did.
- yousry 12y ago
  Snappys security is based on AppArmor. A comparison to other LSMs cam be found here: https://grsecurity.net/compare.php https://grsecurity.net/compare.php. In my opinion a flawed security is worse than no security.
nickysielicki 12y ago
it amazes me that everyone still uses ubuntu. It's not the 'stable' operating system that everyone thinks it is. I mean, it is stable, but not more than the dozens of other distributions that have far more up to date repositories with more packages, and are more lightweight. I'm far from a distrohopper. I don't think they're all so different. But when considering the minute differences between linux distributions, I find that ubuntu generally has more disadvantages.
- niyazpk 12y ago
  >> I find that ubuntu generally has more disadvantages. Examples please?
  - nickysielicki 12y ago
    It's just a lot of little things... It's not that ubuntu is bad, it's just that, well, there is no reason to use ubuntu when there are distributions that do much more much better. - PPA's are perhaps the most terrible way of providing more up to date packages than what is available in main repos. Typically they'll 404. You're also trusting some random person on the internet to maintain your system. I much prefer arch PKGBUILDs. - You'll commonly find out of date packages. As a developer this is particularly frustrating. I don't want to just unpack an archive to my rootfs. I also don't want to wrestle debuild just to get a newer library. I understand that LTS support is important, but it really isn't that important. - The whole amazon fiasco from a few years back ticks me off. Yeah, I know you could disable it. It's just that they did that by default in the first place. - upstart sucks, and in spite of the fact that they're moving/moved, they hung on too long because they are stubborn. Let me ask you this: What are the advantages of ubuntu over other linux/gnu distributions?
    - nl 12y ago
      What are the advantages of ubuntu over other linux/gnu distributions? Googling for "how to install random linux software on Linux" will generally get either an Ubuntu package, or somewhat working instructions for getting it mostly going on Ubuntu. On other Linux distributions (even major ones like CentOS/Redhat) you'll often be on your own.
tormeh 12y ago
I'm really excited, actually. Atomic upgrades is great! I just hope the underlying system is deterministic/declarative because as it is, my install gets a little less stable every time I do an upgrade.
bryanlarsen 12y ago
Could we please get the title changed, please? It's wrong in at least 4 ways. - This isn't new, snappy has been announced for a while now. - It's not primarily for desktop -- snappy was created for the needs of "cloud" operating systems; it just happens also to be useful on the desktop. - It's not new: CoreOS and RedHat Atomic use the same principles and preceded snappy. - It's not for desktop, it's for "desktop next", which is an Ubuntu test distribution that almost nobody has heard of.
- bryanlarsen 12y ago
  A good alternate title is hard. "Ubuntu testing Snappy for Desktop Next" might work. Probably best to revert to the original title with an Ubuntu thrown in for context, "An important notice for Ubuntu Desktop Next users".
  - dang 12y ago
    Thanks! We used your first suggestion because it's more informative.

72 points by baldfat 12y ago

Before anyone gets up in arms about apt going away for the next release... no. Ubuntu Desktop Next is Canonical's playground for testing new ideas. 15.10 Desktop Next will use Snappy for sure, and IIRC 16.04 will be an LTS that may use Snappy if 15.10 DN works out exceptionally well. Snappy's insufficiently mature yet, IMO, and the effort to convert packages without a Snappy target for some equivalent of `alien` seems a bit gargantuan.

caio1982 12y ago
https://launchpad.net/deb2snap https://launchpad.net/deb2snap
- ZoF 12y ago
  So this lets you convert debian packages into a snappy friendly format? Is that why you're posting this link? Does it have a more specific meaning in this context? I'm just curious and wish you had posted at least a short explanation with the link. I don't like feeling stupid fellow human.
  - caio1982 12y ago
    Colin's comment touched a few different topics but in the end he talked about the effort of converting existing Debian packages to Snaps, and even mentioned Alien, which is an old converter of packages formats. This deb2snap is still WIP but it works fine.

baldfat 12y ago

I feel that this has been needed in Linux for a long time BUT it has to be something that is picked up by the majority of the distros similar to the way SystemD has been picked up. It seems so much better to have a user space container system for packages and a separate DEFINED standard config area.

lqdc13 12y ago

I don't get it... What's wrong with apt? I wish everyone just used one package manager.

cbhl 12y ago
Requires root access, has a global lock, have to build a new package for each distro/version because the deps change (even though the binary itself might not need changes), etc.
- lqdc13 12y ago
  I guess those things could be a configuration thing within apt? Basically I can see it being frustrating in the future with only being able to get a version of something through apt and then trying to not install dependencies that you have through another package manager. That's an issue I sometimes have with homebrew and macports on macs plus python pip. Basically, some things you can only get through macports, some things only through homebrew and some things only through pip. Then you have to reorder the imports to not fuck up compiling something for every single thing you are trying to compile from source. And it is extremely annoying because you actually have no idea which imports are causing the issues. Now add to that that different packages may require the dependencies to be compiled in a certain way and you are in a world of pain.
  - cbhl 12y ago
    Code talks. Show us a version of dpkg that doesn't have those problems and maybe someone will adopt it.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
jcastro 12y ago
Do an upgrade or install an application on your laptop ... while that is in progress pull the battery out. Package manager breaks. Atomic commits, rollbacks, and the big one, decoupling the OS from the applications. Developers can just publish their apps directly on their own schedule.

jdnier 12y ago

In case you're wondering what Snappy is... http://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/ http://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/

Scarbutt 12y ago

The title or the link needs to be change, I click on it to learn about Snappy's features, was disappoint.

reddotX 12y ago
meh, just read the source code (go) http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~snappy-dev/snappy/snappy/files/head:/snappy/ http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~snappy-dev/snappy/snappy/files/...

chris_wot 12y ago

This sounds awful, but what is Desktop Next? Simple google search is unenlightening, I'm asking the lazy-web here...

reddotX 12y ago
Mir + Unity8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mCPxkPqiUc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mCPxkPqiUc
- azinman2 12y ago
  Ok so I don't mean to be a hater but that demo looks like I'm supposed to be impressed by stuff that apple had in os x in 2001, as well as recent iOS additions in 2007. It's 2015 and this is just beginning development now. Diff priorities, diff resources, blahblahblah. But come on -- there ARE quite a bit of man hours since 2001 in gnome, kde, X11, Mir, compviz, Maemo, etc. Enough that recognizing Apple started doing things right so long ago that a unified response to at least copy let alone improved would have yielded significant results at least by 2010. </hate>
  - ikawe 12y ago
    Are you referring to nextstep ideas like the app bundle? This quote in particular sounds like an app bundle: Creating snappy Ubuntu apps is much easier than traditional packaging, simply bundle all the files you need in a single package and publish, then users can download it instantly. Snappy packages can be statically linked and include their own copies of any file they need.
    - azinman2 12y ago
      No I was referring to the UI work with Mir shown in the YouTube video linked by the parent.

anon3_ 12y ago

Ubuntu will eventually fade away, Canonical will run out of money. Have you ever noticed every project they have: Mir, Phone, Unity, Bazaar, Launchpad Are all virally licensed, lack portability and drive people away in droves? Ubuntu has the widest gap in users : developers, yet they're funded. Now: - So long Debian compatibility. That's the one principal thing Ubuntu had going for it. - Exodus / dam-breaks: I see Mint moving to Debian, as well as many {K,L,X}ubuntu developers. "Enough". - It's GPLv3. So there goes a lot of developers / potential for portability. Just like Mir. You can't write modules for GPLv3 software. Commercial vendors will be scared away from investing in it. What do you really gain by using such a restrictive license? Can you see it means we have to rewrite everything over again from scratch in a permissive one?

arthurcolle 12y ago

this seems stupid apt-get is great, so why change whats great?

anon3_ 12y ago
To be fair, from a packagers perspective, it's hell. https://wiki.debian.org/IntroDebianPackaging https://wiki.debian.org/IntroDebianPackaging http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html Compare that to gentoo / archlinux / BSD ports. If they actually simplified* their system and made it permissively licensed and POSIX portable, maybe people would bite. But GPLv3 is just a way to make suckers develop for Canonical for free - at the end of the day - you have no rights over your own contributions and they have 100% ownership.
- vezzy-fnord 12y ago
  GPLv3 makes no such impact. Now, if they had a CLA (which Canonical's projects infamously often do), you could make that argument.
  - anon3_ 12y ago
    GPLv3 makes no such impact. Now, if they had a CLA (which Canonical's projects infamously often do), you could make that argument. http://www.canonical.com/projects/directory http://www.canonical.com/projects/directory The following projects are covered by Canonical’s contributor agreement. If you want to contribute to any of the projects below, please contact the project contacts listed in the third column. Sanppy:: (sic), snappy
- davidgerard 12y ago
  > But GPLv3 is just a way to make suckers develop for Canonical for free - at the end of the day - you have no rights over your own contributions and they have 100% ownership. This is the text of the GPLv3: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html It doesn't contain anything of the sort.

pervycreeper 12y ago

So how will they push security fixes to the bundled dependencies?

noo5Tool 12y ago

This looks to be a package manager that will have the concept of an "app store"[1]. Has anyone found how someone can build and namespace their own app store? From a brief read-through of the docs it looks like the namespace of applications is "owned" by Ubuntu which means it is difficult to add external sources. For example it is `snappy install vim` instead of `snappy install ubuntu.com/vim` [1] https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-format-apps/ https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-form...

Ezhik 12y ago
I know Cydia for iOS does the "app store" thing, paid apps and all. Don't really know how that's implemented, but other than that, it's APT based.
- comex 12y ago
  Cydia has repositories just like Debian, but there are multiple independently operated ones in a default install; they accept proprietary software .debs, and don't take as active a role in shaping the system into a coherent whole as a standard Linux distro (to avoid clashes, packages get reverse-DNS style names), but they do cooperate with each other and with saurik (the developer of Cydia) - I'm sure other people could tell you more about what that looks like. They manually review package submissions before adding them, but they don't have the resources to subject every one to an Apple-like testing procedure. Adding custom repositories is exposed in Cydia's UI and is common. (Among many legitimate uses, this is also commonly used to add repos which host pirated copies of paid Cydia packages and App Store apps. Oh well.) Cydia has some additional functionality compared to stock APT: - Purchases - are basically handled as a separate layer; they're the only part of Cydia which is centralized, and are done through a web UI hosted by saurik. IIRC, once the package is purchased, Cydia's version of APT sends a device identifier header when requesting .debs, and repositories have to check with saurik's server to decide whether to return 403 or not. By itself this is pretty easy to crack, so many popular packages add their own DRM (yuck). - In addition to the short textual descriptions, package metadata can contain a "depiction" header containing a URL which Cydia will display in a web view when the user navigates to the package. This is intended to (a) allow each repo to design their own UI and maintain independence, (b) provide richer package info more flexibly than a fixed description UI would allow, e.g. including videos, and (c) allow repos to display ads, which they need to survive as payments aren't handled through them. (I originally had a somewhat long paragraph here on how utterly horrid a UX this is in practice, but it's not really on topic, so I'll leave it at that.)

orf 12y ago

I don't see what all the hate is about. The developer documentation[1] looks really interesting. 1. https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-format-apps/ https://developer.ubuntu.com/en/snappy/guides/packaging-form...

jethro_tell 12y ago

Yes!! Another soon to be half finished project from Ubuntu that breaks compatability with everyone else. They don't seem to have the devs to finish the projects they have, and they keep removing the Debian and ubuntu community in favor of in house development. They are half finished writing a full new userland, but most of the time it's just broken shot that never quite works and never quite gets finished.

vezzy-fnord 12y ago
So not too different then from another major Linux software vendor that cannot be named, except significantly more honest about catering to its own specific direction, and thus less popular and less adopted by the broader developer community.
madez 12y ago
I think your critique is unjustified and uninteresting. Competition and innovation is interesting. If you don't agree with their development, ignore it. There is no need to ridicule their decision like you did.
yousry 12y ago
Snappys security is based on AppArmor. A comparison to other LSMs cam be found here: https://grsecurity.net/compare.php https://grsecurity.net/compare.php. In my opinion a flawed security is worse than no security.

nickysielicki 12y ago

it amazes me that everyone still uses ubuntu. It's not the 'stable' operating system that everyone thinks it is. I mean, it is stable, but not more than the dozens of other distributions that have far more up to date repositories with more packages, and are more lightweight. I'm far from a distrohopper. I don't think they're all so different. But when considering the minute differences between linux distributions, I find that ubuntu generally has more disadvantages.

niyazpk 12y ago
>> I find that ubuntu generally has more disadvantages. Examples please?
- nickysielicki 12y ago
  It's just a lot of little things... It's not that ubuntu is bad, it's just that, well, there is no reason to use ubuntu when there are distributions that do much more much better. - PPA's are perhaps the most terrible way of providing more up to date packages than what is available in main repos. Typically they'll 404. You're also trusting some random person on the internet to maintain your system. I much prefer arch PKGBUILDs. - You'll commonly find out of date packages. As a developer this is particularly frustrating. I don't want to just unpack an archive to my rootfs. I also don't want to wrestle debuild just to get a newer library. I understand that LTS support is important, but it really isn't that important. - The whole amazon fiasco from a few years back ticks me off. Yeah, I know you could disable it. It's just that they did that by default in the first place. - upstart sucks, and in spite of the fact that they're moving/moved, they hung on too long because they are stubborn. Let me ask you this: What are the advantages of ubuntu over other linux/gnu distributions?
  - nl 12y ago
    What are the advantages of ubuntu over other linux/gnu distributions? Googling for "how to install random linux software on Linux" will generally get either an Ubuntu package, or somewhat working instructions for getting it mostly going on Ubuntu. On other Linux distributions (even major ones like CentOS/Redhat) you'll often be on your own.

tormeh 12y ago

I'm really excited, actually. Atomic upgrades is great! I just hope the underlying system is deterministic/declarative because as it is, my install gets a little less stable every time I do an upgrade.

bryanlarsen 12y ago

Could we please get the title changed, please? It's wrong in at least 4 ways. - This isn't new, snappy has been announced for a while now. - It's not primarily for desktop -- snappy was created for the needs of "cloud" operating systems; it just happens also to be useful on the desktop. - It's not new: CoreOS and RedHat Atomic use the same principles and preceded snappy. - It's not for desktop, it's for "desktop next", which is an Ubuntu test distribution that almost nobody has heard of.

bryanlarsen 12y ago
A good alternate title is hard. "Ubuntu testing Snappy for Desktop Next" might work. Probably best to revert to the original title with an Ubuntu thrown in for context, "An important notice for Ubuntu Desktop Next users".
- dang 12y ago
  Thanks! We used your first suggestion because it's more informative.