this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
351 points (90.9% liked)

linuxmemes

21290 readers
965 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
    • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
    • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
    •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    poopsmith
    zephyr
    rtxn
    351
    Snap bad (midwest.social)
    submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/linuxmemes
    80 comments fedilink hide all child comments
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

    It's a shame that snaps are forced to use Canonicals closed source backend because they are really good, and a fully snap system is a very compelling idea for immutable systems

    [–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

    They're not forced to do so. You can install snaps locally (or provide a distribution system that treats snapd much the way apt treats dpkg), or you can point snapd at a different store. The snap store API is open and documented, and for a while there was even a separate snap store project. It seems to have died out because despite people's contention about Canonical's snap store, they didn't actually actually want to run their own snap stores.

    [–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I don't know why you're getting downvoted. It makes perfect sense that Cannonical made it's own proprietary package ecosystem and while technically anyone can build their own snap store, ain't nobody got time for that.

    [–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

    Can you explain why it makes perfect sense?

    [–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

    It's Cannonical. They prefer implementing everything themselves fast, rather than developing a more sustainable project with the rest of the community over a longer timescale. When they do that, there will be very little buy-in from the wider community.

    Others could technically implement another snap store for their own distro, but they'd have to build a lot of the backend that Cannonical didn't release. It's easier to use Flatpak or AppImage or whatever rather than hitch themselves onto Cannonicals's homegrown solution that might get abandoned down the line like Mir or Ubuntu Touch.

    [–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

    I don't agree that it made any sense to do that. If they wanted to containerize apps, there has been an open source solution to that for years; Flatpak.

    ain't nobody got time for that

    As an app maintainer, that wants to support Ubuntu, why would I prefer to deploy a snap server, instead of publishing deb files, or creating a Flatpak?

    [–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

    It's Cannonical. They prefer implementing everything themselves fast, rather than developing a more sustainable project with the rest of the community over a longer timescale. It makes sense that when they do that, there will be very little buy-in from the wider community. Much like Unity and Mir.

    As you say - why would others put time into the less supported system? Better alternatives exist. If Canonical want their own software ecosystem, they'll have to maintain it themselves. Which, based on Mir and Ubuntu Touch, they don't have a good track record of.