Ubuntu, please stop! Her neck is going to snap!
this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
307 points (96.7% liked)
linuxmemes
20702 readers
1862 users here now
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules
- Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
- Be civil
- Post Linux-related content
- No recent reposts
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
*snaps*
Ooh, snap!
Yes. Very mean.
I'm uninformed, why were things like snap and flatpak created?
I barely understand docker, but I'm starting to understand why it can be beneficial, although bloated.
People are annoyed by canonical shoving snaps into their mouth at every opportunity (people want to choose when to use them by themselves), but there are many legitimate reasons for existence of snap and flatpak. Here are some of them:
- the app developers themselves are in full control of their app's distribution and updates instead of relying on distro maintainers. devs getting some angry mails for bugs already fixed but not yet included by distros is tale as old as time.
- simplified dependency management. what's stopping the dev from packaging their app using distro's native package management instead? whelp, they don't want to deal with this stuff. It can be a hard work, and there are dozens of distros out there to support.
- protecting users data. when you run an app installed from your distro's package manager, you know you can trust it because your distro maintainers have vetted the app to make sure it doesn't read your mail or your browser history or your ssh keys. when you download the app from a third party source, you can only pray to god that those apps won't mess with your data behind your back. You don't have to worry about that when you use sandboxed apps like flatpak.
Yup, what makes flatpak more akin to the open source spirit is that new submissions to flathub are open source and rely on a PR model
https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/submission/
https://github.com/flathub/flathub/pulls
And software that exists on flathub is open and accessible in their repositories
https://github.com/orgs/flathub/repositories
Whereas snaps are a web based walled garden controlled by canonical
https://snapcraft.io/docs/using-the-snap-store
They both provide benefit as you explained, but flathub (flatpak’s default repo) is definitely more open in how it is handled
You still have to worry about that with Flatpak. Like, don’t give a calculator app permission to read all your files and access the internet.
but what if my calculator app needs to check its calculations with wolfram alpha
As an end user I actually love them (yes I know, sacrilege). Flatpak is my preference, but I also prefer pretty much anything to Ubuntu in its defailg state so that might have something to do with it.
None of the the benefits you state apply to something a distribution provides and so I don't understand why Ubuntu is pushing them.
Packaging applications is a hard work so they obviously want the devs to do it themselves. For example, canonical push hard so their users use snap for firefox because it's maintained by firefox devs themselves. Firefox updates very often and has complex build system, so I think canonical is tired of allocating significant resource to support it and want to stop maintaining firefox package if they can.
Flatpak:
To limit shady proprietary software from accessing your full storage / hardware.
You can manage the sandbox access through tools like FlatSeal.
Snap:
To ruin your day / user experience.
Both where introduced as a universal way to distribute packages on various distros.
why were things like snap and flatpak created?
If you're using a stable distro, the repo will end up with programs that are years out of date. So instead of compiling manually, you use flatpak/snap/appimage/nix/guix as an extra package manager. They also allow devs to release cross-distro packages.
I barely understand docker
although bloated.
I would rather have a native .deb package, this is why I use Linux Mint and if really necessary I will grab a flatpak.
With current ubuntu shenanigans better use lmde
What shenanigans?
That was showed in the op meme
Linux Mint doesn't use snaps by default
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it doesn't even come with snap installed. Idk why you're getting downvoted
Me neither, that was the whole point of the parent comment about using Mint.
Edit: the people have redeemed me from the -5 I was at before.
Maybe some people are worried that eventually snaps will be so ingrained into Ubuntu that it'll be too difficult for derivatives to remove?
idfk. just install gentoo, guys.
NixOS, but yeah
Yeah, you have to remove an apt preference to be able to install Snap https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/snap.html
the devs seem pretty against it.
LMDE is a distro?
Linux Mint Debian Edition
Isn’t Mint already Debian based? What is the difference between mint and lmde?
Linux Mint is Ubuntu based as it originally started as a protest distro against decisions take by canonical.
LMDE cuts out the middle man and is directly based on Debian.
If you use Cinnamon DE and like LTS releases; where secure patches are backported and feature releases are held back until the next major release, then LMDE is a good choice.
Mint is Ubuntu based which is Debian based which is just plainly Based.
I see! So close to LXDE.
Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment
Linux mint debian edition
cinnamon.
I like flatpak for someone who is terminally gui.
apt-get masterrace represent
Yes, but use just "apt" today.
Unstable cli warning says no
The daily stuff is. I switched years ago.
Good for you
Nala enjoyers be like:
Nala is fantastic! You sometimes also get a funny typo.
I want to know the meaning of the original image
For a few packages, yes. You can change this behavior, but there's no GUI for it.
I spent several hours trying to figure out why the fish shell configuration page (which is a dynamically generated local web page) wouldn't work, including uninstalling the snap version of Firefox and using apt to try to install the normal version of Firefox. Because neither version of Firefox could open the page, I spent hours trying to diagnose why the fish shell wasn't working properly. Eventually, I installed a different browser and it worked. I finally figured out that it was because Canonical tricked me into re-installing the snap version of Firefox via apt even though that is clearly not what I wanted. I'm still a bit salty about it.