305
Does ubuntu still install snaps when you use apt? (lemmy.world)
submitted 7 months ago by Waffelson@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 64 points 7 months ago

Ubuntu, please stop! Her neck is going to snap!

[-] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 40 points 7 months ago

Yes. Very mean.

[-] superweeniehutjrs@lemmy.world 25 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 43 points 7 months ago

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.
[-] kautau@lemmy.world 40 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago

but what if my calculator app needs to check its calculations with wolfram alpha

[-] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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.

[-] bluGill@kbin.social 3 points 7 months ago

None of the the benefits you state apply to something a distribution provides and so I don't understand why Ubuntu is pushing them.

[-] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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.

[-] Rikj000@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] Shareni@programming.dev 5 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] flemtone@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

I would rather have a native .deb package, this is why I use Linux Mint and if really necessary I will grab a flatpak.

[-] bruhduh@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

With current ubuntu shenanigans better use lmde

[-] null@slrpnk.net 0 points 7 months ago

What shenanigans?

[-] bruhduh@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

That was showed in the op meme

[-] null@slrpnk.net 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Linux Mint doesn't use snaps by default

[-] Shareni@programming.dev 4 points 7 months ago

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it doesn't even come with snap installed. Idk why you're getting downvoted

[-] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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.

[-] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] null@slrpnk.net 2 points 7 months ago

NixOS, but yeah

[-] Alejandro_@compuverse.uk 1 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago

LMDE is a distro?

[-] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Linux Mint Debian Edition

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Isn’t Mint already Debian based? What is the difference between mint and lmde?

[-] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

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.

[-] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

Mint is Ubuntu based which is Debian based which is just plainly Based.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev -3 points 7 months ago

I see! So close to LXDE.

[-] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment

[-] franklin@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

I like flatpak for someone who is terminally gui.

[-] crispy_kilt@feddit.de 9 points 7 months ago

apt-get masterrace represent

[-] jabjoe@feddit.uk 5 points 7 months ago

Yes, but use just "apt" today.

[-] crispy_kilt@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago

Unstable cli warning says no

[-] jabjoe@feddit.uk 1 points 7 months ago

The daily stuff is. I switched years ago.

[-] crispy_kilt@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago

Good for you

[-] mr_right@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Nala enjoyers be like:

[-] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Nala is fantastic! You sometimes also get a funny typo.

[-] kadu@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

For a few packages, yes. You can change this behavior, but there's no GUI for it.

[-] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 7 months ago

I want to know the meaning of the original image

[-] sailingbythelee@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

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.

this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
305 points (96.4% liked)

linuxmemes

21263 readers
728 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!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    poopsmith@lemmy.world
    zephyr@lemmy.world
    rtxn@lemmy.world