354
Snap bad (midwest.social)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
78 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] [S] -12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

These are two incredibly persistent pieces of misinformation...

  1. Canonical provides snaps for Ubuntu. This is no more "forcing" you to use snaps than they force you to use debs, or than Fedora forces you to use flatpaks/rpms.
  2. Apt doesn't "prefer snaps" by any means. Canonical provides transitional packages for certain packages that got migrated from debs to snaps, but the steps for using another apt repository to replace one of these transitional packages are the same as the steps for replacing any other package provided in your base repos with one from a different repository: You add the other repository, and you tell apt to prefer that repository for the specific packages.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If you were running a previous version of Ubuntu, where you had deb packages which worked, over the course of a few updates, they replaced half of your programs with snaps (without telling you), which were unable to see additional hard drives, USB pens, printers, scanners or cameras, couldn't use plug-ins, couldn't use 3rd party templates or presets, and didn't respect any system settings for fonts/text size, icon placement and so on.

    Snaps were fine for "aisleriot solitaire" or "calculator" (assuming you didn't mind a 5 minute loading time) or other things which didn't need to interact with any file or system or device, but for actual programs for people trying to do work? Bag of shite.

    Now, I imagine some years later they must have fixed some of this rubbish, and I read recently they might have finally done something about permissions, but no, they didn't ask anyone before they swapped working programs for completely broken snaps. They forced it on their existing users, and some of us bear grudges.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -3 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    over the course of a few updates, they replaced half of your programs with snaps (without telling you),

    You don't need to lie. A full list of debs that have been transitioned to snaps is:

    • Firefox
    • Thunderbird
    • Chromium
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Sorry, I might have misremembered the exact process (this was probably three or four years ago), though no need for the nasty aggressive attitude (though my apologies if I offended you somehow).

    Maybe it was version upgrades (e.g 18.04 to 20.04) instead of updates, or clean installs/new installs/reinstalls? I expect it was some of one and some of another.

    At the time I used to (casually) maintain a bunch of Ubuntu computers for a few community projects, small organisations and older people who live nearby. I don't remember the specifics, I just remember the phone calls of "the printer isn't working" "Linux has broken my USB pen" etc, and the fix being "remove the snap version and install the deb version". It caused a lot of problems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    If that is true, then why are deb packages provided by Canonical for Ubuntu dummied out?

    Canonical FORCES you to use snaps, there is no other way to look at this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They do not prevent you from adding repos and installing from those. They don't even try to make it slightly more difficult to do so than it was before. Microsoft force you to use edge. Cannot really disable it. Can't remove it. Can't simply switch away from it. See the difference?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I haven't kept up with Edge Shenanigans since I no longer use Windows, but the last time I used it I had no issues using Firefox instead of Edge.

    Yeah sure you can add repositories to replace Canonical Sources to evade those dummied out packages, but you really really shouldn't need to do that in the first place.

    So the only difference is: MS enforcement is more stringent than Canonical, but they both force their respective ways onto the user (which may or may not versed enough to actually add/remove apt repositories).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    you can install firefox, but even if you click 'make firefox my default browser', it won't. It will open the settings, wait a second and then show you another button. Clicking that will do what you wanted - for web links. Pdf files? Html files? Searches from the start menu? Still all open edge.

    On ubuntu it takes maybe a minute to remove the firefox snap, add the mozilla repo and install from there. Those dummie packages are more for convenience than anything nefarious. I agree that snaps have been made unavoidable if you're not paying attention, but I disagree that it's a bad thing. Ubuntu is migrating from .debs to snaps, so it makes sense that those become ever more prominant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Oh so that's still a thing that you need to set every file extensions and protocol separately to the other browser. Yeah that is stupid.

    And it only takes a minute on Ubuntu if you Know what you are doing. The regular user probably only see that their applications are slow to start and need to search the internet why, if they care at all.

    And why is that? Because Canonical doesn't tell you that you installed a snap, Microsoft is "honest" enough and tells you that they are shitty and want you to use Edge.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Canonical provides transitional packages for packages that they've decided to provide as snaps. They're not forcing anyone to use snaps, they're saying "if you want the default we provide you, we're providing you with a snap." KDE Neon (my current distro, which is downstream of Ubuntu) has decided that they want to use the deb packages from packages.mozilla.org, so they provide an override. If you want to use the deb from packages.mozilla.org, you could grab KDE Neon's repository deb and install that, or just set up the mozilla repository and use the same pin file they already have.

    This is like saying "Debian FORCES you to use libav" Debian moved from ffmpeg to libav for a while. No, they provided libav and made transitional packages for this drop-in replacement. Some people didn't like that and made their own ffmpeg repos, and the process for using their separate ffmpeg rather than Debian's transitional packages was the same as the process for using Firefox from a different repository. (I was one of the people used some third-party ffmpeg repositories, and I was glad when they switched back to ffmpeg and provided libav to ffmpeg transitional packages.)

    Does the fact that the Ubuntu repositories don't contain Keysmith mean "Ubuntu PROHIBITS you from using Keysmith?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Canonical provides transitional packages for packages that they’ve decided to provide as snaps. They’re not forcing anyone to use snaps, they’re saying “if you want the default we provide you, we’re providing you with a snap.”

    Uhm... and why does the user have to transition to snaps? Why does Canonical provide those transitional packages while there are perfectly valid debs for the same thing? Certainly not because they have a vested interest in forcing it right?

    you instantly refute yourself, kudos!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Uhm… and why does the user have to transition to snaps?

    They don't. But Canonical will no longer be providing debs in primary Ubuntu repositories, so those transitional packages exist so that users don't wind up with an abandoned, old version of Firefox.

    Why does Canonical provide those transitional packages while there are perfectly valid debs for the same thing?

    For the same reason neither Ubuntu nor Debian provide debs for Google Chrome, despite Google having an official apt repository? Those debs exist in somebody else's apt repository. If you want to add that apt repository, you're welcome to. But those external packages aren't part of the system they provide.

    you instantly refute yourself, kudos!

    Your unwillingness to accept what I'm saying doesn't make what I'm saying contradictory.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They don’t. But Canonical will no longer be providing debs in primary Ubuntu repositories

    so they are forcing the users to adopt snaps.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    If I were giving you €50/month, and then one day I decided to give you USD$55 instead, am I "forcing" you to accept US currency? No, I'm choosing to give you something I don't have to give you in the first place in a different form. You can always reject my offer. You can ask someone else to give you €50/month.

    They're choosing how they want to provide Firefox. If anyone else wants to provide Firefox differently, Canonical isn't stopping them. In fact, Canonical literally hosts and does the builds for an unofficial Firefox repo with their free Launchpad service.

    Distributions decide what they want to package and how to package it all the time. Pretty much every time, someone is upset. But that upset is generally based on an unreasonable sense of entitlement.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    If I were giving you €50/month, and then one day I decided to give you USD$55 instead, am I “forcing” you to accept US currency?

    Yes, you are literally forcing me to accept your dollarinos, which, unless I exchange them MYSELF, are USELESS!

    You provided me, until an arbitrary cutoff day, always the negotiated currency (deb package) but then you, out of the blue, decide to change it to your currency (snap package).

    If Canonical want to do their own package, why don´t they just make a new branch and ditch Debian all together? I am not aware of ANY downstream distribution to ditch their upstream's package format, except Ubuntu. Well and those that lie underneath Ubuntu and ditch snap for the super upstream's (debian) package format.

    You can always reject my offer. You can ask someone else to give you €50/month.

    so either suck it up to Canonical, or go to another distribution provider? Thats your solution to your not perceived enforcement of snap?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, you are literally forcing me to accept your dollarinos, which, unless I exchange them MYSELF, are USELESS!

    Hold on, have I fallen for Poe's law?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    That's your pejorative to believe that, yet I am quite sincere when it comes to the fact that Canonical forces Snap on Ubuntu Users when debs were totally fine as other Debian derivatives use them with no issues.

    And as you can see on other comments I'm not alone with that stance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    as you can see on other comments I’m not alone with that stance.

    Being in the majority doesn't necessarily make one right, as shown by [insert election result you disagree with here]. But if you actually are serious about that, you do realise how entitled it sounds to demand that someone do free work for you in the particular way you want it done?

    And I believe you mean prerogative.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Canonical is a for profit company though.

    And yeah I always mix up those two words, so thanks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    And they're providing Ubuntu for free. If you were a paying customer and the contract you'd signed with them said they'd provide Firefox as a deb, that would be a different situation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •