730
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 145 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm going to create a distro where EVERYTHING including your web browser is launched through systemd and it's built from nothing but snaps, just for you guys. I'll call it "Oops! All snaps."

[-] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 80 points 1 year ago
[-] TrenchcoatFullofBats@belfry.rip 67 points 1 year ago
[-] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

What the hell? Half of the bytes on my drive are missing!

[-] LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

It should have a custom desktop environment called Crackle (or Krackle if KDE based).

[-] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

System sounds are snaps, cracks and pops.

[-] LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Just have to patch in the Linux sound drivers from the 90s!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago

You could call it... Ubuntu 24.10 the way things are going lol

[-] someacnt@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 year ago

What's with all the systemd hate? It seems to work well for me..

[-] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] RoverRacecar@lemmy.world 81 points 1 year ago

Bruh, more like I was already using Ubuntu, and then they uninstalled my firefox and replaced it with a snap.

[-] mojo@lemm.ee 45 points 1 year ago

I have no idea why people still use Ubuntu when all the news and talk about it has just been negative the last few years.

[-] recarsion@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago

I legit have no idea how Mint or Pop is not the default by now.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

because it's so easy 🤷‍♂️

[-] mojo@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

How is it easier then any other distro

[-] techognito@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Compared to say arch, gentoo, lfs. ubuntu is easier to install, but I believe the point you wanted to make is that there are distros that are as easy if not easier to install than ubuntu

edit: I see now that this might have sounded more condescending than I had intended, and for that I'm sorry.

The point I wanted to make was that there are both better and worse installers out there. Which is something I enjoy about linux and the different distros. You have the option to install something easy and just use your computer as you see fit, or you can tinker and learn different ways your computer can be set up.

[-] Sir_Simon_Spamalot@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

What about compared to Linux Mint or Pop!_OS?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're comparing apples and reactors. Ubuntu is one of the easy to use distros by design. Distros like that try to keep config file changes and things like that from the user. When that fails, the falling height for users is higher, as they now have to deal with a complex problem. The other ones are designed to be simple and require you to handle potential breaking changes manually by default, which means you're taught to do these things and won't be clueless when things get hairy.

You shouldn't compare Ubuntu to Arch. Compare it to Mint, Fedora, Pop!_OS, …

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] DavidGarcia@feddit.nl 35 points 1 year ago

people get way too riled up over this

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago

From the context of this thread, I have no idea what a snap is

and I'm conflicted on whether I should inquire

[-] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Say you have a web browser, and to play videos it needs some codecs and a player, and to display pages it needs fonts, and to ... on and on.

Before Snaps, when you installed the browser it would install the programs it needed at the same time, because the developer designed it to do so.

With Snaps, the program, and everything it needs, and everything they need, and they need, on down the chain all gets zipped together.

The good is that dependency management is easy, everything is in one place. The bad is that they're slow to launch because of how everything is stored, and you now end up with many copies of the dependencies, and their dependencies, on your hard drive instead of 1.

The above is just representative, but those who prefer optimized systems do not like snaps. Those who like things tidy with easy dependencies are wrong. I mean, they like snaps.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] backhdlp 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Snap is a universal packaging format (like flatpak) developed by Canonical (the company behind Ubuntu).

[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Look up snap and flatpak, they're both based on a distro agnostic image/packaging model that allows developers to package for multiple distros rather than building native packaging for every single one. Both systems also solve the problem of two softwares requiring separate versions of the same dependency which is a fiddly problem at best for native packages.

Personally I'm a fan of flatpak, snap is similar but wholly driven by Canonical and their business interests.

Both have features that provide a solidly good reason to use them, there isn't a clear "better" system yet. I prefer Flatpak personally but snap still handles some cases (daemon software run by the system or as root) better than flatpak.

[-] ensignrick@startrek.website 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fwiw, pop!_os doesn't have snapd by default but has a Ubuntu feel. Flatpak support is by default with their app store.

[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Fedora is a great choice too, that's where I point people who are coming from Ubuntu most of the time. I'm not the biggest redhat fan these days but Fedora strikes a good balance between stability and staying up to date.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] 4am@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

I liked snaps until I tried them

[-] Marzanna 22 points 1 year ago
[-] franklin@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

How does the fediverse feel about flatpak?

[-] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As far as I'm concerned Flatpak has won the "universal Linux package manager" war.

Snap is a non-starter because of its proprietary back end, appimage has no distribution or automation built in. Flatpak has its faults (why does it put things in /var of all places?) but it's the best I've seen.

I'd like to add: I think it's won not by being the best, but being the least worst. I would like to invite whoever came up with that com.flatpak.FlatPak bullshit to consider a career more suited to their skill set than computer programming, such as vagrancy.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] spark947@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I really like flatpak! But it has its limitations. Thats okay!

There is just a space for containerized images of desktop apps that are distro independent. Linus talks about this at a QA, but having a maintrainer for every app and every distro under the sun is just a waste (he used his diving app as an example). Flat park is a good solution for packaging up apps, and it makes sense for stand alone apps that have a lot of moving parts and don't need to integrate with the rest your intro. Their are basically 5 apps that I use everyday that install through flatpak. Stuff like discord and Joplin.

At the same time, if something is supported through the distro package manager directly, I would rather install through that. Especially for core system components, but also for apps that aren't really daily drivers for me. I definitely feel like I have to actively maintain flatpak installations, so if I can install without a flatpak, I would rather not. For small apps, especially simple command line apps, their probably isn't that much maintenance work to get them on the distro anyway.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] snowraven@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

It's as close to a "universal packaging system" as can get now.

There was a lot of talk back in time, when Ubuntu decided to forcefully shove snaps onto users. The thing is, Ubuntu could have embraced flatpaks like many other distros but it chose snaps which is not ideal for people who like an OS whose primary goals revolve around freedom and privacy. You see, it is the proprietary nature of snaps that gets them this hate.

Appimage and other packaging methods don't get this hate because they are open source and users have a "choice". What we are seeing against snaps is the result of forcing people to a choice, ofcourse the people in question are linux users - people who are famous about taking freedom of choice seriously. Yes, you can get ride of snaps on Ubuntu but you can get rid of lot of ads and stuff on windows with a lot of tinkering too - I think you see the point.

Many people tend to have a preference for flatpaks because they do basically what snaps do but better and ofcourse flatpaks fit into the "freedom and privacy" spirit of linux.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] PeterPoopshit@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I hate snap. On my installation of Ubuntu, snap applications can only access non-hidden directories and only certain directories in home. This is Microsoft Windows levels of bullshit and I just can't have it. I switched to Arch just to escape snap.

[-] squaresinger@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago

Tbh, the meme isn't wrong. If you strongly dislike snaps, get a different distro.

That's the cool thing about Linux based systems: There are enough for everyone and you can customize them any way you want. Just get something that fits your taste.

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Because my work literally forces me to use Ubuntu Desktop on server VMs if I don't want to use Windows. Yes, it sucks, yes, they don't know what they are doing, no, they won't give me other options.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Xirup@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I will never understand this controversial stupidity, why people can not use what they want and this without having "prejudice"?

[-] d_k_bo@feddit.de 35 points 1 year ago

The thing about Ubuntu and snaps is that they are pushing it and “forcing” its users to use it.

You can uninstall it using sudo apt remove snapd but if you then try to install eg. firefox using sudo apt install firefox — voilà! — snapd is back.

[-] Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

Not sure how they are forcing their users to use snaps any more than debian is forcing their users to use apt. It’s a package manager the distro is consciously supporting. If you don’t like snaps then you should probably just stop using Ubuntu.

Yes, I agreeing that symlinking sunsetted apt packages to install the snap version without prior notification is a bit underhanded: I can see they want to make the switch easy for casual users, but the transparency isn’t there for advanced users. I still think it’s a fine distro for newer and casual users.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] poopsmith@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

I've been using Ubuntu 20.04/22.04 daily for years now without any Snap issues. I haven't once had any problems and I have 20 snaps installed.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] ichmagrum@feddit.de 12 points 1 year ago

Ubuntu didn't have snaps when I installed this system ...

[-] halva@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 1 year ago

Snap is just flatpak but worse for most cases (the only exception being cli apps). The fact canonical are pushing it so badly makes Linux more fragmented for no real reason.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
730 points (100.0% liked)

linuxmemes

21603 readers
701 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 2 years ago
    MODERATORS