239
submitted 1 year ago by igalmarino@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml

A new ‘app store’ is expected to ship as part of Ubuntu 23.10 when it’s released in October — and it’ll debut with a notable change to DEB support.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] rikudou@lemmings.world 159 points 1 year ago

Tldr: the new store only supports snaps, deb support will come later. OP, please provide summary next time if you link to clickbait articles.

[-] igalmarino@lemmy.ml 34 points 1 year ago
[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago

Or this time as both title and summary can be edited.

[-] wgs@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 1 year ago

Deb support will come later, but:

If the same piece of software exists in the Ubuntu repository and the snap store the new store will only make it possible to install the snap version.

So the title is on point IMO.

[-] mfn77@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

It's not a click bait per se. Even after deb support they will use only snap for applications that has a snap package and only debs if it hasn't got any snap package afaik.

[-] agelord@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

BUT, the "new" store is based on a community project which ALREADY supports both deb and snap.

[-] Recant@beehaw.org 55 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why is Ubuntu pushing snaps so hard? Is there objectively a benefit to them apart from Flatpak?

It seems like an odd hill to die on.

[-] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 43 points 1 year ago

Canonical is just weird like that, it seems. They tend to pick something and fixate on it really hard (Eg. Unity desktop, Mir, that convergent phone thing, now Snaps) and work on it until it's almost really good, then they get fixated on the next shiny thing and dump whatever they were doing to go chase that instead.

[-] JeremyT@lemmy.teaisatfour.com 14 points 1 year ago

Sooo they have ADHD and suffer with hyperfixation with the rest of us ADHDers?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] floofloof@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

They're the Google of Linux.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Agin@forum.basedcount.com 8 points 1 year ago

that convergent phone thing

Tbf I think convergence could be the killer feature which pushes mobile Linux into large-scale adoption. Also Purism has its Librem 5 phone as convergent, too. It's not just Canonical.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 37 points 1 year ago

There's a benefit to Canonical, the corp that maintains Ubuntu, which is that while snaps are open source tech, the server for the snap store is closed source and snap can't be configured to point at another store.

In other words, it's about centralized control.

There are some advantages to the tech itself, like live auto-updating, which is good for security-critical server apps, but over all I'm not a fan.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] nani8ot@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago

Snaps are used for Ubuntu's IOT distro, and also for their upcoming immutable desktop. They even ship kernel and mesa as snap, which makes updating less likely to break a system (in case of a crash while updating, user error, ...).

That's why they push snap. Canonical doesn't mainly aim to make a apps available to all distros like flatpak does. Just like now where all distros need their own packages, snap will coexist with other package formats.

For the user it's unimportant how apps are installed, as long as they're available.

[-] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Because they controll snaps. Their backend is proprietary and they do not support any other way of distribution.

Now there are some objective benefits to Snaps compared to Flatpaks, at least so I was told. Apparently they offer significantly better documentation and integrate more tightly with the system, allowing you to do more stuff with them.

This was a while back tho, I don't know where Flatpak stands today

[-] EddyBot@feddit.de 11 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] mfat 37 points 1 year ago

I never found out what's wrong with APT.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] pglpm@lemmy.ca 36 points 1 year ago
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] nottheengineer@feddit.de 26 points 1 year ago

Classic canonical move: Take community software, force snaps into it and then ship it.

[-] igalmarino@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

Yep, I can not understand why Canonical keep pushing snaps on desktop

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Because maintaining snaps is a lot less work for whoever maintains the package, upstream developers, volunteers, or Canonical. If I'm shipping software for Ubuntu and I can use snap, I sure as hell will use it instead of deb.

[-] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 8 points 1 year ago

Flatpaks are so much better than snaps. There's nothing that Snaps can do that Flatpaks can't do better, aside from CLI tools. But CLI tools should just be in Docker anyways.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] 20gramsWrench@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

because they won't need to maintain it, they won't even need to maintain the dependencies, some guy online will maintain the package and it's dependency for them, whether it's updated or not, it's going to launch, that's the whole point of those style of packaging

[-] Nullpointer@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Because they something to lock you in to Ubuntu. They want Ubuntu to be the only thing that uses snaps. They want to get snaps to be an Ubuntu exclusive feature, and once they can start convincing some random closed source devs to ship in only the snap format they have a hook to keep you on Ubuntu. And they want those random random closed source devs to be focused on more of the corporate world so they can sell some support licenses.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] zosu@vlemmy.net 8 points 1 year ago

do they get funding from hardware vendors? snaps use a lot more resources

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 year ago

Ubuntu is getting on my last nerve. At this point I'm going Debian on everything except Thinkpad, but only because it's Nvidia based and Pop!_OS just works on it.

[-] bladewdr@infosec.pub 9 points 1 year ago

All the servers I've spun up in the past few years have been Debian instead of my usual Ubuntu.

The last straw was kinda when I learned that installing docker via the install menu gives you the snap version instead of the normal one, with no indication that this is the case.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] m3adow@feddit.de 18 points 1 year ago

Maybe I need to reconsider Pop OS. Last time I tried they shipped with a broken kernel, but that's probably fixed now.

[-] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 year ago

If stability is a concern, Mint has been great for me

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Raincloud@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

The Fedora software app has been promoting flatpaks over native packages, even not displaying that native packages are available even if they are, requiring the command line tool to access some native packages. So I don't see how this is fundamentally different.

[-] knewe@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 1 year ago

The big difference is that Snap is partially proprietary. For those who like Linux for its free and open-source nature and all the benefits that confers, this is an unfortunate evolution that has a negative impact on the Linux ecosystem.

[-] bankimu@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And snap has other issues, such as it's very badly implemented. No sane person wants to see 100s of lop devices mounted on lsblk all the time.

[-] erwan@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 year ago

The fundamental difference is that flatpak is a good system, adopted by many distributions.

Snap sucks and only Ubuntu uses it.

They'll do like their Unity UI, wait many years until they realize their mistake then drop it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] lvxferre@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Yeah, nah, that's a dealbreaker for me. I'm back to LMDE when this happens.

I don't mind having snaps available but I'd avoid using them whenever possible. They're larger than necessary, slower than necessary, and I trust software checked by its original devs plus distro maintainers more than software checked by the devs alone.

[-] mvee@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

Looks like Ubuntu will be going the way of Reddit

[-] Auzy@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago

Honestly not sure why it matters, provided the store is full. Both are similar to end users

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CassiniWarden@infosec.pub 8 points 1 year ago

I've been using more and more flatpaks lately on arch and fedora based distros, i have no idea how snaps compare but seems similar? Seems an odd push from Ubuntu, but could make more sense than deb packages for non techy users perhaps?

[-] ISMETA@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 year ago

A big issue for me with snap is, that the server side software is proprietary. So it really really does feel like they are trying for lock-in

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Ubuntu / Canonical were working on Snap for some years when Flatpak came on the scene. They've been shipping Ubuntu bits using it since 2016. In addition to the legacy, Snap is more versatile than Flatpak in that it can be used to package pretty much anything, including system bits. It's also had a secure sandbox from the start. Changing to Flatpak would be a functionality downgrade for Canonical and Ununtu maintainers using Snap. In addition Flatpak can be used along with Snap on Ubuntu so there's no need to not use both for whoever finds that useful. Snap lets Ubuntu ship software using less work, which means more up-to-date bits in Ubuntu. Users can install other software via Snap or Flatpak, whichever they find more useful.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
239 points (94.4% liked)

Linux

48300 readers
633 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS