Ubuntu's Mozillateam PPA now forcing users over to snap install for Firefox.
3 years ago by PseudoSpock to c/linux
What use to be the PPA that allowed Ubuntu users to use native .deb packages for Firefox has recently changed to the same meta package that forces installation of Snap and the Firefox snap package.
I am having to remove the meta package, then re-uninstall the snap firefox, then re-uninstall Snap, then install pin the latest build I could get (firefox_116.0.3+build2-0ubuntu0.22.04.1~mt1_arm64.deb) to keep the native firefox build.
I'm so done with Ubuntu.
haha.. ubuntu on enterprise doesn't even touch 5% of the market, where 90% of it is RHEL and 5% another is Windows Server and some OSX.. so... I don't think canonical is dumb enough
*please read, enterprise market, not hobbyist. Hobbyist doesn't make money for ubuntu. Well if the hobbyist is a decision maker in enterprise, they probably will have effect, but the problem is, most of them opt in RHEL/Clones
On my corporate laptop, because they require ubuntu to.. well spy on us, I wrote a interface in front of snap to works like flatpak.. as snap forcing through on everything I work on...
At least I tried to disable it. and failed, so I wrote a piece of junk code to accomodate my flatpak muscle memory
Mint is great. Definitely one of the best distros around. PopOS I'd wait for their new DE. Though with Ubuntu going balls deep on snaps, all those ubuntu based distros hang in the balance. At least Mint got a Debian edition already and they are working on a new version right now. Or just use straight up Debian with flatpaks, which is what I do.
Mint also does not force either dpkg/apt-get/apt nor flatpak.
Even its GUI installer is a GUI wrapper around dpkg and flatpak, every application available on both shows a drop-down allowing you to choose between the two.
You can also change its config to allow other sources, in case you want to add something else like snap.
The Pop_Shop gives you the option via a little drop down of flatpak/Deb. I'm not sure if the option is flagged by application developers or system76.
I recently went to Nobara, not a Deb/Ubuntu fork, but its literally been the easiest, smoothest Linux install/usage experience of my life.
So, as someone that's been on flavors of Ubuntu/Linux Mint for me personal computer since Breezy Badger, any good distro recommendations? I've been using Ubuntu Mate and upgrading in place for the last ~5 years, so I've mostly avoided Snaps, but I'm looking to upgrade my computer and I'm probably going to need a fresh install. I'd like to stay on the Ubuntu/Debian tree, but I've been using RHEL on my work computer for a while now, so I'm not totally unfamiliar with that distro branch.
Also, should I be as concerned about Flatpaks as everyone seems to be concerned about Snaps?
Linux Mint doesn’t do snaps, you can add them but they are more flatpak friendly out of the box (software manager supports deb and flatpak install and upgrades). They also have a Debian edition that is nearly identical once installed.
For stuff like Firefox and other areas Ubuntu is pushing snaps, Mint builds their own deb.
That is to say, if you liked Mint there’s not a big reason not to use it.
I was on Ubuntu for almost ten years. The snap BS really started bugging me a few years ago, and I started distro hopping to find a new home.
If you're really wanting to stick with an Ubuntu derivative, you could try Pop!_OS. They remove Snaps.
I ended up settling on Manjaro. Access to the AUR is pretty awesome.
Manjaro and aur are not a good idea. I ran manjaro for a year or two. Things from the aur were constantly breaking and causing problems because of the manjaro repositories. If they were even able to be installed at all. There are many reasons not to use Manjaro. But if you want to use the Aur. Check out endeavor os. Very straightforward simple easy to install Arch. The Aur works perfectly and doesn't break randomly. Because they use the Straight Up Arch repositories with just slightly different configs
Interesting. I've been running Manjaro for two years now and I've found it to be extremely stable on my computer and my partners computer. I haven't had any trouble with AUR packages breaking either.
I hear ya and have recently been scaling-back my personal use of Ubuntu. I am a long-time Debian user for servers (since around the time potato was released), but always found it far too "long in the tooth" for use on a desktop. When Ubuntu first came out, it filled that gap perfectly and it was always my recommendation to people that wanted/needed to use Linux and needed it to "just work". This is especially the case with laptops. However, times have changed and vanilla Debian is actually a viable distro as long as you are not on the bleeding edge hardware-wise and/or don't want/need the very latest desktop software.
For my personal desktop, I've actually been using Linux Mint since around the time Ubuntu switched to Unity. From the moves Mint has been making lately, it seems that they are also wary of Canonical (i.e. having to revert things like snap out of their Ubuntu base). Mint has always been hedging their bets through their LMDE release, so I would not be surprised if they cut over vanilla Debian as their base sometime soon. I have LMDE on some older machines and it works great (they are still based on bullseye, last I checked).
I was a Xubuntu user for about 15 years but have an old EeePC running Debian.
I just recently moved my main, home computer (10+ yo EliteBook) to Debian 12 and am very happy. I will be soon moving my amateur radio "shack" computer (bought last year) to Debian as well.
Forcing Snaps and Snaps' terrible usage of disk space (in my experience) is what made me move. The annoying Firefox update warning only served to aggravate me further.
I do use a couple Flatpaks (did with Ubuntu as well) but it was my choice - not a requirement. I haven't had any disk use problems or bad experiences with them.
I can't comment on specifics. I'm back in linux after several years away in mac land. The snap experience is awful, and confusing. I have not had the same experience with flatpaks. They seem to act more like regular apps that you update. The issue with snap is that firefox will say the snap needs to update, and that the update is pending warning my I only have days (or hours) to use it, but no way to actually do the upgrade. Then it will say its upgrading, but nothing happens. I just keep using firefox, and every once in a while it may say something like the update failed (I honestly can't remember, since I just ignore any notification with the word 'snap' in it since they're all meaningless). Eventually, when I quit firefox, it might update and quit pestering me. But how knows? Maybe it won't upgrade, and then I'll open it again and it won't be upgraded.
Flatpaks, I can just update in the package GUI (Discover for me, since KDE) alongside other updates, and we roll on.
Distro-wise, I dunno :/ I like ubuntu cause its more standardized in terms of software availability --- most things will support an ubuntu package. However, I'm really considering just jumping into debian and going with the rolling releases.
Check out VanillaOS. I think it's pretty neat. Their webpage doesn't really get into the benefits as much as I think they should, but a very quick summary is that it leverages distrobox and some custom package manager to allow you to seamlessly install and run packages from other distros. It's also kind of an immutable OS (but not really). It lets you pick which types of apps you want during the install (snaps, fltapak, AppImage, etc)
I am not super in the loop about why people are so against snaps, but I don't like the centralized nature of them, and if that's also the general concern, then flatpak should be fine, since it's decentralized.
I saw a couple youtube videos about VanillaOS; I could certainly find you one of them if you want to know more.
Yes exactly. This is the main problem. It's one thing to offer Snaps as an alternative, but to force them on users is not the Libre/FOSS way at all.
I switched away to Mint and I'm very glad I did. I'm in control and it works perfectly. Fantastic distro. No Snaps BS and it uses less RAM and is faster than Ubuntu.
I would encourage all Ubuntu users to switch to Mint. You won't regret it.
You know what, enough is enough. Snaps run like shit in my system (IDK/DC why), I hate companies forcing their shit down my throat, and I was planning a clean reinstall anyway from Ubuntu 20.04 to 22.04. Might as well use the opportunity to go back to Debian. Or Mint. Or Mint Debian Edition. Who knows.
Next on the news, Ubuntu ("humanity") gets renamed to Amasimba ("shit"). /s
Feeling bold? Try MenuetOS, it even claims to have an http client.
Redistribution, reverse engineering, disassembly or decompilation prohibited without permission from the copyright holders.
no
After using it since Lucid Lynx 10.04, I switched from Ubuntu to Mint last weekend. I'm lazy about distros these days, and I really didn't want to switch, but Firefox instability was driving me nuts. The web browser must be reliable, IMO. It's a fundamental requirement for a desktop OS, and this problem didn't exist before snaps.
Yeah. I switched away from Ubuntu for all this crap.
I moved to Fedora for my laptop & desktop, and Debian for my home server. I'm considering switching everything to Debian eventually, but there's a couple dedicated repos that make using Fedora on my laptop much easier for now.
I'm considering switching everything to Debian eventually, but there's a couple dedicated repos that make using Fedora on my laptop much easier for now.
I'd recommend against that. Debian is fantastic for a server, but I think it leaves a lot to be desired as a workstation OS as compared to Fedora.
You can get it there/make it that way, but Fedora is just better from a user experience/convenience perspective out of the box.
I don't know. I like Debian. My home server also doubles as a desktop sometimes and it does a good job.
I'm mostly not super interested in cutting edge versions. I run a newer kernel and mesa than default Debian, but the rest is just fine. I'm fine with Firefox ESR, and lagging a little bit behind the state of the art.
There's a simple reason why Mozilla/canonical does this and that is security fixes. Due to the difference in support cycles of Firefox and Ubuntu LTS versions fixes would have to be manually backported to the system Firefox version and newer versions won't run due to library dependencies. Snap solves all of that.
Don't get me wrong though, snap is still terrible, but other than flatpak or doing the work of backporting it's the only option to get security fixes to Ubuntu
Previous to the switch to snaps, Ubuntu was providing the latest version of Firefox built for each supported Ubuntu release. I'm sure this was more work, but the older system library version issue was not a blocker.
Edit: in fact, Mozilla still provides an apt repo with Firefox deb packages built for each supported Ubuntu release.
But around the same time mozilla shortened the support cycles for their lts releases
and newer versions won’t run due to library dependencies.
Mozilla seem to be able to limit library dependencies in their builds: https://www.mozilla.org/...
But are they actually doing this? I am not seeing any changes: https://launchpad.net/... still has the .deb packages
I like the approach Pop OS takes. Their software store lets you choose between deb or flatpak when you install software. I've had issues with flatpak versions of some software, and flipping to the deb package usually fixes it.
Mint does this, too!
@Linuturk @PseudoSpock My problem here is that I don't understand the purpose of flatpak when Deb seems to have everything from my experience, but I'd love to be proven wrong.
@bear
Thank you for the very clean and clear explanation. I'll have to give them another chance.
All of that is good but you are overlooking the small detail that installing flatpack implies using up a lot more disk space than just pulling a distro package.
I can point one specific example with libre office: 3.9GB for the pack vs 785MB for the .deb.
We can argue disk space nowadays is cheap but overloading a machine with duplicated packages also goes against the main goal of running a Linux.
When I first started using it, one of the talking points was that Linux kept the system clean of clutter and that improved longevity for the hardware and delivered stability by not having unnecessary and unused or orphaned and redundant libraries and dependencies.
With flatpacks we get the latest and greatest - I'm a debian fan and I hurt for not getting more up to date software - but we are carting in a ton of junk that should not be necessary.
And the container/sandbox part is not that great, apparently. Debian wiki links to this to further educate/alert on the down sides of flatpacks. Debian is not the ultimate bearer of truth but they do move a lot of respect.
The 3.9GB is not just libreoffice, that number also includes runtimes. At most you would only install maybe around half of your host systems’s packages in runtimes for all the apps you use. There shouldn’t be any more usage than that. And even less if you stick to apps that fit your DE. Like if I just stuck to apps that used the gnome runtimes, I would have a pretty minimal installation.
Unfortunately, the dependency problem is really hard to solve, and at least they deduplicate what they can. Everything else works perfectly as well besides some minor issues with the sandbox connecting to the host system in certain edge cases.
Also please don’t link flatkill, it’s woefully outdated and every point on there has been addressed for years; it should be taken down.
I can point one specific example with libre office: 3.9GB for the pack vs 785MB for the .deb.
You already have most of the major dependencies installed natively as they are depended on for many other packages, and you're not including the space they take up as part of installing the native package, but you are including them as part of the flatpak.
When I first started using it, one of the talking points was that Linux kept the system clean of clutter and that improved longevity for the hardware and delivered stability by not having unnecessary and unused or orphaned and redundant libraries and dependencies.
Flatpaks literally improve this. The core system itself remains extremely minimal and lean when you use containers, in both the server and desktop space. This greatly improves stability and longevity. We all know how much of a pain it is to do a point release upgrade on a system with tons of installed software. Flatpaks do not have this problem because they are independent of the system and each other.
but we are carting in a ton of junk that should not be necessary
It is necessary, and it's not junk.
Debian wiki links to this to further educate/alert on the down sides of flatpacks.
Much like Debian packages, the Debian wiki is stale and outdated.
Flatpaks can guarantee you have a known-good dependency chain directly tested by the developers/maintainers themselves
What does known-good mean? What if a security vulnerability is found in one of the dependencies. With an old-style distribution there is a security team that monitors security reports and they will provide a fixed package. With flatpaks it's not clear to me if those developers will monitor each dependency for security vulnerabilities and how they will handle that. Will users even be informed about a security issue, will a fix be backported or will it only be available in the latest version?
What does known-good mean?
Known-good meaning a tested and working configuration approved by the developers/maintainers.
What if a security vulnerability is found in one of the dependencies. With an old-style distribution there is a security team that monitors security reports and they will provide a fixed package.
Flatpak is just another model of distribution. There isn't really anything that needs to change here. The bugs are fixed upstream and they get pushed via the method of distribution, which is Flathub in this case.
The security team in a given distribution is charged with getting upstream fixes backported and shipped. There's no need for this role because they're just shipped directly in most cases.
With flatpaks it's not clear to me if those developers will monitor each dependency for security vulnerabilities and how they will handle that.
The developers are usually the ones doing the fixes in the first place.
Will users even be informed about a security issue, will a fix be backported or will it only be available in the latest version?
Well, fixes don't normally need to be backported because flatpaks are usually fresh. They're just built normally in most cases.
For notifications, you'd have to follow the relevant projects directly.
Flatpacks include the dependencies with the application. So different flatpacks may have the same libraries over and over, wasting space. RPM/DEB install just the application and each dependency is a separate package, and packages that use the same dependency will share the one copy. So flatpack is better for consistency when running the app because everyone is running the same dependency version, and space isn’t as much of an issue anymore with nearly everything having more than enough storage.
LibreWolf is a Firefox fork with features removed which we don't want (Telemetry, Pocket, ...) and a few (privacy) features enabled (which can be deactivated if they're too annoying). I didn't had any issues with Firefox extensions as well.
I'm currently using it on Debian and it runs smoothly. Recent Ubuntu versions are also supported and you can install them via your package manager, see here.
I've recently distro hopped and the new distro came with Firefox preinstalled (had arch before but with xfs and wanted btrf snapshots).
Do you think its telemetry is so bad? I want to help Mozilla to some extent to keep them working on Firefox as I think Librewolf isn't showing much usage or support for Firefox itself.
@hornedfiend @Seltsamsel That's a good question and got me curious. I had a look at Telemetry collection and deletion from Mozilla. You can enter about:telemetry in the address bar to see what Firefox is collecting (even if it is not being sent).
You shouldbea able to turn off from settings. More options are present in the config. You can find github guides doing more hardening for sedurity and privacy.
Not sure about librewolf specifically but most of these firefox forks do these initial setups for you and maybeave a couple of addons preinstalled. You would still be using firefox. Beyond crash reports and some reduced usage metrics turning them off should hinder firefox much.
Hence me now moving off of it.
I'm curious, what are you considering moving into?
EndeavourOS. It's available for Arm64. Has firefox, has chromium, has vivaldi, and even has a widevine plugin builder in their AUR repo for the first two.
For UTM hypervisor, select the Arch for ARM from their gallery and install it. Then follow the instructions for Parallels to EndeavourOS it. Oh, expand the disk and filesystem first, though.
It's quite a step back in time for an installation process, though. Even after getting it installed and setup for KDE Plasma, still need to install a lot of things:
I stopped using Ubuntu because of snap a while ago. I tend to run Linux on older machines and flat packs tend to take much longer to load than native apps. I get that they have their purpose but I would prefer to choose to use rather than be forced. I’m currently trying out POP_OS! and it’s a welcome flavor of Ubuntu
They forget this
Most normies using linux distros use it because they don't have 16gb of ram and a massive ssd
Now the most mainstream linux distro does a lil trolling
Hot take: PPAs suck and snaps/flatpaks are better.
With PPAs, inevitably some repo that hasn’t been updated since 2015 causes dependency conflicts and you have to sit there and troubleshoot, or pick between the software you need and actually having an OS that’s not EOL. With snaps, you can keep your decade old dependencies all bundled up and still upgrade your system even if the package maintainer has abandoned it.
The issue people have with snaps isn't the containerization or the bundles, but the proprietary backend. There is no way to point the snaps at a different store other than the one canonical controls. Canonicals forcing snaps on people pisses a lot of people off because it's a blatant power grab, an attempt to get people dependent on something they have control over in a microsoft-esque move. Flatpaks and docker don't have that issue.
Hot take: it doesn't feel nice to have a change forced.
It should be the personal preference of the user to decide whether to use native or snap/flatpak. If native package manager decide to not support the package any longer it would be better to make user aware and stop maintaining app, than to install a snap package. This is a user's decision.
Also this can have far reaching consequences. Imagine you cannot use/install snaps on your machine due some reason, what now?
I tried so hard to embrace snaps and flatpak. I really did. But the snap service kept bogging down. Installs specifically of Firefox were ponderously slow to start up. And ultimately I ended up with regular installs, PPAs, snaps, and flatpaks all together with their own daemons, update paths, and quirks sucking up my system bandwidth and emotional resources. System was constantly slow. Felt like I was running Windows.
I flipped over to endeavours, really enjoying it. Feels like Ubuntu did in the earlier years. Great support community, lots of choice, but a straightforward path to just using your system if that's what you're there for. And the same computer runs a good 25% faster.
Not a fan of immutable distros like Silverblue because you’re giving a lot of control to the upstream, unless you have the ability and time to maintain those system images yourself. And if you’re doing that, except for within an organization, there’s not a huge reason to not just use a traditional distro.
If you don’t want that control, they’re great.
In NixOS you can do an overlay and just make your own package. If the package works, you can submit it to the NUR. If it's good, you can maintain it in the official channel. I'm doing both, the crappy fork of some GUI is in the NUR, the underlying service is maintained by me in nixpkgs
Nix had a huge learning curve for most folks, but it doesn’t suffer most of my complaints about control.
Ironically a full Ubuntu modular system made up of a bunch of snaps wouldn’t necessarily either. One of the cool things about snaps is that they can hold the kernel and other lower level things so you could build a “snap”-together immutable system out of various components.
Silverblue and its variants are a monolithic system image though.
So your saying a Snap based Firefox use case is limited to downloading a different browser... so it's effectively IE6? I agree, if that's what you are saying.
I can agree with that only if they solved the problems with extensions and a few other features that were not working with the snap version. If they did not, then they are assholes.
I use keepass to fill login forms, and that does not work with the snap version.
Just curious if you know why? I thought snap was just a package format, not a siloed container.
In my case, KeePass and ExpressVPN could not function. For KeepassXC, this was the reason:
It is impossible to support native messaging when a browser is running as a sandboxed snap. This is a limitation in snapd not keepassxc.
It appears they found some work-around with an extra script after installation as of 2 years ago. Basically, snaps are sandboxed, which is a feature. That wreaks havoc with certain tools, though. ExpressVPN's browser plugin was having similar problems, and on Linux, that's you're only GUI interface for ExpressVPN.
I just checked, and I was updated to the Snap version, and I had no problems with either extension, so they did solve the problems. Therefore, I'm not outraged. Ubuntu has the right to standardize their deployments on a system that makes their work easier or less chaotic - as long as it does not screw over their customers.
Edit: i was mistaken. I still use the Mozilla PPA, so the problems migjt remain.
I haven't had any problems with using Snap. I am currently switching from Chrome to Firefox. Firefox has ran great with Snaps so far.
But I also have an Nvidia RTX 3080. The Linux community hates both Snap and Nvidia. But they are working fine for me.
I tried PopOS but they didn't have the current drivers for my Nvidia card, so I switched back to Ubuntu. This was about a year or so ago
I am at work and can't check the driver version but they sound like the current one.
How is Steam's new big picture mode running for you under Pop!OS? I used to run Wayland with Steam's old big picture mode but had to go back to x because it wouldn't work.
I'm on ARM, arm64 to be more specific. There's no native Widevine package for the browsers. There is a way to rip it from the new chromeOS for arm64, and to then plug it into chromium and firefox... but not with snap firefox. And to top it off, flatpak doesn't even have firefox or thunderbird for arm64.
Hot take: PPAs suck
Agreed. I'd rather install manually than use a third-party PPA. I've had way too many problems, especially when it comes time for an OS upgrade.
snaps/flatpaks are better
I see this as a false dichotomy. The point of a distro is to have a wide array of stuff tested and available in official repositories. If the official repositories only contain half-assed snap ports, what's the point? I either suffer with a shitty Firefox or jump through more hoops than ever before to install it from external sources? Ugh.
I'm on Ubuntu again, and I've had it up to my eyeballs with snaps. When the time comes to upgrade again, I'm either going back upstream to Debian, or downstream to a de-snapped Ubuntu derivative.
Time to switch to Mint ( or Debian ). I have not like Ubuntu for a while but this forced match to snaps seems too much.
I use Arch myself. I have been considering trying Debian Stable with Distrobox / Arch. The stability of Debian with a totally current and massive package inventory ( thank you AUR ) sounds like perhaps the best of all worlds.
This is on an arm64 (m1) platform, in a VM.
I'm a bit confused to see that the hate falls entirely on ubuntu. Isn't the change in the ppa of mozillateam, owned by mozilla?
Edit: It seems that mozillateam is actually ubuntu.
I use the binary provided by Mozilla at https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/
I even wrote an installation script that takes care of it all. (For amd64, not arm64. I'm not sure if they provide a stand-alone arm build.)
TIL about desktop-file-edit.
I’ve been doing desktop files by hand for years.
My favorite thing about the Mozilla binary is that it auto updates just like Windows, as long as you have write permissions.
I tend to do the same. Can you link it ?
Ubuntu was my first-ever training-wheels gateway to Linux. I started from 8.04 Hardy Heron, and it felt like such a counter-culture move back then and I wanted to be part of the 'cool' edgy goth kids that DGAF about the mainstream normies.
15 years later, I still daily-drive windows, but I have many linux boxes for various specialist use-cases, mainly for scripting or self-hosting services, and still have 22.04 server versions running here and there. But this will be my last version of Ubuntu, and the only reason its still there is because migrating them is going to be no fun.
The Ubuntu today feels like a completely different animal than when I started. My breaking point was the 'upgrade to pro' message on every apt run. I DON'T WANT TO SIGN UP FOR YET ANOTHER METERED ACCOUNT. I use Linux to escape all the mainstream commercialism and monetization once in a while when I'm up for it. Next thing I know, it starts popping up in Linux OS's and even terminals asking me to login with an account so that I can be monetized.
Don't get me wrong, I know people need to eat and companies need revenue streams to pay their staff. Linux was my occasional escape back to my engineering and tinkering roots, but corporatism is creeping in like what happens to all good things (eventually).
Windows as daily driver?!? :(
Yes indeed, it just works when I need it to. Just 10 minutes ago I regretted installing Arch as I had some trouble trying to get my WH1000XM4 to connect. I was able to figure it out eventually as I was missing a bunch of missing packages for bluetooth and bluetooth audio that for some reason archinstall decided wasn't part of the core packages. There was zero prompts from KDE as to why the pairing was failing and I had to figure out with some trial and error which ones were missing and which ones I needed. And after doing all that I still couldn't get LDAC to work.
Seriously reflecting on my life choices right now, should have stuck to a distro with some sensible defaults when I just need shit to work. Of all the problems people have with M$, windows always just worked for me. Perhaps Linux and I just aren't fated to be together. I always come back a couple of times a year to try out the state of Linux and while it has gotten a whole lot better, its always these little gotchas that result in me telling myself "maybe next year will be the year of linux", which has been happening for the past ~15 years for me now.
I hope one day those gotchas disappear for you. You said yourself you want to get away from corporatism. Let's hope that one day, Linux can provide that for you.
Payment? What for?
For easily supporting developers of the apps.
For giving us more things migrating away from native packages? No thanks.
Oh wow. We should NOT let Flatpak have payment options. So the corporates will flock to Canonical's Snap and we will all be forced to use it just to be able to use proprietary apps we need for work/school. Shooting ourselves in the foot is the nature of Linux users. 🐧
For proprietary, non-free software I'd much prefer them to be sandboxed in Flatpak, thank you very much. So yeah, let Flatpak integrate payments!
For open source keystone applications, like my browser or my text editor, please let me have an unsandboxed native package.
I think desktop will go towards immutable, and flatpak will be saving grace for it...
Native package still the king, but when the immutable desktop become standard, then the only option is using new sandboxed app runner like flatpak, or native package change it's building strategy.
There are rpm-ostree, but immutable desktop focus on stability, and with flatpak, it will offer the best experience.
Funding non native packaging to absolve distros of their job is not something I would donate to.
I think you’re misunderstanding what the claim here is. The payments are not necessary for Flathub and flatpak (though they take a cut), it’s revenue for developers. Revenue they would have never seen if their app is packaged in distro repos like normal. Implementing payment systems in the native package format is basically impossible which is why no one ever did it. Flathub is giving app developers (whose job is oftentimes thankless) a chance to receive easier funding or even a livelihood. All around a good thing.
Mostly agree, except the last two points. Snaps are available anywhere...if you so wish (I wouldn't).
The biggest issue with snaps is that they are SLOOOOOOOW when compared to a standard binary install, or even Flatpak. Most of this has to do with fuse, but when you have many versions of a specific package, it just gets slower and slower.
The local versioning system also takes up a ton of local space by not expiring caches regularly, so it's not fit for lightweight installs.
Thanks for the clarification! I've never used Snaps myself (as I'd rather use Arch than Ubuntu), so I was unaware on how slow do Snaps run on an average computer. Again, sandboxing can be an overhead too large for an old machine.
For me it's the fact that Ubuntu forcefully shove snap into my system when I want the normal deb install with apt. I'm sure snap has gone better over the years but this is something that I absolutely hate. When I want to use snap/flatpak, I can use snap/flatpak install, and when I say apt install it should be deb install as it's supposed to be as a Debian variant. Linux tools has always been known for doing exactly what is told, whereas what Ubuntu is recently doing is the opposite of it
I think that would be a higher integrity move for sure. The issue of course is how to migrate existing users. If they just remove the deb, many users will just stay on the old version forever. They may never know the snap version even exists.
I get the problem. I just hate their solution.
I believe apt has the ability to "redirect" or "inform" the user on prompt. They could just show a message that says it's no longer available for this LTS version, and let them use snap or flatpak instead
Beyond the complaints about Canonical's hostility to Flatpak and other formats, but the real risk snap poses is that Canonical has a lot of control over the snap store, and lack of integration with distros beyond Ubuntu.
There's a vague promise of "new stores" and better integration with other distros but Flatpak is a truly open technology that gives you the option to install apps from ANY source and other distros are collaborating to improve it.
Many have issues with stability. Especially with firefox which comes installed via snap on ubuntu. Similarly compared to deb snaps versions occasionally have weird bugs. I personaaly had an issue with opening files properly using snap but worked fine on deb.
Also its unnecessarily forced. Deb works great and apt is widely used as primary package manager. No need to maintain the system with another one in the mix.
Its also repoted not to work well on otknr platforms like fedora or arch. Other package formats like AppImage, flatpak might be better in that regard though I havent used them.
For one, packages aren't cryptographically verified after downloading them, as is done with apt.
This is a massive security vulnerability.
Verifying a snap package’s authenticity seems to suggest otherwise. What's the source for your claim?
Your link is just guesses on a forum.
Link me to the official documentation that describes how signatures work.
You mean like https://manpages.ubuntu.com/...
Still better than a random user claiming
This is a massive security vulnerability
with no justification whatsoever.
Main reasons I see being raised a lot are Canonical's absolute control over the snap ecosystem and the dependency problem inside the snaps, meaning they often ship outdated versions of dependencies which might have known bugs or flaws.
The fact that it is forced on users is mentioned by other people here already. Afaik this is not a thing yet on Ubuntu server, so maybe install that one + the GUI packages? Not an Ubuntu user myself, so this could be oversimplified.
They are mostly Mozilla members, not Ubuntu members, who are responsible for the PPA. Are you sure, that your complaints and grievances are directed to the right address? See here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Contacts
Debian's packages are more up to date than those in Mint and PopOS. Why people always complain about Debian being out of date, but never complain about that with other distros is beyond me. I guess people just repeat what they hear or read without ever thinking for themselves. Some might call them sheeple, me I just become ever so slightly more disgruntled.
Yeah… For years I already suggested anything good but Ubuntu to those interested in trying Linux, but now I'm going to directly tell them not to touch it. Sure, you've got lots of online discussions from the past 20-ish years of people teaching each other how to install PPAs for up-to-date versions of programs or drivers and that's sweet. But how about a distro where that stuff is just available out of the box and one that doesn't force you to use snaps as if they didn't cause issues left and right?
Thanks for the warning. I’ll keep my eyes open. Perhaps it’s time to start distro-hopping.
I get that people don't like being forced, but otherwise I couldn't care less about Firefox snap vs deb. All problems I once had have been ironed out. On the contrary, I like sticking to the "recommended" path with more developer focus and hopefully higher stability. For my usecases I have zero problems with snap.
For one, the snap version is 115 instead of 116, so it's reverting me to an older version, which makes firefox want to wipe my profile. Not ok. Two, I was purposely using the Mozillateam PPA to get non snap installations, and they up and changed that on us with no warning. Then there is the matter that firefox as a snap is slower. And finally, I can't add the Widevine for arm64 plugin to the snap.
Snap for browsers is a terrible idea.
Same for our student PCs - As soon as the setup includes network homes snap becomes completely unusable. Applications just crash on startup because snap doesn't allow them to access the user's home directory
I also hate that anyone would side for snap based browser installation, and that any of you are upvoting it is horribly icky.
I like some things as flatpak or appimage. But not my browsers, I use a hacked in widevine plugin.
I know you do. I want my stuff in containers as much as possible. So maybe be less judgemental about other people wanting to do that, and I won't be judgementable about you not wanting to do that.
Come join us on NixOS, we have declarative state management and also chocolate chip cookies
That way you get the exact same cookie every time
@PseudoSpock add Linux Mint repository and install Firefox from there, as described here: https://askubuntu.com/...
Or switch to Linux Mint entirely, like I did :ablobcatbongo:
This is affecting my daily driver vm running on arm (m1), otherwise it would already be running Mint. :)
@PseudoSpock too bad
Yeah, other than battery life, I HATE the m1.
Firefox snap on Ubuntu is still slow to start after all this time. The binary from Mozilla starts nearly instantly.
This may be caused by pinned versions or preferences not being setup correctly in your apt config, rather than a problem with the PPA. It could have been caused by the recent 117 update.
In /etc/apt/preferences.d/ you can create files to control which versions and releases are used for which packages. This is how linux mint prevents snap from getting in, (even though they package their own firefox with its own customizations). Setting up something like:
Package: snapd
Pin: release a=*
Pin-Priority: -10
and
Package: firefox
Pin: release o=Ubuntu
Pin-Priority: -10
should get it working better for any further upgrades
The last time I had to deal with Firefox-Snap on a fresh Ubuntu install, it kept crashing on launch. Grabbed a tarball and that justworks (TM). That was around a year ago. Hopefully the situation has gotten better.
What PPA was it? I'm using this one and it seems to be still native. http://downloads.sourceforge.net/...
That said - I'm experimenting with NixOS to move to.
Biggest package repository, a very strange package manager that lets you reproduce exact environment for any package. But also takes a bunch of time to understand and you basically have to learn a whole new programming language to use it if you don't want to copy-paste examples.
Nix has "over 80 000 packages," according to their website. The AUR has 85719, so they're pretty close. This website seems out of date, as the AUR is listed as having 73914 packages, but it says that Nix is bigger. Either way, there's a lot.
Have you had any dealings with the FSF? “Forcing users” is standard operating procedure.
All distros make choices for their users. In fact, what applications are available in what repositories via what methods is practically the defining feature of a distribution. That in itself is not what bugs me about Ubuntu. It is the choices they make that bug me. That is why I do not use Ubuntu.
What's with FSF? If it's free software and SaaSS, there is no "forcing" by their words.
There isn't one for arm64. And even if there were, I couldn't make it use my widevine installation.
They don’t work. I am on arm and need to add in widevine. Can’t from a snap or flatpak.
Yeah, voyager and I are figuring each other out.
Linux Mint specifically excludes the snap store due to the many criticisms people have already mentioned here. Doc refers to version 20, but I believe it's still the same in the current version. Not sure about other ubuntu-based distros though.
The mint folks are gonna eye this whole development carefully. Personally I'd be more surprised if ten years from now Mint was still based on Ubuntu instead of Debian.
There is not and it’s not likely, they are two different distributions that happen to use deb packages. It’s sort of like installing rpm and expecting to upgrade Ubuntu to Fedora. Maybe you could do it if you fight enough, but it’s less effort to just install Fedora.
Ubuntu-based Mint isn’t going anywhere, they just maintain them both.
I use Linux in all my machines, currently: LMDE, Debian, Arch, openSUSE Tumbleweed, Fedora and Linux Mint. Yeah, I just realized I stopped using Ubuntu a couple of years ago.
:(
Already started my EndeavourOS vm last night. :)
The Debian package has different lib version dependencies than Ubuntu has. :(
Thank you, but no. I have the pinning correct. The ppa has turned to the dark side.
Nothing stopping anyone from installing by any other means though. This is just Canonical forcing their official channels to make sure they are pushing security fixes as fast as possible to desktop users.
Wouldn't it be faster to just use binaries directly from Mozilla?
Not necessarily. If you're just a single user on a machine, and you don't have any profiles to locate and move to match Mozilla's binaries, it would be just as fast. Client-side updates would be a pain to manage though.
Then you have a use case that doesn't hit the limits of it's implementation. I am both glad for you, in that it hasn't bit you, and sad for you, in that you have let yourself be sucked into the proprietary ubuntu app store, known as snap.
Because it forces me to have a snap directory in my home dir which I otherwise keep very tidy. At least let me put it in .snap or something like any decent piece of software. The snap developers don't respect users at all.
First, it's a version behind, prompting Firefox to ask me to erase my existing profile. That's not going to do. Second, it's not able to have Widevine added to it, which is needed for video / screen sharing in Teams web client.
Cuz the damn PWA and keepass extensions don't work.
I use snaps for Spotify and Firefox. I know that it's "forcing" something on users in an ecosystem where things should never be forced on you but as long as they work, I just don't want to fight them anymore.
They've succeeded. They've worn you down.
I swapped to pop and Debian.
I refuse to have Google and Microsoft tactics used against me in the Linux world, so Ubuntu are out for me.
I mean it's on a laptop that's plugged into my stereo and streams Spotify and my music collection. On my main system I don't use snaps but for that particular one I wanted kubuntu and Spotify and that was basically it. But I guess you are right about them wearing me down.
Just use the flatpak versions instead. I've been using the spotify flatpak for years now and the firefox flatpak for a few week since switching to debian (they package firefox esr which I refuse to use)
@lemmy.ml
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.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
go to feed...
@lemmy.ml
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.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
go to feed...
Yeah they’re all in on snaps. Vote with your distro choice.
save