Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canonical To Focus On A New, More Modular Snapcraft - Current Codebase Goes Legacy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Canonical To Focus On A New, More Modular Snapcraft - Current Codebase Goes Legacy

    Phoronix: Canonical To Focus On A New, More Modular Snapcraft - Current Codebase Goes Legacy

    A few minutes ago a new Ubuntu blog post hit the wire entitled "The Future of Snapcraft" where immediately I wondered if it was announcing plans to move away from their own app packaging/store/update tech and shift over to a Flatpak world like the rest of the Linux ecosystem for app sandboxing, app store, and distribution. Nope, but they are going to overhaul Snapcraft's architecture...

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...ft-New-Modular

  • #2
    Sure some people might like snaps. I'm rather glad that PopOS has all advantages of Ubuntu but no snap dedication. Flatpak is default / snap optional.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't really have any preference between Snaps, Flatpak and AppImage (I use Flatpaks because I am on Fedora). But I feel like there is such a strong 'not invented here' vibe around these initiatives. Instead of fixing the portability of applications between distro's this seems to only further exacerbate the fragmentation issue over seemingly trivial technicalities from an end-user perspective.

      Comment


      • #4
        I do not really like snap, but it is not a case of invented here syndrome. It was designed well ahead of flatpack. My grip with it is that it is a very good solution for servers and clusters, but for deploying desktop applications, nope. They have done nothing to bring it to desktop users, meanwhile they enforced it upon them. You cannot install anything as a user, and have to be root. You cannot control what/when can be updated as a user. This has broken stuff for me in the past. I heavily use snap/juju for a semi-large cluster.

        Comment


        • #5
          Does anyone notice that Appimages are a bit more underrated compared to Snaps and Flatpaks? I actually had the best experience with them probably because they are not sandboxed, so they don't have all the issues that are caused by sandboxing, from which both Snaps and Flatpaks suffer. They also usually take less disk space. But I guess that the fact that they aren't sandboxed is precisely the reason there is less attention to Appimages.
          user1
          Senior Member
          Last edited by user1; 07 January 2022, 09:18 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thats too late too little.
            Core issues not addressed, still demanding BS as the forced auto updates and single source under full control of canonical out of spite. Snap was created not to please the user and community but to please companies.
            No Distro, desktop, project beside Canonical and a few companies support Snap.

            Snap has only one benefit compared to the other solutions, that it is good in rolling out headless/server software, but no one with a sane mind ever used it for that due to the forced update BS. Otherwise it just has a lot of downsides.

            Canonical, please, stop kicking snap, its already dead.

            Comment


            • #7
              Fuck you Canonical with the whole Snap crap!
              You're obsessed with taking control from the users on their computers.
              You're turning into Microsoft and it's disgusting!
              To all the developers out there, please provide your apps in different packaging formats instead of Snap or as an alternative to Snap.
              I will never use a Snap only package on my system.
              I recommend Flatpak or AppImage!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by user1 View Post
                Does anyone notice that Appimages are a bit more underrated compared to Snaps and Flatpaks? I actually had the best experience with them probably because they are not sandboxed, so they don't have all the issues that are caused by sandboxing, from which both Snaps and Flatpaks suffer. They also usually take less disk space. But I guess that the fact that they aren't sandboxed is precisely the reason there is less attention to Appimages.
                Yeah ...sandboxing causes issues when you have editors with extensions that are e.g. interacting with shell

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by user1 View Post
                  Does anyone notice that Appimages are a bit more underrated compared to Snaps and Flatpaks? I actually had the best experience with them probably because they are not sandboxed
                  Amen.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by user1 View Post
                    Does anyone notice that Appimages are a bit more underrated compared to Snaps and Flatpaks? I actually had the best experience with them probably because they are not sandboxed, so they don't have all the issues that are caused by sandboxing, from which both Snaps and Flatpaks suffer. They also usually take less disk space. But I guess that the fact that they aren't sandboxed is precisely the reason there is less attention to Appimages.
                    For me, I don't know how to install, or more importantly, uninstall an AppImage. With Flatpak, it's very clear to me how to install or uninstall an app which can be done via the Gnome Software. That has always been the thing that has kept me away from AppImage. Maybe there's a way to install and uninstall it like app bundles in macOS but I currently don't know how to do that. If there's such a way, I would certainly use AppImage in addition to Flatpak.

                    I remember some AppImages seem to install themselves upon execution but some don't. The ones that do install themselves, I don't know how to uninstall.
                    veeableful
                    Junior Member
                    Last edited by veeableful; 07 January 2022, 09:45 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X