Ubuntu 23.10's Firefox Snap Enabling Wayland By Default

[Britoid]

How does the Snap version of Firefox compare to the Flathub version? Any benefits from changing to that instead?

(Edit: Please don't devolve this thread into a Snap vs. Flatpak discussion. My question is specifically on the actual differences between the Firefox Snap version versus the Firefox Flathub version. Thanks! )

The Flatpak version has better sandboxing when using non-Ubuntu.

[CochainComplex]

Pop_OS is a perfect replacement for Ubuntu. I think it will replace ubuntu in the near future. (If cosmic is a big break)*

*I know that it is based on ubuntu. But its more or less a matter of time until they will rebase to debian with their selection of packages and cosmic+flatpak

[Britoid]

Pop_OS is a perfect replacement for Ubuntu. I think it will replace ubuntu in the near future. (If cosmic is a big break)*

*I know that it is based on ubuntu. But its more or less a matter of time until they will rebase to debian with their selection of packages and cosmic+flatpak

Whilst both are dwarfed by Red Hat, Pop OS is nothing close to Ubuntu in terms of package maintenance and support.

[phwoar]

I use Ubuntu on my servers and there it just doesn't matter if some stuff is Snap or not. In fact, for some things Snaps are easier and more reliable than setting everything up and keepin it up-to-date manually.

If you mean you don't do updates but leave it for the snap system to do it automatically - after.. is it 14 days? - then yes.

But it's the work of a minute to set up a cron job to check for and install updates to deb packages every hour.

Fortunately, there are not many snaps on servers I control.

[WereCatf]

But it's the work of a minute to set up a cron job to check for and install updates to deb packages every hour.

Yes, and you can do that with snaps just as well. There's nothing stopping you from installing newer versions of the snaps whenever you like.

You also ignored the whole "setting everything up and keeping it up-to-date" -- Nextcloud has quite a lot of dependencies and those dependencies may occasionally break. I've got better things to do than constantly monitor Nextcloud-related news to see if an update requires e.g. changing something wrt. PHP and/or Apache2 configuration. Using a snap Apache2, Redis, Nextcloud and whatever else has already been configured to work together well and if any changes to any of the dependencies' configuration is needed, I don't need to know.

[reba]

Yes, and you can do that with snaps just as well. There's nothing stopping you from installing newer versions of the snaps whenever you like.

You also ignored the whole "setting everything up and keeping it up-to-date" -- Nextcloud has quite a lot of dependencies and those dependencies may occasionally break. I've got better things to do than constantly monitor Nextcloud-related news to see if an update requires e.g. changing something wrt. PHP and/or Apache2 configuration. Using a snap Apache2, Redis, Nextcloud and whatever else has already been configured to work together well and if any changes to any of the dependencies' configuration is needed, I don't need to know.

Sounds like the usecase for proper containerization.

[WereCatf]

Sounds like the usecase for proper containerization.

Snaps are containers.

[reba]

Snaps are containers.

Well, you said something about nextcloud and several dependencies you have to keep in synchronization.

That's why I said proper containerization using docker, podman etc.

Snap is somewhat inbetween packages and real containers and probably best used for single-application containerization, desktops and other simple usecases where a "just simple app" container is enough.

Whole services like nextcloud need proper care and thus vendor-provided, security checked containers for reliable updates.

[WereCatf]

Well, you said something about nextcloud and several dependencies you have to keep in synchronization.

You should've read my entire comment. I was talking about if I was installing it all manually versus using Snap.

Whole services like nextcloud need proper care and thus vendor-provided, security checked containers for reliable updates.

The Nextcloud-snap is maintained by the vendor, ie. Nextcloud.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that using Docker, Podman or whatever would still require me to keep track of any changes to Nextcloud that might require changes to the other containers' settings and I'd still have to configure them myself to work well with Nextcloud. Like I said, the snap takes care of all that, which is why I like using it.

I ain't trying to convince anyone else to use them, but I am very definitely saying that they're not as useless as people make them out to be or some sort of a devil spawn.

[phwoar]

You also ignored the whole "setting everything up and keeping it up-to-date" -- Nextcloud has quite a lot of dependencies and those dependencies may occasionally break.

Ah, you're using a BIG THING snap from the vendor of BIG THING. Trying this with snaps of Apache2 and PHP, should they exist, would have exactly the same issue (and more) compared to keeping the debs up to date of course.

What you're doing is offloading keeping up to date with Apache and PHP and ssh and.. security updates to the vendor of BIG THING, and if you're happy with that, fine.