9 ms·

I used to use Ubuntu for everything and was very happy in the massive Ubuntu ecosystem with a .deb for everything till I was forced to use Snap a few releases a

I used to use Ubuntu for everything and was very happy in the massive Ubuntu ecosystem with a .deb for everything till I was forced to use Snap a few releases ago for installing even some basic utils I used on a daily basis. I then had Snap constantly hang on installs and just break for no apparent reason and waste my time debugging it. It didn't "just work" anymore. Swapped to Arch and haven't looked back yet, Arch took me a lot more work to get set up but once it was it's been pretty invisible, which is how I like my OS to be. I'd probably happily swap back to Ubuntu if I read somewhere that Snap was removed entirely/canceled or something.

bigmattystyles 4y ago
I think I was bit by snap (Firefox refusing to start) - I just don't have the mental energy to learn what snap is and why I can't or shouldn't just use apt-get like I always have. Or do I have to use both now? (edit: if you want to quickly answer great, but I'm really putting my frustrations into words)
rpdillon 4y ago
I strongly recommend Pop!_OS as a great solution for 'snapless Ubuntu '. I buy System76 machines with it, but also install it on a bunch of my other non-System76 machines. The whole family uses it.
Jenk 4y ago
Arch does have a slight hangup - you can't pin versions of stuff without creating a whole new pkgbuild.
shinjitsu 4y ago
I've loved ubuntu for a while as well, but snaps are making me want something new - any suggestions for a "I'm middle aged with children so I need an it just works distro"?
- nehal3m 4y ago
  I was in the same boat and switched to Fedora 6 months ago on desktop and laptop, the Cinnamon spin. It gets out of the way and up until now has just worked. No hardware issues except for the fingerprint reader.
- mikae1 4y ago
  > any suggestions for a "I'm middle aged with children so I need an it just works distro"? The latest and greatest recommendation is now openSUSE Tumbleweed (rolling yet stable). Fedora was the recommendation of 2021. Manjaro was the recommendation of 2020. Try one and see if it works on your hardware. If not, pick the next one. :)
- jherskovic 4y ago
  Pop_OS!, hands down. Ubuntu without the crud, with sensible UI choices. The Mac of Linuxii.
  - jlkuester7 4y ago
    Seconded. I am also a fan of Linux Mint for very similar reasons. Ended up recently switching from Mint to Pop, though because I like modern Gnome more than Cinnamon (sue me). Mint was pretty much rock solid on my Dell XPS. It just worked. Pop has been a bit more exciting, but still a great distro!
- poulpy123 4y ago
  I recently discovered ZorinOS and while I didn't use it long enough to advise it strongly, I found their philosophy of proposing a simple system well integrated interesting
amelius 4y ago
I would love to switch away, but nVidia is forcing me to use Ubuntu on their Jetson series of products.
gtirloni 4y ago
I think you could have a very polished desktop with Fedora and flatkpaks (no daemon) without much work, but I'm glad Arch is working for you.
bxparks 4y ago
Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu but does not use snap. Doing "a lot more work" to install an OS does not sound appealing.
- nagyf 4y ago
  Yeah, setting up arch for the first time takes time. For newbie users it is definitely not appealing process, and also I would not recommend it. It's not a long process, but you do everything yourself and all this in the terminal (no GUI installer). I learned a lot about linux when I decided to try Arch. And as OP, I also never looked back :)
  - rgoulter 4y ago
    My experience with Arch (which I tried after I'd used Linux Mint) was that for the first few weeks I was constantly consulting the Arch Linux Wiki to get anything done. -- I mean, yes, the emphasis is on "learned a lot". The Arch Linux Wiki is a fantastic resource.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Installing Arch (or even Gentoo) is worth doing at least once just to learn a bunch about how the parts work together. Heck, even just reading the installation guide gives you a better understanding of how a Linux machine operates.
- pxeboot 4y ago
  Installing Arch with the cli installer [1] is pretty straightforward these days. It only becomes a lot more work if you have very specific preferences on partition layouts, filesystems and bootloaders. In my experience, changing these things on Ubuntu was even more difficult and less documented. [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/archinstall https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/archinstall
  - mkl 4y ago
    I haven't tried Arch, but in my experience changing those things in Ubuntu setup is simple and can be done in the GUI installer - I do it every fresh install. I haven't tried changing the bootloader; haven't had the need to.
roter 4y ago
For me it is just Firefox that I don't want in snap form. The Mozilla team still puts out a .deb version via PPA [0]. You should probably also pin to this source so that the snaps don't get installed [1]. [0] https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/ubuntu/ppa?field.series_filter=kinetic https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/ubuntu/ppa?field... [1] https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2022/04/how-to-install-firefox-deb-apt-ubuntu-22-04 https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2022/04/how-to-install-firefox-d...
- blacksmith_tb 4y ago
  I agree, and it's a little depressing to have the same "now I have to go fix that" relationship with two OSes, Ubuntu and macOS (I guess if I used Windows more than occasionally it'd three for three). Since I did all that on 22.04, I am a little nervous that it will get clobbered if I upgrade to 22.10...
severino 4y ago
I also use Ubuntu a lot, and while I'm disappointed about this Snap thing, I'm still not looking for alternatives. At least until 22.04 I could dodge snaps pretty easily, but now, since Firefox is now a snap package, things went worse, at least for me. I gave it a try and, while the experience was not as bad as I feared, I soon encountered problems with things like trying to use a smartcard reader for signing documents, something that used to work out of the box with the non sanboxed version of Firefox and now it's broken with snaps (or at least some weeks ago). I ended up downloading a Firefox tarball from the official site. I know you can use a PPA for that, but I don't feel comfortable having software as critical as a web browser from a third-party Ubuntu PPA. Maybe I should give Pop OS a try...
- stevekemp 4y ago
  I run Debian on all my systems, and to be honest firefox is something I always maintain separately. /opt/firefox contains the latest binary download from the official site. The application is one that updates frequently enough that the gain is worthwhile.
  - bornfreddy 4y ago
    This. The packages make sense for the apps that don't change frequently, but browsers don't match this description.
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      It's the opposite of the way things should be. Package managers should have the most utility for applications that update frequently, because isn't the raison d'etre of a package manager to make updating programs easier? Some distros manage to get it right. I haven't had any trouble using OpenSUSE Tumbleweed's packaged Firefox.
      - kzrdude 4y ago
        The package repository should be the off-the-shelf items in the grocery store, while installing separately is the big-ticket and custom made items. Installing apps separately doesn't scale very well, but it makes sense to just do it for firefox and certain others. IMO.
abvavgjeremy 4y ago
Same, but I went with Debian as I wanted to stay in the .deb world.
- aliqot 4y ago
  Let me start by saying Debian rolling release is the truth. That being said, I worry about the archaic community and contributor-tooling behind debian to be a barrier that will lead to its demise though. Makes me sad, but it is what it is. We are all getting old, and to us this interface looks normal, but to new people and those making the apps that the kids depend on, it looks like a shitshow of antiquated code. Nobody wants to interact with savannah, it's ugly, move those projects somewhere else. Nobody wants to use mailing lists or byzantine social arrangements through IRC just to get their package submitted. I've got to be real with you, not a lot of people give a shit about 'free' beyond price either. Make non-free the default and put 'free-only' as the apt option. I love free software and it hurts me to say it, but there's a reason why AUR is killing the game right now. It's easy to use, easy to enter, easy to see people using your code in a mainstream OS without having to opine to holy neckbeards for the mercy to allow your package to be published. Debian is a great OS, and I'd happily use it for the rest of my life if given the choice, but reality is staring me in the face that this won't last in its current form, and its current form won't be maintained if anything changes. It's a catch-22.
  - nsteel 4y ago
    > Make non-free the default Didn't they just vote to do this?
    - ixtenu 4y ago
      No, the recent change [0] was to add non-free firmware to the official installer (instead of relegating it to a separate unofficial installer). GP, however, was talking about the apt repository: the non-free apt repository is disabled by default. This hasn't changed and is unlikely to ever change. The non-free apt repository be enabled via a trivial /etc/apt/sources.list edit. [0]: https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Non-Free-Firmware-Result https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Non-Free-Firmware-Resul...
krn 4y ago
> Swapped to Arch and haven't looked back yet, Arch took me a lot more work to get set up but once it was it's been pretty invisible, which is how I like my OS to be. I think that Fedora Workstation[1] is a #1 alternative to Ubuntu in terms of smoothness and ease of use. And if .deb is a requirement – then simply Debian. [1] https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/ https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/
- Kwpolska 4y ago
  Another good alternative could be openSUSE: https://www.opensuse.org/ https://www.opensuse.org/ - also pretty smooth, with user-friendly configuration tools, and no snap nonsense. WSL users might also be interested in using that for their distro instead of Ubuntu.
  - tesseract2 4y ago
    I used to use opensuse around 2010, and had very pleasant experience with it. Things just worked, and their Yast tool was very handy. I used to joke that opensuse is the Mercedes of linux distro :). I am wondering why it isn't more popular. Is there any sentiment/experience people would like to share about this distro?
    - stinkytaco 4y ago
      It's the second biggest Linux company behind Redhat, so I think it's reasonably popular. It's also been a while since I used it, but I'll also point out that it's developed primarily in Germany, so it's entirely possible it's just not as popular in the English speaking community. However, the licensing agreement with Microsoft put many people in the open source community off, so I think that's contributed to its decline among hobby users.
    - Kwpolska 4y ago
      Ubuntu does a pretty good job marketing-wise, many people start they journey with Ubuntu and never look for other distros. Or on the other hand, they end up on advanced/continuous-maintenance distros like Arch Linux.
tyingq 4y ago
Snap has also ruined Ubuntu for me, and I've moved to Debian and/or Alpine depending on the use case.
mkurz 4y ago
Same here. Ubuntu user since the beginning (2004). Switched to Arch half a year ago, will never look back. I don't understand why Ubuntu tries hard to scare away users from what used to be a solid OS with things like Mir, Unity, snap,... Even now the modified Gnome it comes with by default. I don't get it.
- pmontra 4y ago
  I think that they are looking for a way to make money. A snap app store managed by them could be a source of cash. I'm still on 20.04 and maybe I'll switch to Debian or PopOS. I need to find the time to experiment. I'll buy a second SSD and dual boot.
  - gexla 4y ago
    With open source apps though? My guess is the idea of a store is a commonly known UX (App store, Play store.) And the snaps give you a way of installing more updated versions of software than the package repos provide.
    - pmontra 4y ago
      I'm fine with the repos. After all what am I using? Firefox (I know how to switch to PPA), Thunderbird (with the features that were there 10+ years ago), LibreOffice. Slack is a snap and customers use it. Server side stuff is usually docker. Languages have their own package manager or an asdf plugin. Emacs is apt-get. Is GIMP still an apt? It seems they are going for flatpack https://www.gimp.org/downloads/ https://www.gimp.org/downloads/ Not a fan of that too.
smashed 4y ago
My first encounter with snaps was launching gcalc, the basic built-in calculator app. At some point after an update, launching that app would take multiple seconds. How could the most basic gtk app be so slow to launch. Investigating further, I found the update had transformed the normal gcalc package into a snap, probably just to prove how great snaps could be for desktop apps? What a bad way to introduce your latest tech canonical. From then on, my opinion of snaps was very negative and I still do everything possible to avoid them. Even if they are technically great or more secure, canonical messed up their introduction and are now stuck pushing a dead horse.
- pbhjpbhj 4y ago
  My last Kubuntu update (to 22.04) broke because, I think, I'd disabled snaps and the update required snap installs (including Firefox). The update had a "install snap version of Firefox" stage with the only option being OK/Yes ... so install broke. They were so up themselves that they removed the option to cancel snap install despite it not being for essential elements of the OS; I had to kill them installer. My first brush with fat-packages was Digikam stopping producing .deb packages, it put in so much overhead I couldn't run it on my (admittedly weak) system. The forced use of Firefox snap lost configuration, then failed to work properly (permission problems) ... it's like how the use of file managers via sudo was stopped, seemingly without a proper plan to replace it; make the new tech first, then implement it when it works! It's like going back to Windows, having fragmented app sources and forced updates that wreck everything. I'm not sure where to move to next, I came to Ubuntu years ago because I no longer wanted to do the config work necessary to run Slackware. Looks like Mint/Arch/Debian are contenders.
  - tannhaeuser 4y ago
    Tested Kubuntu after frustration with gnome 3+ and over a decade on Ubuntu, but was very disappointed. Someone more knowledgable than me strongly recommended KDE Neon (Ubuntu LTS-based distro by KDE themselves) over Kubuntu. Me, I figured I don't need K apps and a full-fledged desktop environment; ended up going back to Mac OS for now.
  - remram 4y ago
jonesnc 4y ago
I'm on Ubuntu Server 22.04, and I've never had to use Snap. Is it exclusively a Desktop thing?
- garblegarble 4y ago
  No some server packages are snaps -- e.g. lxd
  - e12e 4y ago
    Yeah, lxd was the first one I noticed (with the implication that it's not likely to work on eg Debian - but rather be canonical-only thing). I see juju is recommended to be installed via snap, and landscape is recommended to install via juju: https://juju.is/docs/olm/installing-juju https://juju.is/docs/olm/installing-juju https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/landscape-beta-juju-installation/31538 https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/landscape-beta-juju-installat... https://ubuntu.com/blog/landscape-beta-test-the-landscape-server-migration-to-ubuntu-22-04-lts https://ubuntu.com/blog/landscape-beta-test-the-landscape-se...
- pmontra 4y ago
  The letsencrypt certbot package has been a snap for a long time. It's their recommended choice even on Debian https://certbot.eff.org/ https://certbot.eff.org/
  - Andys 4y ago
    Its a good opportunity to switch out certbot for something else, there are some great alternative options on github
    - jpb0104 4y ago
      Fan of https://github.com/dehydrated-io/dehydrated https://github.com/dehydrated-io/dehydrated
- mekster 4y ago
  - bitcoin-core - bottom (Modern top)
simion314 4y ago
I have a ubuntu server, I needed an app that is not in the repos, I found a snap of it, it worked great (it is a CLI app), so there are good use cases for this tech, it needs probably more optimizations but hopefully it does not get killed, some competition is good. Btw I used Arch , when I had time and tinkering with software was still pleasurable( I could do a full dual boot install without any documentation in one hour but this kind of stuff displease me this days)
compsciphd 4y ago
I used to defend snap with the idea that it makes sense for some apps, i.e. "firefox" where updating firefox while its running is bad news. Except, snap can't update applications while they are running! i.e. try to do a snap refresh while firefox is running, nothing to update, because its running, quit it wait for all processes to die and then refresh, and it will update and cause you to wait 30-60s while it does it, and then you can restart firefox. This has to be one of the most idiotic design decision ever made by a containerized application system showing the designers don't understand containerization at all. one of the primary points of containerization is the ability to have multiple copies of an application running in parallel using different "application images". One should be able to upgrade (i.e. install a new image in parallel to the old one) without disrupting existing execution environments. Basically all firefox has to do is 1) if a container is running for the current user, execute firefox in its context 2) if no container is running for the current user, create a new container 3) every so often, garbage collect old images that don't have containers running for them. these concepts are so simple, even docker basically does it! and that's my rant for the day.
- mxkopy 4y ago
  I thought it was really funny when I tried to update some stuff with the snap gui, and it threw the error - "Can't update snap-store, the application is running" or something like that
- cgriswald 4y ago
  > i.e. try to do a snap refresh while firefox is running, nothing to update, because its running, quit it wait for all processes to die and then refresh, and it will update and cause you to wait 30-60s while it does it, and then you can restart firefox. Oh, it's worse than that. When there is an update available but firefox is running you get: > % snap refresh > All snaps up to date. It doesn't even tell you there is an update and that you need to close firefox to get it. In fact, it tells you there isn't one.
  - AaronFriel 4y ago
    This seems broken, full stop. Can Firefox itself, when installed via Snap, notify the user that it needs security updates? If so, can users effectively do that, or do they have to know this incantation of closing, waiting, running a terminal command, and restarting?
mixmastamyk 4y ago
After 15 years switched to Mint Cinnamon, it's quite nice now. It is easier than ubuntu because removing snap is no longer a task. Next up need an alternative to Firefox, it's very disapointing how much has to be configured to turn off all the bullshit analytics, "colorways?", and get a blank new tab page.
- 6c696e7578 4y ago
  I don't think there'll be a good alternative until Firefox isn't the alternative to Chrome.
Ptchd 4y ago
I also switched to Arch... the only issues that I've had is that sometimes the update process breaks and needs manual intervention.
registeredcorn 4y ago
I'm interested to know: What made you choose Arch over Fedora? I had a somewhat similar experience to you and tried Fedora first and it works well. Fedora seems to follow the same "just work" direction that Ubuntu aimed/aims for, minus some aspects I wasn't a fan of. Since Fedora worked for me, I never bothered checking out any other distributions. Was there a big draw to Arch over some of the others, or was it just the first one you tried out and stuck with?
- dwaite 4y ago
  Speaking for myself - Red Hat's package manager cratered on an upgrade in the past (early 2000s) when it ran out of user space, and my investigation was that I hit a pretty core issue with the package manager design itself. Since it isn't something where I can easily test if the problem still exists, I just avoided RPM completely. That means I have a knowledge and learning benefit in using other systems, and even in learning new (simpler) systems over investing in Fedora. The split between Fedora and RHEL is also not IMHO as clearly advertised as with other distributions, so I do worry that I will hit a very expensive support wall that might also require me to switch distributions.
jrsj 4y ago
I’ve been using EndeavourOS lately. It’s less of a distinct distro and more a really convenient Arch installer to get to a usable system quickly. And without all the extra BS of Manjaro — once you’ve installed it, you’re basically just running Arch. It installs packages directly from Arch, etc.
- tetris11 4y ago
  Arch has an official installer now too. Never been easier.
yamtaddle 4y ago
Snap is so bad that everyone who's not at Canonical (and probably even most of them) can tell it should go away. It's plainly not the right solution.
wooque 4y ago
I don't why people make so much fuss about snap. Just purge snap and stop complaining. I did this when I run Ubuntu. Ubuntu still is offers pretty polished and reliable OS that is easy to install and has most third-party support.
- psanford 4y ago
  Because more and more things are only packaged as snaps.
  - wooque 4y ago
    Only Firefox is shipped as snap on default install. But Firefox packaged by Ubuntu was always gimped as they didn't enable certain optimizations like PGO/LTO so official tar.gz from Mozilla was superior anyway. (They fixed this recently for snap). I think it's similar for Chromium. So I didn't use snaps and I never been in situation that I needed to use snap.
    - psanford 4y ago
      Firefox isn't the only thing that has been switched off .deb and to a snap. LXD, for example, has been shipping as a only a snap for years. But even if it were only firefox, telling people they should download tarballs instead of having their distro ship packages is really missing the point.
- yakubin 4y ago
  The problem is when you instruct a colleague to check something using nmap, they install nmap using snap and are surprised it doesn't work, while you are left wondering what the hell is wrong with their computer, oblivious to the footgun Canonical put into their distro; until you remember again after a decade+ of not using Ubuntu. Canonical shouldn't push out broken things like that. It's supposed to be a distro where stuff Just Works(TM).
zekrioca 4y ago
I second this. I understand how hard it may be to maintain software these days, and that’s the whole point of snap, but the way it is implemented seems broken. It can simply break the whole system, it is like it uses one huge semaphore for all ‘transactions’ it commits in the ‘snap database’ (whatever it is) and if the transaction doesn’t complete, the whole system stalls. Only recourse is reboot. Don’t get me wrong, snap is like a great conceptual ideal, but it seems to work only for Ubuntu/Canonical developers (or to people with access to them), no one else. It is not well programmed/thought for some reason. Pretty stupid issues, and the read-only fs thing is also weird, how can one test things On-The-Go?
- tannhaeuser 4y ago
  > I understand how hard it may be to maintain software these days ...* I can't see it being harder than during the forming years with ever-changing libs and tools. Haven't seen a new end-user desktop app on Linux for over a decade either.
  - zekrioca 4y ago
    Yes, I agree. However, this is the main execuse Canonical devs cite when asking why they wouldn’t provide a *.deb package. When one pushes more, they do not elaborate and roll back to the maintainability execuse.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Last time I poked at Desktop Linux I tried all three of the major solutions for this, and the only one I could tolerate was AppImage, but its ecosystem seemed a bit weak and its official (I think?) site & repo were... not confidence-inspiring.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
Canonical really showed their colors with Snap I think. The base concept is obviously one desired by many users, as evidenced by the existence of alternatives like Flatpak and AppImage which both(?) predate it, not to mention ROX AppDirs, GNUStep Application Bundles, and a few others. But Canonical insists on their own implementation which is entirely controlled by them. Only they have a Snap repo, they follow the hated Windows model of forced updates, etc. Someday I think Ubuntu will have to give up Snaps to remain relevant and switch to (probably) Flatpak, but they're going to lose a lot of users in the mean time.
- zmk5 4y ago
  I honestly hope not. I like the fact that other distros are trying things themselves. If you don't like it, just switch to a different one. Whats the point of different distros if they all do the same thing?
akvadrako 4y ago
You don't have to use Snap at all. I've been using latest Ubuntu for a few years and I just uninstall it after every major upgrade. I do use flatpak for a lot of stuff, but it's better than Snap in many ways: it's faster, you can upgrade while apps are running, it allows third party repos, etc...
- rcthompson 4y ago
  They make it nearly impossible to avoid snap. Every couple of upgrades, they unconditionally run a script that forcibly removes the Firefox deb and installs the snap. Nothing I've tried has been able to prevent this. It seems to be hard coded somewhere. So it's kind of like saying "well you don't have to stay in the pit" except you keep pushing me in the pit every time I climb out.
  - Andys 4y ago
    I'm not finding this to be the case, on every computer I now uninstall snapd completely and use the firefox-esr PPA (mentioned elsewhere), and I am able to apt-get dist-upgrade regularly with no problems.
- gauddasa 4y ago
  And also, you do not need administrative privilege to install Flatpak apps. Snap mandates administrative privilege. The only downside is accessing utilities from frameworks using command line is difficult and tricky in Flatpak.
umvi 4y ago
I use OpenSUSE Tumbleweed which is also rolling release, and the one thing that bugs me is that sometimes your tools are so cutting edge that it makes it hard to get older stuff. For example it's super easy to get python 3.10 working in Tumbleweed but super hard to get python 3.6 working. I needed specifically Python 3.6 to test something, and man that was hard to get working in Tumbleweed. First of all, it is not available in standard repos or pre-built on python's website. Second of all, downloading 3.6 source and building it fails because (apparently) the GCC version I have is too new and creates problems with the `-O3` flag passed during building. So now I have to install an older version of GCC that plays nice with python 3.6 source code... Eventually I just said "screw it" and used the docker python:3.6 image. Not quite as convenient as having a native python3.6, but "good enough". Not sure what I would do if that image became unavailable.
- tmtvl 4y ago
  I've also been using TW for a while now (6 or so years) and I've taken to using GNU Guix as an environment manager when I need a specific version of some software.
- int_19h 4y ago
  That's exactly the kind of stuff that https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv is meant to handle.
  - umvi 4y ago
    I started down that route as well but was running into the same gcc issues as when compiling manually. I found this issue https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv/issues/2046 https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv/issues/2046 but the workaround didn't immediately work for me and I didn't dig any deeper.
mike256 4y ago
I switched to Debian. Still able to use most of the debs but without those Snaps.
- 6c696e7578 4y ago
  Debian for everything.
  - knob 4y ago
    This is the way.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
bitL 4y ago
My main gripe with Snap was the loss of configuration whenever it decided to update a package on its own. Imagine running OwnCloud as a Snap and losing all metadata when OwnCloud updated itself for some reason.
sosodev 4y ago
Maybe you would like Pop!_OS? It's mostly Ubuntu but with a lot of user friendliness considerations like the removal of snap.
pizza234 4y ago
I'm a "power" Ubuntu user, strongly anti-snap, but Ubuntu doesn't force users to use snaps. 22.04 has been very invasive by defaulting Firefox to a snap (there is still an alternative though, which is easy and well known, but still), but the repositories are still there in apt/deb format, with all the usual (thousands of) programs. There may be a few exceptions, but they're very likely programs that have never been in the standard repositories; Subsync is an example. This is a decisions of the developers more than Ubuntu. I can see another case being programs whose developers did not want to update dependencies, but I've never found such case. That said, I'm definitely afraid of a real push of snaps, although I'm not sure if Ubuntu itself will be involved more. At the very end, containerized packaging programs take space, and there's only so much that a distribution can provide (before enraging users).
remram 4y ago
I always uninstall snapd first thing, as well as GNOME (I use KDE but the Kubuntu 22.04 installer crashes if using full-disk encryption). Apart from Firefox, for which I had to enable the Mozilla PPA, I haven't really run into anything where I was required to use snap.
WirelessGigabit 4y ago
Is there an easy way to get Arch on WSL?
stereoradonc 4y ago
Cancel culture comes to Linux!
asddubs 4y ago
does arch still sometimes just break requiring manual intervention on updates? that's what turned me off last I used it, especially coming back to a machine you haven't used in a while trying to update it, but that must've been over half a decade by now so I don't know how things changed

bigmattystyles 4y ago

I think I was bit by snap (Firefox refusing to start) - I just don't have the mental energy to learn what snap is and why I can't or shouldn't just use apt-get like I always have. Or do I have to use both now? (edit: if you want to quickly answer great, but I'm really putting my frustrations into words)

rpdillon 4y ago

I strongly recommend Pop!_OS as a great solution for 'snapless Ubuntu '. I buy System76 machines with it, but also install it on a bunch of my other non-System76 machines. The whole family uses it.

Jenk 4y ago

Arch does have a slight hangup - you can't pin versions of stuff without creating a whole new pkgbuild.

shinjitsu 4y ago

I've loved ubuntu for a while as well, but snaps are making me want something new - any suggestions for a "I'm middle aged with children so I need an it just works distro"?

nehal3m 4y ago
I was in the same boat and switched to Fedora 6 months ago on desktop and laptop, the Cinnamon spin. It gets out of the way and up until now has just worked. No hardware issues except for the fingerprint reader.
mikae1 4y ago
> any suggestions for a "I'm middle aged with children so I need an it just works distro"? The latest and greatest recommendation is now openSUSE Tumbleweed (rolling yet stable). Fedora was the recommendation of 2021. Manjaro was the recommendation of 2020. Try one and see if it works on your hardware. If not, pick the next one. :)
jherskovic 4y ago
Pop_OS!, hands down. Ubuntu without the crud, with sensible UI choices. The Mac of Linuxii.
- jlkuester7 4y ago
  Seconded. I am also a fan of Linux Mint for very similar reasons. Ended up recently switching from Mint to Pop, though because I like modern Gnome more than Cinnamon (sue me). Mint was pretty much rock solid on my Dell XPS. It just worked. Pop has been a bit more exciting, but still a great distro!
poulpy123 4y ago
I recently discovered ZorinOS and while I didn't use it long enough to advise it strongly, I found their philosophy of proposing a simple system well integrated interesting

amelius 4y ago

I would love to switch away, but nVidia is forcing me to use Ubuntu on their Jetson series of products.

gtirloni 4y ago

I think you could have a very polished desktop with Fedora and flatkpaks (no daemon) without much work, but I'm glad Arch is working for you.

bxparks 4y ago

Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu but does not use snap. Doing "a lot more work" to install an OS does not sound appealing.

nagyf 4y ago
Yeah, setting up arch for the first time takes time. For newbie users it is definitely not appealing process, and also I would not recommend it. It's not a long process, but you do everything yourself and all this in the terminal (no GUI installer). I learned a lot about linux when I decided to try Arch. And as OP, I also never looked back :)
- rgoulter 4y ago
  My experience with Arch (which I tried after I'd used Linux Mint) was that for the first few weeks I was constantly consulting the Arch Linux Wiki to get anything done. -- I mean, yes, the emphasis is on "learned a lot". The Arch Linux Wiki is a fantastic resource.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Installing Arch (or even Gentoo) is worth doing at least once just to learn a bunch about how the parts work together. Heck, even just reading the installation guide gives you a better understanding of how a Linux machine operates.
pxeboot 4y ago
Installing Arch with the cli installer [1] is pretty straightforward these days. It only becomes a lot more work if you have very specific preferences on partition layouts, filesystems and bootloaders. In my experience, changing these things on Ubuntu was even more difficult and less documented. [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/archinstall https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/archinstall
- mkl 4y ago
  I haven't tried Arch, but in my experience changing those things in Ubuntu setup is simple and can be done in the GUI installer - I do it every fresh install. I haven't tried changing the bootloader; haven't had the need to.

roter 4y ago

For me it is just Firefox that I don't want in snap form. The Mozilla team still puts out a .deb version via PPA [0]. You should probably also pin to this source so that the snaps don't get installed [1]. [0] https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/ubuntu/ppa?field.series_filter=kinetic https://launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/ubuntu/ppa?field... [1] https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2022/04/how-to-install-firefox-deb-apt-ubuntu-22-04 https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2022/04/how-to-install-firefox-d...

blacksmith_tb 4y ago
I agree, and it's a little depressing to have the same "now I have to go fix that" relationship with two OSes, Ubuntu and macOS (I guess if I used Windows more than occasionally it'd three for three). Since I did all that on 22.04, I am a little nervous that it will get clobbered if I upgrade to 22.10...

severino 4y ago

I also use Ubuntu a lot, and while I'm disappointed about this Snap thing, I'm still not looking for alternatives. At least until 22.04 I could dodge snaps pretty easily, but now, since Firefox is now a snap package, things went worse, at least for me. I gave it a try and, while the experience was not as bad as I feared, I soon encountered problems with things like trying to use a smartcard reader for signing documents, something that used to work out of the box with the non sanboxed version of Firefox and now it's broken with snaps (or at least some weeks ago). I ended up downloading a Firefox tarball from the official site. I know you can use a PPA for that, but I don't feel comfortable having software as critical as a web browser from a third-party Ubuntu PPA. Maybe I should give Pop OS a try...

stevekemp 4y ago
I run Debian on all my systems, and to be honest firefox is something I always maintain separately. /opt/firefox contains the latest binary download from the official site. The application is one that updates frequently enough that the gain is worthwhile.
- bornfreddy 4y ago
  This. The packages make sense for the apps that don't change frequently, but browsers don't match this description.
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    It's the opposite of the way things should be. Package managers should have the most utility for applications that update frequently, because isn't the raison d'etre of a package manager to make updating programs easier? Some distros manage to get it right. I haven't had any trouble using OpenSUSE Tumbleweed's packaged Firefox.
    - kzrdude 4y ago
      The package repository should be the off-the-shelf items in the grocery store, while installing separately is the big-ticket and custom made items. Installing apps separately doesn't scale very well, but it makes sense to just do it for firefox and certain others. IMO.

abvavgjeremy 4y ago

Same, but I went with Debian as I wanted to stay in the .deb world.

aliqot 4y ago
Let me start by saying Debian rolling release is the truth. That being said, I worry about the archaic community and contributor-tooling behind debian to be a barrier that will lead to its demise though. Makes me sad, but it is what it is. We are all getting old, and to us this interface looks normal, but to new people and those making the apps that the kids depend on, it looks like a shitshow of antiquated code. Nobody wants to interact with savannah, it's ugly, move those projects somewhere else. Nobody wants to use mailing lists or byzantine social arrangements through IRC just to get their package submitted. I've got to be real with you, not a lot of people give a shit about 'free' beyond price either. Make non-free the default and put 'free-only' as the apt option. I love free software and it hurts me to say it, but there's a reason why AUR is killing the game right now. It's easy to use, easy to enter, easy to see people using your code in a mainstream OS without having to opine to holy neckbeards for the mercy to allow your package to be published. Debian is a great OS, and I'd happily use it for the rest of my life if given the choice, but reality is staring me in the face that this won't last in its current form, and its current form won't be maintained if anything changes. It's a catch-22.
- nsteel 4y ago
  > Make non-free the default Didn't they just vote to do this?
  - ixtenu 4y ago
    No, the recent change [0] was to add non-free firmware to the official installer (instead of relegating it to a separate unofficial installer). GP, however, was talking about the apt repository: the non-free apt repository is disabled by default. This hasn't changed and is unlikely to ever change. The non-free apt repository be enabled via a trivial /etc/apt/sources.list edit. [0]: https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Non-Free-Firmware-Result https://www.phoronix.com/news/Debian-Non-Free-Firmware-Resul...

krn 4y ago

> Swapped to Arch and haven't looked back yet, Arch took me a lot more work to get set up but once it was it's been pretty invisible, which is how I like my OS to be. I think that Fedora Workstation[1] is a #1 alternative to Ubuntu in terms of smoothness and ease of use. And if .deb is a requirement – then simply Debian. [1] https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/ https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/

Kwpolska 4y ago
Another good alternative could be openSUSE: https://www.opensuse.org/ https://www.opensuse.org/ - also pretty smooth, with user-friendly configuration tools, and no snap nonsense. WSL users might also be interested in using that for their distro instead of Ubuntu.
- tesseract2 4y ago
  I used to use opensuse around 2010, and had very pleasant experience with it. Things just worked, and their Yast tool was very handy. I used to joke that opensuse is the Mercedes of linux distro :). I am wondering why it isn't more popular. Is there any sentiment/experience people would like to share about this distro?
  - stinkytaco 4y ago
    It's the second biggest Linux company behind Redhat, so I think it's reasonably popular. It's also been a while since I used it, but I'll also point out that it's developed primarily in Germany, so it's entirely possible it's just not as popular in the English speaking community. However, the licensing agreement with Microsoft put many people in the open source community off, so I think that's contributed to its decline among hobby users.
  - Kwpolska 4y ago
    Ubuntu does a pretty good job marketing-wise, many people start they journey with Ubuntu and never look for other distros. Or on the other hand, they end up on advanced/continuous-maintenance distros like Arch Linux.

tyingq 4y ago

Snap has also ruined Ubuntu for me, and I've moved to Debian and/or Alpine depending on the use case.

mkurz 4y ago

Same here. Ubuntu user since the beginning (2004). Switched to Arch half a year ago, will never look back. I don't understand why Ubuntu tries hard to scare away users from what used to be a solid OS with things like Mir, Unity, snap,... Even now the modified Gnome it comes with by default. I don't get it.

pmontra 4y ago
I think that they are looking for a way to make money. A snap app store managed by them could be a source of cash. I'm still on 20.04 and maybe I'll switch to Debian or PopOS. I need to find the time to experiment. I'll buy a second SSD and dual boot.
- gexla 4y ago
  With open source apps though? My guess is the idea of a store is a commonly known UX (App store, Play store.) And the snaps give you a way of installing more updated versions of software than the package repos provide.
  - pmontra 4y ago
    I'm fine with the repos. After all what am I using? Firefox (I know how to switch to PPA), Thunderbird (with the features that were there 10+ years ago), LibreOffice. Slack is a snap and customers use it. Server side stuff is usually docker. Languages have their own package manager or an asdf plugin. Emacs is apt-get. Is GIMP still an apt? It seems they are going for flatpack https://www.gimp.org/downloads/ https://www.gimp.org/downloads/ Not a fan of that too.

smashed 4y ago

My first encounter with snaps was launching gcalc, the basic built-in calculator app. At some point after an update, launching that app would take multiple seconds. How could the most basic gtk app be so slow to launch. Investigating further, I found the update had transformed the normal gcalc package into a snap, probably just to prove how great snaps could be for desktop apps? What a bad way to introduce your latest tech canonical. From then on, my opinion of snaps was very negative and I still do everything possible to avoid them. Even if they are technically great or more secure, canonical messed up their introduction and are now stuck pushing a dead horse.

pbhjpbhj 4y ago
My last Kubuntu update (to 22.04) broke because, I think, I'd disabled snaps and the update required snap installs (including Firefox). The update had a "install snap version of Firefox" stage with the only option being OK/Yes ... so install broke. They were so up themselves that they removed the option to cancel snap install despite it not being for essential elements of the OS; I had to kill them installer. My first brush with fat-packages was Digikam stopping producing .deb packages, it put in so much overhead I couldn't run it on my (admittedly weak) system. The forced use of Firefox snap lost configuration, then failed to work properly (permission problems) ... it's like how the use of file managers via sudo was stopped, seemingly without a proper plan to replace it; make the new tech first, then implement it when it works! It's like going back to Windows, having fragmented app sources and forced updates that wreck everything. I'm not sure where to move to next, I came to Ubuntu years ago because I no longer wanted to do the config work necessary to run Slackware. Looks like Mint/Arch/Debian are contenders.
- tannhaeuser 4y ago
  Tested Kubuntu after frustration with gnome 3+ and over a decade on Ubuntu, but was very disappointed. Someone more knowledgable than me strongly recommended KDE Neon (Ubuntu LTS-based distro by KDE themselves) over Kubuntu. Me, I figured I don't need K apps and a full-fledged desktop environment; ended up going back to Mac OS for now.
- remram 4y ago

jonesnc 4y ago

I'm on Ubuntu Server 22.04, and I've never had to use Snap. Is it exclusively a Desktop thing?

garblegarble 4y ago
No some server packages are snaps -- e.g. lxd
- e12e 4y ago
  Yeah, lxd was the first one I noticed (with the implication that it's not likely to work on eg Debian - but rather be canonical-only thing). I see juju is recommended to be installed via snap, and landscape is recommended to install via juju: https://juju.is/docs/olm/installing-juju https://juju.is/docs/olm/installing-juju https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/landscape-beta-juju-installation/31538 https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/landscape-beta-juju-installat... https://ubuntu.com/blog/landscape-beta-test-the-landscape-server-migration-to-ubuntu-22-04-lts https://ubuntu.com/blog/landscape-beta-test-the-landscape-se...
pmontra 4y ago
The letsencrypt certbot package has been a snap for a long time. It's their recommended choice even on Debian https://certbot.eff.org/ https://certbot.eff.org/
- Andys 4y ago
  Its a good opportunity to switch out certbot for something else, there are some great alternative options on github
  - jpb0104 4y ago
    Fan of https://github.com/dehydrated-io/dehydrated https://github.com/dehydrated-io/dehydrated
mekster 4y ago
- bitcoin-core - bottom (Modern top)

simion314 4y ago

I have a ubuntu server, I needed an app that is not in the repos, I found a snap of it, it worked great (it is a CLI app), so there are good use cases for this tech, it needs probably more optimizations but hopefully it does not get killed, some competition is good. Btw I used Arch , when I had time and tinkering with software was still pleasurable( I could do a full dual boot install without any documentation in one hour but this kind of stuff displease me this days)

compsciphd 4y ago

I used to defend snap with the idea that it makes sense for some apps, i.e. "firefox" where updating firefox while its running is bad news. Except, snap can't update applications while they are running! i.e. try to do a snap refresh while firefox is running, nothing to update, because its running, quit it wait for all processes to die and then refresh, and it will update and cause you to wait 30-60s while it does it, and then you can restart firefox. This has to be one of the most idiotic design decision ever made by a containerized application system showing the designers don't understand containerization at all. one of the primary points of containerization is the ability to have multiple copies of an application running in parallel using different "application images". One should be able to upgrade (i.e. install a new image in parallel to the old one) without disrupting existing execution environments. Basically all firefox has to do is 1) if a container is running for the current user, execute firefox in its context 2) if no container is running for the current user, create a new container 3) every so often, garbage collect old images that don't have containers running for them. these concepts are so simple, even docker basically does it! and that's my rant for the day.

mxkopy 4y ago
I thought it was really funny when I tried to update some stuff with the snap gui, and it threw the error - "Can't update snap-store, the application is running" or something like that
cgriswald 4y ago
> i.e. try to do a snap refresh while firefox is running, nothing to update, because its running, quit it wait for all processes to die and then refresh, and it will update and cause you to wait 30-60s while it does it, and then you can restart firefox. Oh, it's worse than that. When there is an update available but firefox is running you get: > % snap refresh > All snaps up to date. It doesn't even tell you there is an update and that you need to close firefox to get it. In fact, it tells you there isn't one.
- AaronFriel 4y ago
  This seems broken, full stop. Can Firefox itself, when installed via Snap, notify the user that it needs security updates? If so, can users effectively do that, or do they have to know this incantation of closing, waiting, running a terminal command, and restarting?

mixmastamyk 4y ago

After 15 years switched to Mint Cinnamon, it's quite nice now. It is easier than ubuntu because removing snap is no longer a task. Next up need an alternative to Firefox, it's very disapointing how much has to be configured to turn off all the bullshit analytics, "colorways?", and get a blank new tab page.

6c696e7578 4y ago
I don't think there'll be a good alternative until Firefox isn't the alternative to Chrome.

Ptchd 4y ago

I also switched to Arch... the only issues that I've had is that sometimes the update process breaks and needs manual intervention.

registeredcorn 4y ago

I'm interested to know: What made you choose Arch over Fedora? I had a somewhat similar experience to you and tried Fedora first and it works well. Fedora seems to follow the same "just work" direction that Ubuntu aimed/aims for, minus some aspects I wasn't a fan of. Since Fedora worked for me, I never bothered checking out any other distributions. Was there a big draw to Arch over some of the others, or was it just the first one you tried out and stuck with?

dwaite 4y ago
Speaking for myself - Red Hat's package manager cratered on an upgrade in the past (early 2000s) when it ran out of user space, and my investigation was that I hit a pretty core issue with the package manager design itself. Since it isn't something where I can easily test if the problem still exists, I just avoided RPM completely. That means I have a knowledge and learning benefit in using other systems, and even in learning new (simpler) systems over investing in Fedora. The split between Fedora and RHEL is also not IMHO as clearly advertised as with other distributions, so I do worry that I will hit a very expensive support wall that might also require me to switch distributions.

jrsj 4y ago

I’ve been using EndeavourOS lately. It’s less of a distinct distro and more a really convenient Arch installer to get to a usable system quickly. And without all the extra BS of Manjaro — once you’ve installed it, you’re basically just running Arch. It installs packages directly from Arch, etc.

tetris11 4y ago
Arch has an official installer now too. Never been easier.

yamtaddle 4y ago

Snap is so bad that everyone who's not at Canonical (and probably even most of them) can tell it should go away. It's plainly not the right solution.

wooque 4y ago

I don't why people make so much fuss about snap. Just purge snap and stop complaining. I did this when I run Ubuntu. Ubuntu still is offers pretty polished and reliable OS that is easy to install and has most third-party support.

psanford 4y ago
Because more and more things are only packaged as snaps.
- wooque 4y ago
  Only Firefox is shipped as snap on default install. But Firefox packaged by Ubuntu was always gimped as they didn't enable certain optimizations like PGO/LTO so official tar.gz from Mozilla was superior anyway. (They fixed this recently for snap). I think it's similar for Chromium. So I didn't use snaps and I never been in situation that I needed to use snap.
  - psanford 4y ago
    Firefox isn't the only thing that has been switched off .deb and to a snap. LXD, for example, has been shipping as a only a snap for years. But even if it were only firefox, telling people they should download tarballs instead of having their distro ship packages is really missing the point.
yakubin 4y ago
The problem is when you instruct a colleague to check something using nmap, they install nmap using snap and are surprised it doesn't work, while you are left wondering what the hell is wrong with their computer, oblivious to the footgun Canonical put into their distro; until you remember again after a decade+ of not using Ubuntu. Canonical shouldn't push out broken things like that. It's supposed to be a distro where stuff Just Works(TM).

zekrioca 4y ago

I second this. I understand how hard it may be to maintain software these days, and that’s the whole point of snap, but the way it is implemented seems broken. It can simply break the whole system, it is like it uses one huge semaphore for all ‘transactions’ it commits in the ‘snap database’ (whatever it is) and if the transaction doesn’t complete, the whole system stalls. Only recourse is reboot. Don’t get me wrong, snap is like a great conceptual ideal, but it seems to work only for Ubuntu/Canonical developers (or to people with access to them), no one else. It is not well programmed/thought for some reason. Pretty stupid issues, and the read-only fs thing is also weird, how can one test things On-The-Go?

tannhaeuser 4y ago
> I understand how hard it may be to maintain software these days ...* I can't see it being harder than during the forming years with ever-changing libs and tools. Haven't seen a new end-user desktop app on Linux for over a decade either.
- zekrioca 4y ago
  Yes, I agree. However, this is the main execuse Canonical devs cite when asking why they wouldn’t provide a *.deb package. When one pushes more, they do not elaborate and roll back to the maintainability execuse.
yamtaddle 4y ago
Last time I poked at Desktop Linux I tried all three of the major solutions for this, and the only one I could tolerate was AppImage, but its ecosystem seemed a bit weak and its official (I think?) site & repo were... not confidence-inspiring.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago

Canonical really showed their colors with Snap I think. The base concept is obviously one desired by many users, as evidenced by the existence of alternatives like Flatpak and AppImage which both(?) predate it, not to mention ROX AppDirs, GNUStep Application Bundles, and a few others. But Canonical insists on their own implementation which is entirely controlled by them. Only they have a Snap repo, they follow the hated Windows model of forced updates, etc. Someday I think Ubuntu will have to give up Snaps to remain relevant and switch to (probably) Flatpak, but they're going to lose a lot of users in the mean time.

zmk5 4y ago
I honestly hope not. I like the fact that other distros are trying things themselves. If you don't like it, just switch to a different one. Whats the point of different distros if they all do the same thing?

akvadrako 4y ago

You don't have to use Snap at all. I've been using latest Ubuntu for a few years and I just uninstall it after every major upgrade. I do use flatpak for a lot of stuff, but it's better than Snap in many ways: it's faster, you can upgrade while apps are running, it allows third party repos, etc...

rcthompson 4y ago
They make it nearly impossible to avoid snap. Every couple of upgrades, they unconditionally run a script that forcibly removes the Firefox deb and installs the snap. Nothing I've tried has been able to prevent this. It seems to be hard coded somewhere. So it's kind of like saying "well you don't have to stay in the pit" except you keep pushing me in the pit every time I climb out.
- Andys 4y ago
  I'm not finding this to be the case, on every computer I now uninstall snapd completely and use the firefox-esr PPA (mentioned elsewhere), and I am able to apt-get dist-upgrade regularly with no problems.
gauddasa 4y ago
And also, you do not need administrative privilege to install Flatpak apps. Snap mandates administrative privilege. The only downside is accessing utilities from frameworks using command line is difficult and tricky in Flatpak.

umvi 4y ago

I use OpenSUSE Tumbleweed which is also rolling release, and the one thing that bugs me is that sometimes your tools are so cutting edge that it makes it hard to get older stuff. For example it's super easy to get python 3.10 working in Tumbleweed but super hard to get python 3.6 working. I needed specifically Python 3.6 to test something, and man that was hard to get working in Tumbleweed. First of all, it is not available in standard repos or pre-built on python's website. Second of all, downloading 3.6 source and building it fails because (apparently) the GCC version I have is too new and creates problems with the `-O3` flag passed during building. So now I have to install an older version of GCC that plays nice with python 3.6 source code... Eventually I just said "screw it" and used the docker python:3.6 image. Not quite as convenient as having a native python3.6, but "good enough". Not sure what I would do if that image became unavailable.

tmtvl 4y ago
I've also been using TW for a while now (6 or so years) and I've taken to using GNU Guix as an environment manager when I need a specific version of some software.
int_19h 4y ago
That's exactly the kind of stuff that https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv is meant to handle.
- umvi 4y ago
  I started down that route as well but was running into the same gcc issues as when compiling manually. I found this issue https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv/issues/2046 https://github.com/pyenv/pyenv/issues/2046 but the workaround didn't immediately work for me and I didn't dig any deeper.

mike256 4y ago

I switched to Debian. Still able to use most of the debs but without those Snaps.

6c696e7578 4y ago
Debian for everything.
- knob 4y ago
  This is the way.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

bitL 4y ago

My main gripe with Snap was the loss of configuration whenever it decided to update a package on its own. Imagine running OwnCloud as a Snap and losing all metadata when OwnCloud updated itself for some reason.

sosodev 4y ago

Maybe you would like Pop!_OS? It's mostly Ubuntu but with a lot of user friendliness considerations like the removal of snap.

pizza234 4y ago

I'm a "power" Ubuntu user, strongly anti-snap, but Ubuntu doesn't force users to use snaps. 22.04 has been very invasive by defaulting Firefox to a snap (there is still an alternative though, which is easy and well known, but still), but the repositories are still there in apt/deb format, with all the usual (thousands of) programs. There may be a few exceptions, but they're very likely programs that have never been in the standard repositories; Subsync is an example. This is a decisions of the developers more than Ubuntu. I can see another case being programs whose developers did not want to update dependencies, but I've never found such case. That said, I'm definitely afraid of a real push of snaps, although I'm not sure if Ubuntu itself will be involved more. At the very end, containerized packaging programs take space, and there's only so much that a distribution can provide (before enraging users).

remram 4y ago

I always uninstall snapd first thing, as well as GNOME (I use KDE but the Kubuntu 22.04 installer crashes if using full-disk encryption). Apart from Firefox, for which I had to enable the Mozilla PPA, I haven't really run into anything where I was required to use snap.

WirelessGigabit 4y ago

Is there an easy way to get Arch on WSL?

stereoradonc 4y ago

Cancel culture comes to Linux!

asddubs 4y ago

does arch still sometimes just break requiring manual intervention on updates? that's what turned me off last I used it, especially coming back to a machine you haven't used in a while trying to update it, but that must've been over half a decade by now so I don't know how things changed