• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    192 months ago

    The issues are twofold: Linux distros historically update software through a package manager. Something that was working fine for everyone, however it was causing a lot of work for maintainers. They got together and designed a packaging format for software that works across all Linux distributions called ‘flatpak’. However, Ubuntu decided to create an alternative called Snap, which solves the same problem, except it’s not used by anyone else.

    Also, there’s some implementation details that make it look messy in your system (every application is mounted as it’s own filesystem, so if you use tools to list your disk’s there’s a bunch of weird spammy looking drives and things like that).

    • @WindyRebel
      link
      English
      42 months ago

      Awesome! Thank you for this explanation. So it’s mostly just because it’s a redundancy and specific to a certain distro (Ubuntu in this case)?

      • NebLem
        link
        English
        102 months ago

        Specific to Ubuntu, not very open for collaboration, and operated by the company who owns the Ubuntu trademarks. Additionally they’ve made it unnecessarily difficult to install non-snap versions of many popular packages. (they removed non-snap versions from upstream Debian repositories).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 months ago

        No, redundancy is fine. It’s the proprietary backend and Ubuntu forcing it on users that people don’t like.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Native package managers were not “working fine for everyone”, the software and libraries in them are often very outdated and contain custom patches that don’t come from the original software authors.

      So you often end up dealing with bugs that were already fixed and the fixes released months ago.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        That sounds like the maintainer’s problem, not a problem with apt/dnf/whatever. We’ve had automated build processes for decades. If you want stable, use a stable distro; if you want the latest, use a rolling release like Arch or something.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        That’s one of the main reasons I use a rolling release distro. I used Arch for years, and now I use Tumbleweed.

        With packaged apps (like flatpak, snap, etc), you can end up with outdated dependencies in those apps because they bundle everything together. So instead of fixing bugs once for everyone, you have to pester each individual package maintainer to update the dependencies. However, this is mitigated by having these apps be somewhat containerized and limiting impact of a breach on other apps, so YMMV depending on what kind of sandboxing you use.

        I’m not really decided here, and I use both flatpaks and distro packages. I don’t touch snaps though.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 months ago

        Other distros were faster with updating packages, or for Ubuntu specifically you had PPAs or repositories maintained by the vendor.

    • @tankplanker
      link
      English
      22 months ago

      Didn’t it also used to be noticeably slower than apt installed apps? This was one of the reasons I got rid of it at the time, Ive heard it has better performance now but not tried it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 months ago

        I think that’s mostly solved, but yeah, some of the sandbox stuff affected performance.