• BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
      281·
      1 day ago

      Until you run an apt command and both snapd and snaps get forcibly reinstalled.

      Just don’t use Ubuntu. If you need to stay in the Debian ecosystem then just use Debian with KDE.

      • L3ft_F13ld!@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        12·
        1 day ago

        Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu, but removes or otherwise avoids most of the problems with Ubuntu.

        It doesn’t come with KDE, but it’s a solid option for those not quite comfortable with Debian or Linux in general (or people who prefer Ubuntu as a base).

        There’s also LMDE if you want a Debian base.

        • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
          6·
          1 day ago

          It doesn’t come with KDE

          It doesn’t come with KDE preinstalled

          You can e.g. mintify your Kununtu by installing Linux Mint packages instead of the original Ubuntu packages (add the corresponding LM repos matching your Ubuntu version and give them a sufficiently higher priority) or, alternatively, install KDE on Linux Mint.

          • L3ft_F13ld!@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            3·
            1 day ago

            I’ve heard that KDE on Mint can be a bit temperamental. I assume because most of their stuff is focused around GTK instead of QT and adding KDE somehow messes with stuff.

            • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
              2·
              1 day ago

              Of course one should avoid using the originally provided GTK software under KDE, as it’s also spamming the app drawer.

              It should work the same as for the Ubuntu -> Kununtu transition: Install some KDE Plasma desktop metapackage, logout and login using KDE, then remove the libgtk* packages to uninstall the Mate/Cinnamon desktop and it’s associated applications. One can reinstall the desired packages, e.g. Firefox, Thunderbird, Synaptic, afterwards.

      • NeilBrü@lemmy.worldEnglish
        12·
        1 day ago

        @BlameTheAntifa, I disagree. To test your claim, I ran a search with admin privileges for snap and snapd on my Kubuntu LTS workstation, and there’s no trace of it.

        Also, the following is from a query to Gemini Flash 2.5:

        Kubuntu’s minimal install, especially in version 24.04 and later, generally does not install any Snap packages and often leaves out the snapd service by default, resulting in a snap-free system. Be cautious, as installing certain common applications like Firefox from the default repositories may still pull in snapd as a dependency.

        • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          31·
          1 day ago

          I think that’s what they were saying: it still uses Ubuntu repositories, which use snap. So to install, e.g. Firefox natively, you need to manually meddle with PPAs, or compile from source. The package manger, arguably the biggest strength of any Linux distro, becomes next to useless unless you want to run snaps

          • NeilBrü@lemmy.worldEnglish
            12·
            1 day ago

            I’ve been daily driving Kubuntu LTS for 3 years now completely snap-free due to --minimal-install, and use Waterfox, a Firefox fork that doesn’t use snapd as far as I can see. snap-free *buntu is alive and well. It doesn’t take much effort.

            • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              41·
              1 day ago

              but why

              seriously. now you basically don’t have access to a large number of packages. sure, waterfox is a good alternative to firefox. but say you do want to install firefox (or any other package that canonical distributes only as a snap), what do you do?

              I get that it’s possible to run Kubuntu, or even stock Ubuntu, without snap. that’s the beauty of an open OS, you can do whatever you want with it. I just don’t get why you would want to run a distro that is actively pushing a standard on you that you don’t want

              • NeilBrü@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                16 hours ago

                but why

                To explicitly piss off the distro purists and cultists.

                Jk😅

                Really, it’s because sometimes I like to run my experimental DNN applications on bare metal, and many of those use containers have an Ubuntu base.

      • erotador@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        27·
        1 day ago

        snaps are similar to flatpaks, little containers that hold apps that can be sandboxed for security, reproducibility, and convenience. cannonical decided to push their own snaps over flatpak, a widly accepted standard. the big problem with snaps is the store where you get them is proprietary, and they will sneakily install snaps instead of standard packages when you try to install programs you didn’t realize we’re even snaps.

          • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
            20·
            20 hours ago

            That’s not the full picture.

            The proprietary store backend really isn’t consequential. Most websites are, and if you have a modern computer, you’ve got proprietary firmware running at ring -3. At best, it’s a distraction from Snap’s real issues.

            Snap packages are compressed filesystems, similar to squashfs. When an application is started for the first time, the filesystem has to be decompressed and mounted to the root filesystem, which (depending on the computer) can take a long time. It also litters your mount points with loopback devices.

            Snap’s sandboxing only works on systems running Systemd. No Devuan, no Artix, no Alpine; the packages will work, but without sandboxing.

            The worst part is Canonical’s desperate attempts to make snaps happen.

            …and I’m sure there’s more that I’m forgetting about.

            • Morphit @feddit.uk
              2·
              20 hours ago

              They haven’t modified apt; they abuse an extra version number that supercedes the major version number of a package. I think it’s meant to be used for new packages that reuse the name of an abandoned project. Canonical publish packages for software like Firefox that depend on snapd and just run snap install firefox instead of actually installing anything. Since they bumped that extra version number, their packages always have a higher precedence than even the officially packaged debs from Mozilla.

              • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
                1·
                19 hours ago

                Thanks, that’s even more fucked up.

                What’s even even more fucked up is that the package still installs an executable to /usr/bin/firefox, but it’s just a wrapper script that launches the Snap application… and also replaces your desktop shortcuts, application launcher shortcuts, and favourites with its own Reforged Edition file if you’re running GNOME, Unity, MATE, or KDE Plasma.

                Excerpt from /usr/bin/firefox Canonical Edition(TM) 
                # [...]

# GNOME Shell
OLD="firefox.desktop"
NEW="firefox_firefox.desktop"
FAVS=$(gsettings get org.gnome.shell favorite-apps 2> /dev/null)
if echo "$FAVS" | grep -q "'$OLD'"; then
  NEWFAVS=$(echo $FAVS | sed -e "s#'$OLD'#'$NEW'#")
  gsettings set org.gnome.shell favorite-apps "$NEWFAVS"
fi

# MATE
OLD="/usr/share/applications/firefox.desktop"
NEW="/var/lib/snapd/desktop/applications/firefox_firefox.desktop"
OBJECTS=$(gsettings get org.mate.panel object-id-list 2> /dev/null)
for object in $OBJECTS; do
  object=$(echo $object | cut -d\' -f2)
  launcher=$(gsettings get org.mate.panel.object:/org/mate/panel/objects/$object/ launcher-location)
  if [ "$launcher" = "'$OLD'" ]; then
    gsettings set org.mate.panel.object:/org/mate/panel/objects/$object/ launcher-location "'$NEW'"
  fi
done

# [...]

# TODO: handle other desktop environments

exec /snap/bin/firefox "$@"

                I’d classify that as malware.

        • rozodru@piefed.socialEnglish
          1·
          23 hours ago

          yup discovered this on my server yesterday. needed something on there so just did sudo apt install blahblahblah and then come to find the little ubuntu fucker installed a snap of it.

          I really should have gone with another distro for my server but meh i’m too lazy to fix it now.

      • flemtone@lemmy.world
        19·
        1 day ago

        Bloated container format that has many issues running software, somehow ignores system settings when it wants to and has a propriatary backend controlled by Canonical. Flatpaks are much better imo.

  • deathmetal27@lemmy.world
    7·
    1 day ago

    That is the original from? I’m guessing some look alike competition.

    I’d love to use that as a meme template.

  • jobbies@lemmy.zip
    3·
    23 hours ago

    So Ubuntu in human form looks like one of Saddam Hussain’s decoys? Interesting.

  • ohshit604@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    5·
    1 day ago

    Someone correct me if I’m wrong here but Ubuntu is based off of Debian, therefore Ubuntu based distros are actually Debian based?

    Or do they all have the same snap integration like Ubuntu does?

    • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
      9·
      1 day ago

      Ubuntu is Debian based yes. Not all ubuntu-based comes with snap (for example Mint). Sometimes I think “why are there so many different distros? We only need like five of them”, but then, sometimes I think it’s a strength, each distro exploring a new direction to see what works.

        • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
          2·
          23 hours ago

          Back in the day, ubuntu used to be the most user friendly distro. Linux for humans. It has a faster release cycle by not following stable debian releases. It had hardware support that you had to jump through hoops in debian to get. A great community. It made sense to base mint on ubuntu.

          • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            20 hours ago

            That’s about where things were when I started using Mint about 11 years ago. Ubuntu has kind of strayed from that obvious choice to hand to newbies. Mint has been sitting around saying “No, we’re not doing that, because it’s user hostile” on anything from Gnome to Snap.

        • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
          2·
          23 hours ago

          Do you think you would have that opinion if you ran arch on mission critical production servers for a couple of years?

            • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
              1·
              21 hours ago

              Well, for the sake of clarity, lets separate stability and reliability? Stability means unchanging. Reliable means it won’t crash or behave in unexpected ways.

              • jobbies@lemmy.zip
                2·
                21 hours ago

                lets separate stability and reliability

                And how do you propose we do that? Is reliability not dependent on stability?

                Stability means unchanging

                No, it means how stable something is. Literally.

                Reliable means it won’t crash or behave in unexpected ways

                Funny, that’s how most folks around here describe stability.

                You’re just using words to be honest.

                • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
                  2·
                  20 hours ago

                  If you have a better word for the concept of unchanging functionality and interfaces, I’m open to using that in this context. In describing distros, I’ve only come across the word stable for this. Reliable is a wider concept to me, and also includes being relatively free of bugs. A stable distro can still be buggy, if it’s the same bugs tomorrow as yesterday.