this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
151 points (96.3% liked)

Linux

48186 readers
1510 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I actually don't understand the issue people have with Snaps. The main gripe seems to be "It's controlled by Canonical".
But why is it an issue that Canonical controls a source of software for their own OS? Isn't that the same with every distro's repository?

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But why is it an issue that Canonical controls a source of software for their own OS? Isn’t that the same with every distro’s repository?

No. You can add any other repository to apt, rpm, Flatpak, etc. You cannot do the same with Snap and that's by design. Canonical wants to be the sole gatekeeper of Linux software, hoping that all developers have no alternative but to publish software on the Snap store (ideally only there) which works best on Ubuntu.

Therefore: Fuck Snap.

[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly. I feel they want to sell it to a big player, but no big player will touch it unless they can fully control it. Hence snap as part of that plan. Ubuntu is a hell no for me.

[–] caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Forget selling it.
I think they're going to get everyone trapped in the ecosystem, and then they'll start charging for access to the source.

[–] alteropen@noc.social 4 points 1 year ago

@caseyweederman @makingStuffForFun the prediction imperative will come in before that. surveillance capitalism is how they will make their fortune

[–] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How would they trap everyone in the ecosystem?
This isn't Apple, there's a gajillon other ways of getting software you can use on every single linux distro.

[–] Metallinatus@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's exactly what they're trying to change.

[–] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Then I guess it's a good thing they don't control all other Linux distros.

[–] Metallinatus@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Yes, thank god for that.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then I guess it’s a good thing they don’t control all other Linux distros.

But they would to a degree if the Snap Store would actually succeed becoming the Linux app store (like Steam is for games but that's more because all other vendors don't care to make a Linux client).

[–] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Open source software would still be available packaged by the distros and as Flatpak, even if the software's author offered it exclusively as Snap.

[–] KISSmyOS@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You cannot do the same with Snap and that’s by design. Canonical wants to be the sole gatekeeper of Linux software

Then why did they publish source code and documentation for all parts of it, so you can create your own snap store?

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Smoke and mirrors. You cannot add a secondary Snap repository.

[–] Patch@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You can; the issue is that you can't add two snap repositories at once.

This is functionally pretty much the same thing, as nobody is likely to want to use snap while locking themselves out of the main snap repository, but it's still important to make the distinction.

In theory I guess there's nothing stopping you setting up a mirror of the main snap repo with automatic package scraping, but nobody's really bothered exploring it seeing as no distro other than Ubuntu has taken any interest in running snap.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know that it's possible to change the one entry but adding additional ones is not possible and that's by design.

[–] wmassingham@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is that an artificial limitation that could be resolved by third-party clients?

[–] Patch@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's all open source so there's no reason you couldn't fork it and add that functionality. Although it'd probably be a fairly involved piece of work; it wouldn't be a simple one-line change.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 1 year ago

Who knows? Maybe it's just "#define STORES_LIMIT 1"?

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not all open source. Canonical merely made available a super simple reference implementation of the Snap server but the actual Snap Store is proprietary.

[–] Patch@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I was referring to snapd, which is the thing that actually has the hard limit on a single repository. That's fully open source (and there's one major fork of it out in the wild, in the form of Ubuntu Touch's click). The tooling for creating snap packages is also all open source.

The APIs which snapd uses to interact with its repo are also open source. While there's no turnkey Snap Store code for cloning the existing website, it's pretty trivial to slap those APIs on a bog standard file server if you just want to host a repo.

Not open-sourcing the website code is a dick move, but there's nothing about the current set up that would act as an obstacle for anyone wanting to fork snap if that's what they wanted to do. It's just with flatpak existing, there's not a lot of point in doing so right now.

[–] flashgnash@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From reading this that's not the whole story. Someone working at canonical successfully made a version of snap that could use alternative stores, but the default version does not allow it

And honestly at the point of installing that modified version you may as well just install a different package manager anyway

[–] Metallinatus@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or better yet, a different OS.

[–] flashgnash@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Might I suggest NixOS best package manager out there imo