this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
293 points (91.7% liked)

linuxmemes

20771 readers
734 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
293
Snap bad (midwest.social)
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
72 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a shame that snaps are forced to use Canonicals closed source backend because they are really good, and a fully snap system is a very compelling idea for immutable systems

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They're not forced to do so. You can install snaps locally (or provide a distribution system that treats snapd much the way apt treats dpkg), or you can point snapd at a different store. The snap store API is open and documented, and for a while there was even a separate snap store project. It seems to have died out because despite people's contention about Canonical's snap store, they didn't actually actually want to run their own snap stores.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I don't know why you're getting downvoted. It makes perfect sense that Cannonical made it's own proprietary package ecosystem and while technically anyone can build their own snap store, ain't nobody got time for that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Can you explain why it makes perfect sense?