this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
153 points (96.4% liked)

Linux

47361 readers
1150 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
[–] [email protected] 54 points 10 months ago (34 children)

I know this thread is likely to quickly descend into 50 variants of "ew, snap", but it's a good write up of what is really a pretty interesting novel approach to the immutable desktop world.

As the article says, it could well be the thing that actually justifies Canonical's dogged perseverance with snaps in the first place.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Snap makes a lot of sense for desktop apps in my opinion. There's a conceptual difference between system level packages that you install using something like APT, and applications. Applications should be managed at the user layer while the base system should provide all the common libraries and APIs.

It's also worth noting that this is a similar approach to what MacOS has been doing for ages with .app bundles where any shared libraries and assets are packaged together in the app folder. The approach addresses a lot of the issues you see with shared libraries such as having two different apps that want different versions of a particular library.

The trade off is that you end up using a bit more disk space and memory, but it's so negligible that the benefits of having apps being self-contained far outweigh these downsides.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The problem here is that for that purpose, Flatpak is better in nearly every way and is far more universal

I think Snap makes the most sense for something like Ubuntu Core, where it has the unique benefit of being able to provide lower level system components (as opposed to Flatpak which is more or less just for desktop GUI apps), but it doesn't make sense for much else over other existing solutions

[–] [email protected] -3 points 10 months ago

I don't disagree, but as you point out in the context of Ubuntu Core the decision makes sense and snap does the job.

load more comments (31 replies)