Hacker News Reader

Comment by viraptor | Hacker News Reader

> Snaps have mostly created problems for me

I think this is the wrong way to look at it. You still have access to the same packages as before without snap. If you're using snap, that means you either explicitly chose it, or the package is not available in the repo.

The choice here isn't between a package or a snap most of the time. It's between: not using the app, packaging it on your own, or using a snap which is not perfect.

View on HN

But certain packages are migrating to Snap-only, e.g. Chromium.

I understand why they're doing this (primarily to save on build times), but the way they've gone about it (using a transitional Apt package that just installs the Snap) is messy and inconsistent.

If I type `apt install` then I want an Apt package. Under no circumstances should this install a Snap.

That's f'd up. Some people say the default settings for sandboxing [in respects of basic snap defaults or setups] etc are basically disabled some places. Hope that works. Bet the skin looks great. Most snaps I used long ago looked like a un-made-up pig to be frankly. I don't hate on snap, I obviously love it, or either I'd not wasted the time. Let's hope it improves. All improvements are great, obviously.

> using a transitional Apt package that just installs the Snap

You need a migration path from an existing package. It's also nice not to invalidate every post on the web which describes the installation.

Chrome is special... it already doesn't really belong in the repository and was handled in a special way. It bundles tens of libraries in its binary without relying on the system/repo deps. It's actually more natural for it to live with all the other "include all deps" applications.

That's because Chromium is hell to keep updated in a stable distribution release apt archive. Upstream adds new dependencies that aren't packaged in the distribution's stable releases, for example. It's not practical to do anything but a whole load of bundling (in debs) to solve the problem. This then isn't much different to a snap any more anyway, and packaging a snap takes a fraction of the effort.

Anyone is welcome to maintain chromium as an apt package for your distribution release of choice, and you're welcome to point apt to that repository instead. The reason it's not happening is that it's increasingly impractical to do while also maintaining Ubuntu's quality standard for debs.

Yep, and the chromium migration broke my webex meetings.

First I had to research and find out how to give it microphone permissions. That worked, but the mic works for about one minute then stops.

So frustrating, I had to move meetings to Firefox which is where I do most of my work. I like to have two browsers to split the work to that which is most appropriate.

I found a way to remove snap[1] and get Chromium from Debian[2]. Have a look (I have the same problem with audio in the snap version):

[1] https://github.com/cies/kubuntu-setup#remove-snap

[2] https://github.com/cies/kubuntu-setup/tree/master/chromium

> If I type `apt install` then I want an Apt package. Under no circumstances should this install a Snap.

Exactly!

I found a way to remove snap[1] and get Chromium from Debian[2]. But I'm close to leaving the buntus over this drama.

[1] https://github.com/cies/kubuntu-setup#remove-snap

[2] https://github.com/cies/kubuntu-setup/tree/master/chromium

The problem is, from a user perspective, when simple things as the included calculator is a snap package. I am biased and it's been a long time since I used Ubuntu or snap, but, you shouldn't need to be a hostage to sloppy snap-early-experiments, for the _calculator_, on an LTS release. This is long ago, and, let's hope these things have improved. And will improve. All progress is progress, let's hope for the best. Freedom is good, long live Ubuntu and snap. Right.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com