this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2025
491 points (92.0% liked)

linuxmemes

21779 readers
940 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves/tolerates/hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 2 years ago
    MODERATORS
     
    top 50 comments
    sorted by: hot top controversial new old
    [–] spujb@lemmy.cafe -1 points 2 hours ago

    Yall wonder why the desktop Linux community hasn’t grown as much as you wish and then upvote stuff like this

    The constant superiority struggles do nothing but alienate most computer users

    [–] lurklurk@lemmy.world 22 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

    Distro wars are silly. If someone is happy using Ubuntu, I'm happy they're a linux user.

    [–] highball@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

    Same as the Unix wars and Vim vs. Emacs.

    [–] crossdl@leminal.space 4 points 11 hours ago

    Here to represent the Arch Linux master race!

    lolsteamos

    [–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

    I tried mint; it was worse. I was like oh well, guess I'll deal with the snaps.

    [–] Badland9085@lemm.ee 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

    It’s pretty rare hearing that Mint is worse than Ubuntu. Genuine question to just know what people may think about it: what made you think it’s worse than Ubuntu?

    [–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

    I switched from Ubuntu to Linux Mint and I have more issues with Linux Mint. From the top of my head :

    • Sleep simply doesn't work. I have Mint on two different machines and both don't work (it worked fine on Ubuntu)

    • If I do a soft reboot, it reboots to a black screen 100% of the time on both machines. I need to power cycle to reboot.

    • I need to restart Pulseaudio frequently because it starts to make white noise.

    • Cinnamon desktop environment crashing to a black screen and logging me out randomly.

    I am just waiting to finish my current game to switch to a new distro because Mint isn't working for me.

    [–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

    Cinnamon is so bad, even Ubuntu got rid of it, and that's saying something.

    [–] trigg@lemmy.world 99 points 1 day ago (1 children)
    [–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

    Femcel: I will flatten you if you disagree with me <3

    [–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

    Depending on the mechanism it may not be so bad.

    [–] TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

    now would you like to be smushed by femcel with a forklift with or without a forklift certification?

    [–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)
    [–] lengau@midwest.social 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

    It's popular and widely used so people naturally hate it.

    [–] festnt@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)
    [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

    forcing snaps on people (if you apt-get firefox it'll install the snap even though you didn't install it with snap), adding ads for it, snap having a proprietary backend, snap being essentially just a fundamentally worse version of flatpak.

    the only advantage i've heard for snap is that it's easier to package for.

    Plus I think if you want the advantages of a stable release, easy for user, distro, they'll also need to be immutable now, what's the usecase for a non-immutable, stable, easy to use distro?

    If you didn't care about ease of use, you wouldn't want immutable, but if you do, you absolutely do.

    If you don't care about stability, you might not care about immutable, but if you do, you absolutely do.

    Ubuntu seems like a prime usecase for an immutable distro, but it isn't for tradition-related reasons rather than it actually being good for users.

    [–] qaz@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

    Snap is also useful for server software and it can apparently be used for more low level things such as drivers. Still, it being properiatary is enough for me to avoid it completely.

    [–] lengau@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

    Ubuntu Core is the way Ubuntu's doing immutability. They've already got tech demos of Ubuntu Core Desktop, but designing a distro around interchangeable parts with immutability and the ability to have airgapped networks that can still get updates is a nontrivial task. But it depends on things that snaps can do that Flatpak was never designed to do.

    [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

    Can you explain any of those things? I've never understood the appeal and was just kinda hoping they'd let snap die.

    [–] lengau@midwest.social 4 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

    Ubuntu Core works by having everything on the system, kernel included, be a snap. Or, as another way of describing the same thing, everything on the system is installed by mounting a squashfs image (which by its nature is read-only) and applying groups to the processes in those images. This applies all the way down to the level of the kernel, although a kernel snap, on install or upgrade, does write out to a boot partition.

    The net result is that you get many of the benefits of immutability, but also many of the benefits of traditional distros. For example, you can replace the kernel snap (and even build your own kernel snap if you choose) without replacing the rest of the base system, since the kernel is installed separately from the base. This is especially important for non-x86 systems that may need different (mutually incompatible) kernel builds for different SOCs, but even on x86 an example of replacing parts like that is NVIDIA drivers. But you don't need a separate version of cups just because you have an Nvidia GPU. And because cups is in its own snap, it's isolated too. You get the same benefits of confinement that applies to desktop apps, but for services, where it can be even stricter. After all, cups doesn't need to even know that you have a GPU, so an attack vector of hacking cups and then using it to attack your GPU gets foiled in a way that an immutable base with unconfined services doesn't.

    [–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

    And that's one of the annoying things about snap: It's fundamentally a nice system with neat capabilities but it's spoiled by Canonical's proprietary backend.

    [–] lengau@midwest.social 2 points 5 hours ago

    There was an open backend for a while. A complete lack of interest killed it.

    [–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

    that is very interesting, however, why can't that be done wth flatpak?

    [–] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

    That's pretty fundamentally not how flatpak works. It could theoretically be modified to do all of that, but by that point you're recreating snapd and it would likely be easier and more straightforward to start with the current snapd and change what you dislike about it.

    the problem with snap is that it's proprietary, which really can't be changed, and while i'm sure it would be a lot of work, what kind of work would need to be done, is really what i'm curious about.

    [–] TheImpressiveX@lemm.ee 44 points 1 day ago

    Don't snap at me, but it would be more apt of you to make a flat pack, or create an app image, or you might get stuck in a tar ball.

    [–] kronarbob@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

    Snaps make sens from the Ubuntu side.

    Only one package to maintain for an application, even if they have different distributions to maintain. If snap is officially supported by the creator of the application, then it's less work for Canonical. Well, it would have make more sens if flatpak didn't exist.

    From user side, it makes way less sens :

    • the closed source application shop
    • if snaps are not officially supported, then Canonical try to create one, and they may be not that great ...
    • ...
    [–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I'd say snaps are aimed at servers. A big aspect of both Flatpaks and Snaps is the whole sandboxed environment thing.

    I think that's a major reason Canonical flubbed snaps, is they shoved them down the throats of casual users instead of focusing on using them in server situations where you want things more "locked down."

    Once again, it does seem silly that they reinvented the wheel, but I mean, that's actually really common. So common there is an XKCD comic about it. So due to how commonplace such a thing is, it seems weird to attack Canonical so much over it.

    [–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

    it seems weird to attack Canonical so much over it.

    I mean, on the technical side, sure. Canonical's technical choice is just weird. Plenty of fully open app store environments have almost no competition, because self hosting is still hard work.

    But all of the business reasons - for having a closed proprietary sole app server - go against everything that Canonical used to claim they stood for.

    Canonical's business choice not to open source the snap servers is an open declaration of war against the FOSS community who have previously rallied around them.

    It's like inviting someone into my basement and locking the door with a key as they get to the bottom step. The action isn't illegal, but the probable motive is creepy as fuck. (Maybe I just watch too many horror movies. Lol.)

    [–] lengau@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago

    It's also inaccurate to say that they reinvented the wheel since snaps predate flatpaks.

    [–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

    I use Kubuntu LTS. Went with --minimal-install. No snap to worry about from the get-go.

    [–] 4oreman@lemy.lol 5 points 1 day ago
    [–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)
    [–] csm10495@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

    The fact that they changed the name to Azure Linux still upsets me. I get upset easily.

    We use it at work. Seems mostly fine and similar enough to old CentOS and RHEL.

    [–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (8 children)

    I still use Ubuntu server. It’s not nearly as atrocious as Ubuntu desktop.

    [–] blackstrat@lemmy.fwgx.uk 3 points 21 hours ago

    Ubuntu Server LTS releases are unbelievably good. They are absolutely solid as a rock. I've had several VMs running it for almost a decade with zero issues.

    Ubuntu desktop doesn't suit my use case though,and nor does Gnome.

    [–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 9 points 1 day ago (7 children)

    I use Ubuntu desktop for my server! What can I say? I installed it one night on my desktop to see how it felt and my experiment turned into an entire fucking server because "already here. More convenient."

    load more comments (7 replies)
    load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 1 day ago

    I mean, my distro's technically an Ubuntu variant, but I honestly don't think that's ever come up in any meaningful way.

    I use Arch btw :3

    [–] Montagge@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 day ago

    I'm yet to have an issue with snaps while using Ubuntu

    load more comments
    view more: next ›