this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
1499 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

35125 readers
76 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago (16 children)

Good. Now, stop being forced as a snap, please.

[–] tram1 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Kind of crazy that Ubuntu has some packages exclusively as snaps...

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Crazy is installing a package through apt and having it install the snap.

[–] win98se 10 points 1 year ago

This... If I wanted an app in snap form, I would install it through snap instead. But installing an app through apt redirects to snap? No. It's ridiculous and unacceptable.

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

Holy shit, didn't know that

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It makes sense that they don't want to maintain 2 versions. What doesn't make sense is that when you ask it for an apt, instead of saying "this package isn't avalible as an apt" and maybe "by the way it is available as a snap if you want", it just installs the snap without telling you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Canonical is not maintaining fuck-all. They're just re-distributing Debian packages (sometimes with a few patches on top at most). The Debian team is doing all the heavy lifting of packaging software (including firefox-esr).

It's not a technical limitation that Canonical doesn't offer firefox as a deb. It's an intentional attempt to trap people into their walled garden.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I didn't say it was a technical limitation, I said it was laziness. Even if they just straight up take the deb from Debian, they are still responsible for if it works well on Ubuntu.

Anyway, it's hardly a very good trap. You can still download the deb from Debian, or use Mozilla's ppa, or use flatpak. Or hell, snap is the main difference between Ubuntu and Debian at this point anyway, so just use any other Debian distro. I hate to be the person defending Canonical here as I vastly prefer community distros, but when the vast majority of people are using OSs from Microsoft, Apple and Google, painting Canonical as a big greedy villain sounds like a joke.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago
load more comments (12 replies)