Traditionally, updates on Linux systems are controlled by the user. You get an icon in the system tray that looks important; you click on it; it asks you if you want to install updates; you say “yes” or “no”; updates are applied, or not; when you next restart any applications that you have running that were updated, the new version is picked up. Data isn’t lost, because updates don’t restart the application. You can (and do) update the Linux kernel in this way, and your computer just stays up (usually running on the old version of the kernel until you next restart.) Mechanisms have been added over time to allow auto updates to take place for critical security patches (“unattended upgrades”) but these have typically to be opt in. And again, they don’t restart running applications.
Snap breaks this contract. The update channel for Snap is independent from the KDE updater (on Kubuntu), and seemingly the Gnome updater (on Ubuntu). If you consent to applying updates from the general system tray “updates needed” notification, Snap updates are not included; they’re not even listed in the pending notifications from the system tray. Snap updates only happen when the Snap updater is running, either if the application is not running or after the period of time required to force updates has expired. Snap updates happen without consent.
I would really, really suggest moving away from Ubuntu, and opting for the countless better alternatives instead, like Fedora (the best desktop, in my view), Linux Mint (a great desktop, but a bit more conservative than Fedora), any of the Arch derivatives (for bleeding edge and tons of fooling around with AUR), or Void (for those of us with taste). Or any, any of the others.
Ubuntu just does not seem to have its users’ best interests at heart, and Snap is the best example of that.
For now, I’ll stick with ripping the snap system out of Kubuntu LTS and applying Mint’s fixes to keep it away.
Last I checked, RPM tooling in general was still inferior to DEB or ebuild tooling in the respects I care about, Fedora is also still a pain when it comes to patented codecs, Mint retired any efforts for KDE desktops, Arch doesn’t do LTS, and Void is too niche for my needs.
(I generally run an LTS distro for infrastructure and add Flatpak for apps.)
I’ve always found OpenSUSE to be a fine KDE desktop, probably my favorite. For OpenSUSE, KDE isn’t an afterthought, it isn’t on equal footing with GNOME. It is the primary desktop. It’s KDE, and everything else. Their KDE desktops always have such polish. Their theme is really nice, also.
Drumhellar,
I use debian + KDE myself. Not sure how it compares to opensuse, but I’ve always had a preference for the debian branch over the redhat branch. IMHO Ubuntu was nice too, but modern ubuntu seems to be deviating from the debian branch in significant ways so like you I’m also loosing interest in it.
I could probably get used to fedora, but I’d loose muscle memory and even my distro is debian based. I think it could be difficult to justify.
I’d recommend that you at least give openSUSE a try. Debian had been my distro of choice from 2003 until 2020. During that time I tried many if the other major distros, including Fedora, and came to the same conclusion as you: Not worth my time relearning everything. I finally got fed up, did a lot of research into which distro would offer what I was looking for and ended up on openSUSE. I’ve found it to be very professional and polished. Yast and zypper are great replacements for the APT suite. It took a little getting used to the different package making convention, but that was about it. Also, the openSUSE Build Service is pretty awesome.
I used openSUSE from 2007-2020, always with KDE. It was amazing! I only switched to Debian with KDE because there was one driver that wasn’t working in from a third-party repo.
I intended OpenSUSE to be covered under “Last I checked, RPM tooling in general was still inferior to DEB or ebuild tooling in the respects I care about”.
(eg. I’ve yet to see someone point me at a “sufficiently snappy equivalent to apt-cache” and then not backpedal to some variant of “your demands are unreasonable” when I start asking for details on HOW snappy it is and discover that what they’re recommending is significantly less optimized than apt-cache to the point where it’s not more or less instant if run on rotating media.)
That said, as it becomes possible to migrate more and more of my apps to Flatpak installs with tightened sandboxing rules, trying new distros does become more feasible if I can ever get over my tendency to stay on an LTS until the very last day of the support window and then upgrade to the same distro to minimize churn.
Snaps are why I avoid recent Ubuntu versions. If I wanted a self-contained app, I’d use Windows or MacOS (Which I do. Extensively). However, the integrated nature of a package repo is what I appreciate about Linux. Snap and Flatpack just seem so out of place to me when I’m using Linux, and in my experience integration is poor.
This only further makes my distaste for Ubuntu grow.
Thank you. I use OpenBSD on the workstation but I use Void on my HP laptop for the performance and better hardware support. Void is by far the most sane of the “old school” distros, and the most conducive to daily desktop use. No snaps, no systemd, a very cool package manager that makes it easy to build one’s own packages, and a rolling distro that isn’t bleeding edge like Arch, so it feels as stable as Slackware and Debian.
void is a faff around OS, too much low level configuration required for people who have been there and done that before (can’t be bothered going through that stuff again for yet another distro doing it their way).
That’s fair, it does require more manual setup than “my first OS” distros like Ubuntu, Pop!_OS, Mint, Fedora, and so on. On the other hand, it’s not quite as obtuse as Crux, Arch, Gentoo, and similar advanced distros. I feel they all have their respective place in the spectrum of Linux distros, and Void (for me) hits that sweet spot between ease of use and “some assembly required”.
Also I find it interesting that your handle here is “tux2bsd” indicating that you’ve moved on from Linux to the world of BSD, which no matter which BSD variant you pick, there’s a lot of “faffing around” as you put it.
Whatever little support exists by hardware and pre-compiled packages is officially on Ubuntu. Also, whatever little mindshare exists among the general public is also on Ubuntu. Funny how the market works, ain’t it?
Also, it’s amusing seeing Windows retain a very open app ecosystem (just download the exe and install it) while the two most popular Desktop Linux distributions are dependent on Play Store-like app stores, and for the case of Snap is even worse than the Play Store. If you receive the product for free, expect to pay in other ways. It’s been how the console market operated since forever.
kurkosdr,
The upside is that we have other genuinely viable choices and people are free to make up their own minds and choose what works for themselves. This is how competition is supposed to work and it is a good thing!
I’m happy for windows users that like microsoft’s direction. But I was a windows user too and personally I got frustrated by microsoft forcing annoying changes that I felt were hostile to me. What was I supposed to do: shut up and take it? I feel windows metro was the epitome of this. Being locked into a single entity can be a big disadvantage and I don’t think you need to like linux to be able to appreciate the value of having other options.
You can criticize ubuntu as much as you want, just like some of the linux community does, but I do think the better-than-though attitude is a bit misplaced.
You mean like how most Desktop Linux users left systemd? (which I don’t understand why it gets so much hate, Desktop Linux finally has actual service files and service management and not a clumsy hack on top of the shell with files acting as pid locks, but whatever, most of the Desktop Linux crowd hate it for some reason and want it gone). Newsflash: Most distros eventually moved to systemd because that’s where the platform is from a codebase standpoint and where the app ecosystem ix,
Similarly, if Snap becomes a defacto standard because some major publishers decide to use it, everyone will adopt it. This is why Canonical pushes it so hard, they see themselves becoming the tollbooth for Desktop Linux apps that can potentially collect payments in the future.
BTW I consider win32 to be like DVD-Video and Blu-Ray, a remnant from less dystopian times where always-online DRM wasn’t a thing and your purchases weren’t locked behind app stores that can take them away from you any moment they want.
kurkosdr,
You’re preaching to the choir, init.d sucked and I’ve always said so. The complaints about systemd were more nuanced than that.
Yes that’s true.
I think there’s enough support for other distros that it won’t be a major problem for users who want something else.
Yes, but at the same time microsoft themselves are no saint. They have backed DRM, walled gardens, advertising, tracking, mining users and so on. The point being these are all general trends that aren’t isolated to specific companies or platforms. It does us no good to take pot shots at each other, we have to stand together as consumers to protest these things that are bad for consumers across the board.
Microsoft has tried to kill win32 with their Metro “walled-garden” stuff but failed. That’s why I consider it a remnant from a less dystopian era. It survives despite Microsoft’s attempt to kill it.
kurkosdr,
Yes, I agree. Had they gotten their way it would be “IOS restrictions” for everyone. Personally I’ve very glad it failed. I still feel wary though because we still may end up loosing our rights if it’s only an inch here and an inch there.
With the exception of stuff bought on DVD-Video and Blu-Ray, and games bought from GOG, you have already lost your rights when it comes to purchased content. You have no resale rights and access to the stuff you’ve bought relies on some kind of online DRM server that can be taken away at any moment without a refund. I once bought a physical copy of Test Drive Unlimited 2 and it didn’t work because the online DRM server had gone down. I had to use a NoDVD patch.
So, they didn’t have to impose their dystopia inch-by-inch, they did it in one big coup. DVD, Blu-Ray and win32 are the survivors of the coup, and even win32 is dystopian in some cases (where online DRM has been bolted on).
Obviously, if you avoid “premium” content anyway, this doesn’t apply to you, so you can claim you haven’t lost any rights, I guess.
kurkosdr,
I’d say it depends on the specifics, but you are right things are moving in that direction with DRM that and services that can take away freedoms, even those explicitly granted by copyright. Rights become irrelevant when companies get to ignore them and use their own locks 🙁
I know, I’ve been there too.
I don’t think it happened in a fell swoop. We got here through many smaller changes over many years, not a sudden coup. By taking an inch at a time, it doesn’t rise to the level of public interest and debate. It still becomes significant over time though. I’d say Microsoft is known for testing the waters with large unpopular changes only to follow them with a lessor reversal following public outcry. This creates the image of appeasement “they listened to us” while still making progress towards taking away user control. Of course it’s not just microsoft we have to worry about and over a long time things have gotten worse in terms of owner control & freedoms.
“Also, it’s amusing seeing Windows retain a very open app ecosystem (just download the exe and install it) while the two most popular Desktop Linux distributions are dependent on Play Store-like app stores,”
This is not exactly correct. Executables in Linux/Unix don’t work exactly as in Windows. You need to manually enable the executable bit to run the downloaded app if you want to install it the way Windows does. Software vendors have the freedom to make their application *independent* of app-store like repositories by making their own repos like what Microsoft is doing or allow users to download directly from their website. If the latter happens, the software distributor must ensure that the downloaded app will work exactly when double-clicking it or after enabling the exe bit. And this is for good security reasons.
For the app stores, it must be called repositories where a Linux distributor compiled a list of applications that is “officially” supported, a distant similar in new Windows versions is the Microsoft Store.
I know this is a prevailing attitude for lots of folks wrt Ubuntu and honestly, I just don’t get it. I manage thousands of desktop computers and laptops for a living, predominantly Windows. When I get home and sit down in front of a computer, I really don’t want to have to futz with it. Ubuntu absolutely just works for me and with it being such a popular distro, I can’t be the only one.
I’ve distro hopped a fair bit over the past 20+ years and I keep winding up back at Ubuntu. The software ecosystem and support are top shelf. I can use deb, snap, flatpak, nix, whatever, and everything I need is well supported and well documented. It has never balked at whatever odd hardware I’ve thrown at it. Their gnome customization is well considered and easy to be productive with with minimal fuss. When I get prompts for an update, I hit the button and then go back to whatever I was doing. Just an absolute non-event and not something I can understand getting even a little bit upset over.
I was slow to upgrade to 22.04 because everyone was up in arms about the Firefox snap and when I finally took the plunge, the kinks quickly got worked out and I honestly wouldn’t even know it was being packaged separately unless I hadn’t read a million articles going on about how it was the most egregious offense imaginable. I honestly don’t want to think about software upgrades. Why would I demand the need to approve a browser upgrade? It’s the whole reason I picked a vendor I trust: give me a secure and working product and I’ll use and advocate for your product.
I gotta figure it’s because I’ve been on the other side of that transaction. I’ve had folks second and third guess the decisions I made with regards to keeping things working and it really does come down to trust. Canonical/Ubuntu hasn’t been flawless with that trust, but them and Mozilla have come the closest of any tech company I’ve ever had to deal with. I trust the processes and products enough that even if I wind up disagreeing with the decisions, I’m comfortable enough where I’m willing to give it a chance. Out of all the assaults on personal computing, this may be the easiest to understand, but it is far from the most dangerous.
dumdumjobes,
To be fair though, I don’t think anyone is actually suggesting it was “the most dangerous” or “the most egregious offense imaginable”. Obviously many people are using it and will attest that it works for them.. You can use it too. If you like the app store model, then maybe you’ll like snaps too. I don’t think anyone was debating that though, It’s really over the pros and cons compared to other solutions. Like it being less efficient that apt, especially for low end systems. Or as this article suggests, not everyone appreciates snap subverting the distro’s repository management tools. As an administrator, all the additional loopback mountpoints have bugged me since day one. On the one hand it’s a minor annoyance that most users will never see. It’s just an implimentation detail under the hood. But on the other hand it still does make it more difficult to work with mounts when applications are spamming the hierarchy and I don’t think they belong there. Also I don’t want linux distros to turn into app stores. For me (and only me, I have no pretenses that you should care about my opinion), these are enough of a reason for me to choose another more traditional distro.
I was speaking more to the article as posted (including Thom’s commentary) rather than dismissing anyone’s specific reasons for their preferences. My intention was to point out that coverage on this topic is overwhelmingly negative while highlighting that real world usage isn’t nearly as dire. In Ubuntu’s case, snap IS the distro’s repository management at this point, certainly on the desktop and IoT side (there’s enough diversity of containerization stuff on the server side it hardly matters). I do agree that loopback mounts are an inelegant solution but that’s neither here nor there for desktop and IoT usage. To pretend that there’s even a ghost of a chance that Ubuntu becomes some kind of walled garden app store gatekeeper feels untethered from reality. Likewise, saying Ubuntu offers a terrible desktop user experience is equally detached. It offers a really good experience by making some questionable tradeoffs some folks don’t like, but that’s not the same thing.
dumdumjobes,
I don’t know who is saying that though. Even Thom, who expressed a preference for other distros, didn’t say that.
I installed kubuntu on my old computer for my inlaws and it hasn’t been a problem. For their use case of web browsing and photo management it works fine. I think Mint could have been a good choice for them too.
Funny story: I had actually intended to install windows due to it being more familiar, but I was not able to get the graphics drivers to come out of standard vga mode. Theoretically an older unsupported version of windows may have worked. but they decided to give linux a shot and it worked out. We saved a computer with decent specs from becoming e-waste. It will be quite interesting to see if they’ll have a preference for a windows or linux desktop for next time 🙂
There is nothing new, SNAPs were always with auto update. Why this drama is coming up now?
tldr; its complicated. I hate snaps when they go bad, and they can also go stale leaving themselves in a very insecure state. And snap does not play well with other non ubuntu distos despite what they say. But when it works well, it works well. Some terrible apps have crazy dependencies and they don’t work well with newer versions of those dependencies or the upgrade process is a mess. With a healthy snap system those problems are gone.
So what’s a worse problem snap or the problems snap causes? It depends on what your needs are. For most people on ubuntu, I think they’re fine. But if you’re not on ubuntu? Stay very very far away and use garlic coated firewalls to keep it away.
…or just use Flatpak which has the same sort of containerized approach, a superior architecture (OSTree), treats adding alternative repos as an officially supported option, is very open about where to get the source to the server-side components, was the origin of the XDG Portals system Snap also uses back when it was called xdg-app, and is supported by many more distros.
Snap is another Mir or Upstart, right down to the disingenuous PR [2].
For FOSS software and GNU/Linux distributions traditional packaging is likely still it. There is certain level of trust involved. Regarding the transparency of the packaging process. Shared libraries are favorable in regards to memory consumption. Certain level of robustness and optimization. Although one does have to wonder. On why we have such fragmented package landscape. On how for example Firefox must be made into a package for gazillion times. All variants with their own bells and whistles involved. For GNU/Linux users being able to use the latest “native” package. Often simply missing out. It’s just extremely inefficient. But OK it’s still somewhat tolerable in regards to FOSS. Then you are confronted with real life task. Such as go to some web page and download some lets say conferencing software you need for your work. And install it on your system with root access. If we exclude AppImage and focus on “native” package managers. It’s extremely hard to ask the software provider. On why don’t you provide a gazillion of “native” packages. And when it comes to trust. You have no choice other than to bite the bullet. The reality hence is Snap is a necessity. To invent a GNU/Linux packaging system where in theory you can create one package. For majority of GNU/Linux users being able to use it after. And in theory to try to reduce some level of concern. When it comes to blind trust. And interesting here we currently only have Snap/Flatpak/AppImage competing. This is an achievement by itself. Rather reduced set of contenders. The main problem with Snap and on why there is likely so much backlash. In my opinion Canonical should focus on persuading companies such as Adobe, game studios, CAD businesses … To provide their proprietary solutions on Snapcraft. And to leave FOSS to “native” packaging for now. Another thing. This article seems to suggest people should ditch Ubuntu in favor of Fedora. That is basically to use Flatpak instead of Snap. It could hence instead simply suggest to remove Snap from Ubuntu and install Flatpak. To use Flatpak version of Firefox on Ubuntu. As in the end we need at least one such solutions. For at minimum the non FOSS. As for having control and an opt-in option. To prevent automatic snap upgrades. This was implemented in November 2022. If you command your system with snap refresh –hold. That should respect your choice and wait until you change your mind. Hence is not yet as integrated. Tray area. But some removed tray area as a concept. But it now works as one is accustomed to. Snap packages upgrades can be made to wait for your consent. As i agree it should be.
To say “without user consent” is misleading. Automatic updates is an openly advertised feature of the snap system, and by using snap you’re consenting to having those updates applied.
Saying “without further confirmation” would be more accurate.
bert64,
I tested this on a fresh install just now and can confirm that “without user consent” is true. I think the article is technically correct, unlike the apt updates. the snap updates never ask for consent.
According to this canonical doesn’t give users a way to disable snap updates directly…
https://www.pragmaticlinux.com/2021/04/how-to-disable-automatic-snap-update/
Most of my environments are servers. I don’t use ubuntu and don’t find automatic updates appropriate for me.
One could argue unprompted updates are “expected behavior” for user desktops. However I’ll note that some have criticized windows over updating without permission. This bit me once when I was traveling at the most inopportune time and I despised microsoft’s reckless policy for causing me grief. If microsoft gets blame for updating without permission, then I think ubuntu fairly deserves blame for it as well. A better way to handle it would be to prompt users once and have a checkbox “perform updates automatically from now on”.
You could argue updates are not yet as integrated. In GUI package managers. But until that improves you can opt-out of automatic updates and do it manually. By issuing snap refresh –hold. Or you can set a custom schedule. On when the updates should occur. So as you have control and can opt-out of automatic snap updates one should argue snap updates should be better integrated in GUI updater. As they likely will be in the future. And not to argue against snap altogether on this account. If you have control then you can manage consent. And in regards to snap you do have control in regards to disabling automatic updates.
snap is fine, but the default and unchangeable ~/snap/ directory (at least on ubuntu), unfathomably stupid.
main report: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapd/+bug/1575053
my addition: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapd/+bug/1575053/comments/331
As for alternative view and suggestions. On Snapcraft there is a blog post from October. Describing on how Steam support is evolving in regards to snap. Installing steam, getting 32-bit support and plethora of options in regards to GPU drivers. To easily switch in between them. All that isolated from the rest of the system. Now i guess what we need is for Ubuntu to switch to KDE by default. And lets finally have some competition. Ubuntu/Snap/KDE vs. Fedora/Flatpak/GNOME 3 competing and splitting the ever-growing market share. And not to result to less again. Where GNU/Linux users should divide themself inside 1%. Moving from Ubuntu to Fedora or something like that. Because of some BS.
Hey, it’s not KDE’s fault that GNOME was born of a “my way or the highway” attitude so strong that it prompted the devs to go write their own desktop, nor that we’re seeing more fragmentation as devs react to GNOME’s recently stronger “comply or GTFO” stance on GTK by GTFOing to their own separate efforts. (Cinnamon and MATE when GNOME 3.x was so unlike the paradigm everyone was used to, and now stuff like LXQt and COSMIC as the GTK devs continue to make design and implementation changes that have the effect of more insistently deprecating the creation of non-GNOME apps with GTK.)
Likewise, it’s not Flatpak’s fault that Canonical has a history of NIHing stuff and then lying about the situation to spin the story. (I don’t have a link, but they did flat-out lie about what the Wayland protocol’s design allowed when PR-spinning to justify Mir, and they PR-spun again when Snap came out. As for Upstart, I don’t have time to check right now, but I think it might have predated systemd by a bit. I remember that they did certainly make it needlessly difficult to compile and install Unity outside of Ubuntu though.)
…and, for the record, if anyone should be picking a combination, it’s GNOME+Snap (the two that embody a “we know what’s best for the user and they should just get used to that” philosophy) and KDE+Flatpak (the two that actively work to provide the tooling to let you customize things to your needs).