Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Adios Apt and Yum? Ubuntu's Snap Apps Are Coming To Distros Everywhere (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the this-is-the-future dept.

An anonymous reader shares an Ars Technica report: Ubuntu's "snappy" new way of packaging applications is no longer exclusive to Ubuntu. Canonical today is announcing that snapd, the tool that allows snap packages to be installed on Ubuntu, has been ported to other Linux distributions including Debian, Arch, Fedora, and Gentoo among others. To install snap packages on non-Ubuntu distributions, Linux desktop and server users will have to first install the newly cross-platform snapd. This daemon verifies the integrity of snap packages, confines them into their own restricted space, and acts as a launcher. Instructions for creating snaps and installing snapd on a variety of distributions are available at this website. Snaps can exist on the same system as either deb or RPM packages. Snaps aren't the only new package manager for Linux distributions that aims to simplify installation of applications. There's also AppImage and OrbitalApps.

14 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. And hello problems by phorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Adios to tried and true package managers, hello dependency and network/firewall hell as you try to resolve conflicts between the different sources?

    1. Re:And hello problems by Dadoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Snaps help solve that - your program can be made into a snap with the versions of libraries it needs, while the rest of your system marches forward

      That sounds a lot like the "winsxs" folder, which is currently eating up 25% of the total space on my Windows machine, for no good reason. Having the same "feature" on Linux really doesn't thrill me.

      --
      Sit, Ubuntu, sit. Good dog.
    2. Re:And hello problems by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So in other words the "solution" is the Microsoft way of shipping a copy of the .dlls with every single program. So if someone finds a security issue with .dll (say OpenSSL) even if the bug gets fixed in the library you need to issue updates to all the apps as well. Fun.

    3. Re:And hello problems by jandrese · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But this way when a library has a security vulnerability you will never be rid of it.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    4. Re:And hello problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      FUCKING AWESOME!

      You mean certain programs can opt to keep using vulnerable libraries?! YES! Soon Linux will finally catch up to Windows in terms of malware thanks to Snap!

  2. Where can I find a UNIX-like Linux distro?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the year 2016, where can I, a long time Linux user, get a decent UNIX-like Linux distro?!

    What I mean by that is a Linux distro that follows the UNIX philosophy of simplicity, doing one thing well, openness, and modularity.

    All of the major distros today, including conservative ones like Debian, are rife with systemd, GNOME 3, now this "snap" crap, and all sorts of other shenanigans that violate the UNIX philosophy.

    I don't want to use a goddamn relic like Slackware, either. I guess what I want is Debian, but just before systemd was forced on Debian users. So a distro that's sensibly conservative, that's reliable, that works, and that follows the UNIX philosophy.

    And don't even bother suggesting Devuan. It's a terrible, terrible joke of a distro in my experience. Conceptually it's what I'd want, but in practice I've found it to be a total shitfest.

    At this point I don't think I'll have any choice but to use FreeBSD. Yeah, it's not Linux, but I don't think that I even care about using Linux at this point. I need a UNIX-like system, and if FreeBSD can deliver (and all of the evidence suggests that it can!) maybe I should just say to hell with Linux and use FreeBSD instead.

    1. Re:Where can I find a UNIX-like Linux distro?! by LichtSpektren · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your post is rife with self-contradiction. Pick one:

      1) I want to avoid modern technologies as much as possible because I hate them (therefore use Slackware, Devuan, CRUX, Gentoo, etc.).
      2) I want a modern distro that uses mainstream technologies (therefore use Ubuntu, Fedora, openSUSE, Debian, etc.).
      3) I want my own custom mix of 1 & 2 exactly how I like it (therefore make your own distro).

    2. Re:Where can I find a UNIX-like Linux distro?! by skids · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know if I'd throw the term "modern" around so much as "trendy". After all, isolating apps in containers where they cannot integrate with the rest of the OS is pretty much warmed over mainframe thinking.

      --
      Someone had to do it.
  3. Clickbait headline... by LichtSpektren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1) DEBs and RPMs aren't going anywhere; they serve different functions from Snappy Core. Snaps are better for servers that require zero downtime because they prevent ABI breakage as packages are updated asynchronously. DEB and RPM are better for desktop, mobile, and less-important servers because they take up monumentally less room (because you don't have to have a million versions of the same dependency installed at the same time).

    2) As TFS indicates, Snaps can coexist with all the other packaging tools (apt, dnf, yum, zypper, slapt, portage, pacman, etc.).

    3) A large percentage of the Linux community are [a] too suspicious of Canonical to ever adopt any of their technologies and [b] conservative to the tried-and-true methods of doing things. apt will probably live forever on account of that.

    1. Re:Clickbait headline... by gmack · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know if I agree with point 1. SNAPS (as a concept) should be better for third party apps because the APP as it is packaged, now imports all of the libraries it needs. The downside of course, l is that if some library has a security issue, you must wait for the package maintainer of each SNAP app that contains it to do the update.

  4. Re:Gentoo user here... by LichtSpektren · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And i think i speak for us all when I say I'll be in the cold cold ground before i ever trust some bull-shit packager repository more than portage. Shuttleworth can eat my ass like groceries.

    I don't understand the hostility. Canonical developed a new tool for you to use if you want to, for free (as in both beer and speech). Nobody is taking portage away from you.

  5. Re:Why switch? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its main purpose is for servers that require zero downtime, where you want to upgrade application X and/or its dependencies without breaking even the smallest functionality of application Y.

    I disagree, snapd is Canonical's attempt to bring an android/ios like 'app universe' to their linux OS. Unfortunately if it succeeds, I also forsee it bringing the in-app advertisements and micro-payments mess :(

  6. Re:You're making up contradictions that don't exis by LichtSpektren · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's no contradiction.

    1) Systemd and GNOME 3 aren't the only "modern technologies" out there. They are among the most anti-UNIX-philosophy ones. There are other modern init systems and desktop environments that do follow the UNIX philosophy, we just see the major distros treat them as second-class citizens, although they're typically superior to systemd and GNOME 3.

    2) The point of using a mainstream distro is to get access to the wide community support network and the benefits it brings, including more testing of releases and quicker bug/security fixes.

    3) The whole point of using a Linux distro is to avoid having to roll your own! In the past there used to be choice among the major distros. Debian is what you used when you wanted a system that worked. SuSE is where you went if you liked KDE. Ubuntu is where you went if you wanted a Windows-like experience. Fedora is where you went if you wanted to subject yourself to Red Hat-produced shit.

    I know you're intentionally ignoring the real problem here: the fact that the major Linux distros have converged to the point where they're nearly identical. Worst of all, they've chosen to converge on software that exhibits a very anti-UNIX approach, such as systemd and GNOME 3.

    Today, a modern Linux distro installation is closer to Windows than it is to anything resembling UNIX. The Linux userland has become a cheap imitation of Windows in so many ways, from the GUI down to the init and service management systems.

    If you want a Linux distro that doesn't use systemd, you have a lot of options. But your complaint seems to be that that most of the Linux community has moved away from your preference. Well I'm sorry princess that you're not in the majority anymore, so either get comfortable in the minority, get your hands dirty with the majority, or do the work getting things exactly how you want them. But I'm not terribly sympathetic to your complaints if you're sad that the rest of the world isn't 100% empathetic to your desires, sparing you from the work of making your own perfect distro to your preferences.

    At least I can understand the systemd complaining, because most distros don't support sysvinit or upstart anymore. But I really don't get the GNOME 3 bitching. I hate it just as much as you do, but literally every single one of the big distros (so that's Ubuntu, Fedora, openSUSE, Debian, CentOS, Arch and Gentoo) support alternatives.

  7. Re:If this replaces repos... ugh by LichtSpektren · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Again, nobody is taking apt or yum away from you. Snappy Core is meant to complement them. If you don't like it, don't use it. As it stands now, you're being a huge douchebag because Canonical developed a technology with their own time and money and are offering it to the Linux community for free, and you're thrashing and crying about it.