Screenshot doesn't even show half.
There are many reasons one could choose to hate Snap packages, and this not one of them. It's like hating a webbrowser because it spawns 20 processes that (the horror) you would all see when you run
ps. It's just a part of how container technologies work.Why I hate snaps/flatpak:
- 1
- package/appimage ~80mb
- snap/flatpak >500mb
- 2
- p/a - app + dependencies
- s/f - app + minimal linux distribution
- 3
- p/a - can be easily run from terminal
- s/f - flatpak run com.very.easy.to.remember.and.type.name
Appimage literally requires more storage for the apps because it dublicates all dependencies so in terms of storage flatpak and dnaps win by FAR, there are valid reasons to criticize all three but your comment is a sad joke!
Unless you trying to replace half your system with appimages, appimages take less space in practice .
Did you read my comment at all? Flatpak and Snap share dependencies while Appimage doublicates all of them so unless you have no big dependencies on your system (literally impossible with Linux systems) Flatpaks and Snaps become more efficient in terms of storage usage the more you use them because they share big parts while Appimage still dublicates every single dependency because it's a single binarie with everything in it...
Flatpaks and Snaps become more efficient in terms of storage usage the more you use them...
I'm not disagreeing with that, but how many apps an average user requires that he can't find in the distro's repository? And how many snaps he should have installed, so it'd be more space-efficient than appimages, 10? 20? 30?
hint: for me - one is too many.
Flatpak and Snap share dependencies while Appimage doublicates all of them...
On the other hand, appimage only includes the libraries actually required by an app. Where Snap/Flatpack install big fat runtimes.
I've recently made a very simple gtk4 app and packaged it with all dependencies into a 10mb appimage you can just download and run. The very same app would rely on 250+ mb gtk4 runtime with snap.
And I could be fine with that; but no, it's not that simple, you'll have x3 gtk4 runtimes on your system. Because snap keeps 3 last versions of every snap pkg and it's dependencies. I don't know what flatpack installs, but it's not efficient in that regard either.2-3 gigs of libraries a program might not even need. It's just wasted space for an average linux user. And if I was fine with that, I would be using Windows right now.
It does make sense why it works the way it works but I still don't want it on my system
Well, that's your choice, I like and use Flatpaks but noone has to do so!
- 1
Try it in enterprise where you have automated systems that deploy alert sensors and they instantly go off because each mount is 100% full.
I think Snap has the potential to be better than Flatpak. It's a real sandbox instead of the half-assed shit Flatpak has going on. The problem I have with Snap is that Canonical keeps the Server closed-source. I don't want a centralized app store where Canonical can just choose to remove apps they don't like. So as long as the Server is closed-source, I will stay on Flatpak
I don't know if sideloading snap apps is a thing, but it has been proven that creating a snap repo isn't particularly difficult. Snap server being closed isn't really an issue Imho.
That's why I moved to fedora recently...didn't like to see 30 or so mounted filesystems every time I did an fdisk -l to mount some disk
Fedora is actually my main on my other machines. This is my server though. I've tried fedora server in the past, but it wasnt quite working for what I needed it for at the time. And now, I don't have time to rebuild =\
Sure..I wouldnt choose fedora for a server..maybe RHEL..I chose debian for my home server..can't go wrong with debian in the server 😅
They also kill performance if you're still using a hard drive as your system drive. I know we should all be using SSDs, it's 2023, but sometimes it's not always possible
Thankfully the OS/app drive is an SSD. The rest are spinners though. Just for low bandwidth storage.
On the plus side, snaps also crap your system log full of petty little AppArmor events. And when snap gets its permissions wrong, you can easily fix it with SnapSeal.
(If Flatpak would just fucking stop rewriting every file path as /var/run/1000/blah, it would be the unquestionably superior package tech)
If you don't want flatpaks to do that, you'll have to give them permission to see the entire file system
I don't like snaps, but dude... Do you even know what fstab is?
Now imagine that your home directory is a network mount where only the user has permissions.
The most annoying thing about snaps is that they fall over trying to use a network share.
I've never used a distro that offered/forced snaps so I'm not very familiar with this perpetual topic. Given it's Linux and you have options why would you continue using a distribution who had a main feature you didn't like?
Edit: Debian is server king. Proxmox, trueNAS, Clonezilla, Ubuntu you can go on and on of very niche tailored and rather amazing products that base on Debian. I'm ever curious if there are people out there using Gentoo, Arch or xyz in the server space.
While I get that
mountsis probably full of crap, I’d put the blame here on the UI rather than snaps
