this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
255 points (97.0% liked)

Linux

48213 readers
700 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Honestly, why enable this kind of behavior in any way? Any user is free to make an informed choice by installing it themselves.

We all know how this goes. Once a critical mass is reached, enshittification begins to milk everything dry. By making it an installer option, you're legitimizing it and supporting a worse future for the Linux desktop.

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

Ok but KDE has official Snap packages so they already are "legitimizing it". Also snap won't be able to entshittify anything. Snapd is still open source, so you can just repackage the software for different package system.

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

My guy. There is no open backend for Snap. If Ubuntu enshittifies Snap, nobody can host an alternate backend for them. How does the client being open source help you?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You simply use a different packaging format as I said in the previous comment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Okay, and how does snapd being open source help with that? It literally has no effect on it.

And when your best argument is "if it gets enshittified you can switch off of it", why help it get popular in the first place?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well if it were closed source, it would be harder to repackage proprietary apps because you would not know how the snap "root filesystem" translates to $DISTRO root filesystem.

Because some apps are only packaged as snaps so if you want them to be accessible to users, you have to install snapd. Flatpak can still be the default which on non-Canonical distros already is. Which why I don't even worry about snap becoming the standard.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Well if it were closed source, it would be harder to repackage proprietary apps because you would not know how the snap “root filesystem” translates to $DISTRO root filesystem.

Only if all the other tools (like Snapcraft) were also made closed-source and obfuscated, but that's besides the point. What if, for example, Snaps start costing money, and you can't legally turn them into Flatpaks and distribute them? What if the only legal way to get some software for Linux will be the official Snap repository? This approach will make for a far worse user experience than simply using the already working, already open-source and non-enshittifiable alternative.

Because some apps are only packaged as snaps so if you want them to be accessible to users, you have to install snapd. Flatpak can still be the default which on non-Canonical distros already is. Which why I don’t even worry about snap becoming the standard.

And by promoting Snap to the same status as Flatpaks on other distributions, you're opening the gates for enshittification and a worse user experience tomorrow. Again, why support it as an equal option if we all know the price?