Snap Store

[Bob Proulx]

Brian Sturgill wrote:
> It turns out that, while snapd, etc. are open source.
> The protocols of the snap store are proprietary.
>
> https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/snap.html#disabled-snap-store-in-linux-mint-20

I have always been told that snaps are an Ubuntu proprietary feature.
Other OS distributions can't use snaps.  Ubuntu users are not quite
required to use snaps but not using them is harder.

On the other hand the main reason to use a snap is if one is using an
already proprietary program such as Skype or Zoom.  And if someone is
already using a closed program such as those then using another closed
thing like a snap to run it doesn't seem like any more of a stretch.
In for a penny, in for a pound.

So far I haven't needed installing either for myself.

> This does not hold true for flatpak or appimage.

I don't know very much about either of those but appimage I know has
always tried to be cross platform.  The idea of a completely
encapsulated binary with *everything* needed to run it included.

> Having seen what the Apple and Google stores did to mobile (really
> mobile software is a total mess), I really don't want to be
> supporting snaps.

I don't generally run Ubuntu and therefore I don't run snaps on my
other systems.  However IF a person is already running Ubuntu then IF
that person is running one of the closed source snap bundles like
skype or zoom then I think I would just go with the flow and use skype
as a snap package.  Blech!  And then it is easy to use chromium or
firefox that way too.  Since those are so messy.  All native packaging
of those apps have been horrid!  Putthing them in a container is a
good thing for those awful apps and their packaging.

It feels strange for me to be defending even a limited use of snaps.
So let me be clear that I don't like the way Ubuntu is using them, as
a proprietary lock-in mechanism.  But for those other people that use
Ubuntu and also use skype or zoom then I think they should install
them as snaps and just go with the flow.  But I also think they should
consider their life choices and see if they can avoid those programs.

The problem is that we live in a time when the mass consumer considers
those programs as the standard.  It is often impossible to go to
school without them.  Gack.

> I used to use Linux Mint, but I got tired of having to upgrade from
> scratch to get major releases (and Ubuntu had a Mate fork come out).
> Linux Mint now has upgrade paths... I may switch back.

I am a pretty simple user of the X system.  I use the very simple i3
tiling window manager, and my fallback is the wonderful fvwm.  But I
always thought the draw of Mint was the Cinnamon desktop.  It's very
pretty.  It's fancy.  It's glitz and glitter like a fishing lure.  And
one that is now available on other distros.  Therefore I don't see any
particular attraction of Mint.  Just install Cinnamon on Debian or
Ubuntu if the user wants Cinnamon.

Mint native install with an encrypted /home is an odd but interesting
feature.  They use eCryptfs to encrypt the files of a directory.  As
of Mint 19 anyway.  They use the user's login password to decrypt the
directory.  Which allows the system to boot normally and the files are
not decrypted until the main user logs in.  (Secondary users do not
have their home encrypted by default.)  That's an interesting feature.
It would allow a server to boot and then be unavailable until someone
logged into it.  However for a laptop I think full disk encryption is
much better.  So this is one of those interesting features which is
better solved otherwise.

Bob