I see people hate snap packaging and removing it if their OS support it. Is it because it’s NOT fully open-source or just due to how the technology works?
Update: fixed typos
deleted by creator
There are philosophical and technical reasons to not like snaps
Technical
- Slow startup time
- Makes lsblk look really ugly
- For awhile users didn’t have a lot of control over when things updated
- Not designed to work with third party repos by default
- Requires apparmor so it doesn’t work well on selinux distros.
Philosophical
- Backend is proprietary and controller by a single company
- Has made the same amount of effort as flatpak to work on distros that aren’t Ubuntu
- Some people just don’t like Ubuntu
Also:
- Creates a snap directory on your home. I hate programs that pollute my home.
- Requires a service (snapd) to function.
Not only does it create that directory but it creates new folders for each updated version of various apps… Very weird and confusing
- Canonical is pushing it too aggressively, removing the freedom of choice.
Canonical has a history of ignoring established practices and established software projects in the FOSS community and instead rolling their own in-house competitor behind CLA licensing agreements that make it hard for community developers to contribute. It feels like an embrace-extend-extinguish situation to me. They did it with Unity (replacing GNOME 3), Mir (replacing Wayland), and now Snap (replacing Flatpak). There are also technical reasons why many Linux users don’t want these userspace/sandboxed packages (Flatpak and AppImage included) taking over the position formerly occupied by native distribution packages (.deb, .rpm, pacman, apk, etc) because of issues with unnecessary copies of dependencies and poor integration with the rest of the system. These concerns apply to Snap as well, and Ubuntu has been pushing to replace .deb packages with snaps.
Short answer: Canonical is strong arming Ubuntu flavors into removing support for alternatives to snap (that run better and do the same thing). These types of decisions are generally worse for the overall Linux community.
Right now, a part of the Linux and Open Source communities are distancing themselves from corporate-sponsored projects given issues we’ve recently seen with RedHat’s CentOS and Canonical’s decisions with Snap and LXD
Because I can’t dismiss the Firefox update notification, no matter how many times I update it.
I’ve had to reboot every time.
Which, way to go you’ve reimplemented windows xp era updates.
Stop the app and run “snap refresh” and it should update anything that’s queued
yes, I did kill the process and update the image though snap.
this did nothing to remove the update notification that cannot be dismissed without rebooting.
Oh, weird. The notification itself disappeared for me when I click it (KDE)
maybe they fixed it, I switched to Debian over a year ago.
Linux Mint’s criticism of snap. Mint is based on Ubuntu.
Snaps have centralized control. Canonical has to approve a snap package. Flatpak is like most of Linux. Anyone can make a Flatpak. Also, in my experience, Snaps had a lot of issues early on that were not present in Flatpaks. Now, Flatpak dominates and Snaps kinda feel like a irrelevant runner in a race long after the officials closed competition packed it up and went home.
On a less philosophical note, I find it immensely annoying how Snap creates mounts for its apps bc of how it clutters up disk management tools
Here’s my answer to this same question from an old thread on Reddit:
My Ubuntu system always reserved a whopping 20% of my 32GB ram for no reason and I never bothered to know why. Later I uninstalled snapd because of boot time issues and guess what happened? Only 1.5 GB used after a fresh boot.
I had like 4 different JetBrains IDEs installed via snap with each totalling around 2GB of disk space. While removing snapd I discovered it kept back 2-3 previous versions of every package on your disk.
Uninstalling this bloat was the best thing I did to my ubuntu system. It was suddenly light as a feather and way more responsive like I just did a fresh system install.
Some time later I was installing something from apt and Ubuntu tried to install it from snap, thus sneakily installing snapd in the process. Looking for a solution, I felt like I was looking up how to disable Windows updates or some other shit.
I had a moment of clarity and wondered why the fuck did I have to put up with this kinda bullshit on Linux. I wiped that drive clean and switched to Fedora.
Because people still believe in one standard to rule them all.
Hmmm, can we just sticky a “snaps are bad” thread? I like to see activity but this same question keeps getting asked.
Also sticky Red Hat’s “response”, it should deter most of the neolibs.
Along with the other comments, imagine if people started to say, “I like Linux but it’s too slow and bloated, so I upgraded to Windows 11.”
Had a low end laptop, i believe it was lubuntu that i installed because i knew ubuntu was too bloated for that laptop. However I was not aware that it used snap and running firefox kick started the fans on that old laptop. Resouce hog seen and searching for firefox direct binary from apt seemed like a chore so i replaced with mint. Snaps automatically i did not want to deal with for old computers. Was happy with mints removal of snaps and it is very user friendly.
Bloat and coersion from canonical when using Ubuntu.
Also I hate typing mount on my home machine and sifting through a sea of mountpoints.
Some of the things that have already been mentioned are true also for me, especially around permissions and assumptions about my system’s setup. However what really did it for me was when Firefox stopped recognizing my keyboard after a snap refresh. It’s just as if no input device was there for FF anymore. I found reports of the issue, but no solution. In the end I installed from a DEB repository and went through the shenanigans to prevent snap from reinstalling it.
