“Canonical only having snap releases was harmful to adoption. I liked using lxd, but uninstalled snapd (forgetting lxd used it), and my vms obviously stopped. Snap wouldn’t reinstall properly (various inscrutable errors), so I moved it all over to libvirt. I’d still be happily using lxd if it weren’t for Canonical’s snap-pushing. That’s my anecdote of one.”
-mkj
(I’m not mkj so…, but I think most users are quite against enforcement of snapd)
deleted by creator
Snap seemed like a cool idea until I tried it
Even better, Debian 12 comes with LXD on the repository.
It’s been a while since I’ve used Ubuntu. What happened?
Forcing Snaps, and requiring all official Ubuntu flavors to remove Flatpak support out of the box. You can still install Flatpak support afterwards, but it continues to rub the Linux community the wrong way.
This might shed some light.
Yeah, Linux users have always had a blind spot for dependency hell when talking about freedom of choice.
I think it affects a sliver of the community that lies above the complete novice, but not quite technically adept. The place that gives you a feeling that you have knowledge but you haven’t reached the level where you understand how much you don’t know. I think that’s the place which breeds this sort of sentiment we see around this issue.
They want Ubuntu users to use snap, which unsurprisingly isn’t very popular.
One of the main arguments for picking Ubuntu over Debian was the installation process, but Debian made the installation process much easier, by allowing non-free firmware.
Ubuntu got worse, and Debian got better, anyone unhappy with Ubuntu should just switch to Debian with Gnome and the problem is largely solved.
Also debian used to have ancient packages, or broken ones in testing. Now stable is fairly up to date so Ubuntu lost its value, it was just a newer stable really.
There’s also LMDE as an option.
Much ado about nothing.
True. I installed this OS, deleted a random component without any dependency analysis and it broke. Plz help.