I’m very beginner of Linux server admin. Few days ago I set up snap version of nextcloud server app on my own Ubuntu VPS server, and I found that Snap system might be focused to build original file system hierarchy in /snap directory, and I felt a little weird about that.

For example, Linux file system hierarchy is defined to set server app config into /etc/app/conf.d or so.
But snap version app tend to set it into /snap/app/current/app/config or so.
It sounds so complicated for me.

So I want to know about how Snap is thought by others. I’m happy if you might tell me something here.

  • thehatfox@kbin.social
    7·
    2 years ago

    It’s annoying fragmentation when even for a stable distributable package there’s flatpak as a standard, and I’ve never seen why Ubuntu needs their own with a proprietary store.

    It’s the Canonical way, just as with Mir, Upstart, Unity, and a bunch of other NIH Canonical projects.

    I miss the old Ubuntu sometimes, the Ubuntu that wanted to be an up to date Debian with sensible defaults, easy installation, and commercial support. It seems that wasn’t profitable or visionary enough for somebody though, and we’ve ended up here instead.

    • Colombo@kbin.social
      2·
      2 years ago

      It’s the Canonical way, just as with Mir, Upstart, Unity, and a bunch of other NIH Canonical projects.

      A commonly repeated lie.

      Mir, Upstart, and Unity all precede or are parallel to the other project. While Wayland technically existed when Mir was created, Wayland wasn’t very active at that time. Upstart was replacing init, systemd was created later and draw inspiration from Upstart. Unity was replacing Gnome 2, Gnome 3 was released a year after Unity and was a mess. Finally, Snap and Flatpack are more or less parallel, both solving a different issue, with Snap being a more system-level solution such as for drivers, IoT, while up until recently, Flatpack couldn’t handle command-line apps at all, concentrating solely on GUI apps installed through GUI appstore.