Is Snap really so terrible?

[Tom_ZeCat]

I've noticed a lot of Snap bashing in the Linux community. A lot of Linux Youtubers say something to the effect of, "Ubuntu would be good, except for this Snap system they use for installing apps. They should have used Flatpak." I've heard stories of Snap packages taking forever to install, and then being buggy afterwards. However, I have not had any trouble with any of my Snap-based apps. They all appear to run just fine. I did have some problems with Flatpak, but that was mainly when it was new, and some of the problems were minor, like the app would run, but didn't take on the look and feel I had set up for Kubuntu. Since then Flatpak has been okay. Some of the advice in the Linux community, has been, "If you use *buntu, uninstall Snap and go with Flatpak." I'm curious if anyone here has felt the need to go that route. Have you guys had problems with Snap? I honestly haven't.

[Schwarzer Kater]

Personally I prefer Flatpaks to Snaps and try to avoid both if possible…

It is no secret that I have written scripts to get rid of Snap in Kubuntu and I will continue doing so as long as technically possible.

Why Snaps are terrible, why Snaps are great, why Flatpaks are terrible and why Flatpaks are great: you will find a lot of thoughts and opinions in several discussions here in this forum already…

For the "average Joe" this is quite irrelevant - I doubt that most "normal" Linux users are even explicitly aware that Snaps and Flatpaks exist and what all the differences (and company politics) are…
And Canonical has done a good job in reducing the start time of some Snaps by now - at least in often used programs like Firefox (this really was still an issue only two years ago…).

And then there are things like this: Heads up, snap had scam stuff… again (I honestly can't remember if something similar has already happened with Flatpaks…).

[notabug]

I have been installing my favorite game for several years. IIRC, when 22.04 came out, an essential package or two were left out, so I couldn't install the game any longer. I tried flatpaks, but didn't have any luck, but I accidentally ran across the option to install the game via Snap using a terminal. I have been doing that ever since and I'm glad to have it. Pysolfc fills a lot of empty time for me.

[jlittle]

... "They should have used Flatpak."

Flatpaks were targetted at desktop apps only. One can do a command-line, text-user-interface application, but it has to have a .desktop file:

Flathub is primarily focused on graphical desktop applications and they have ... expectations to ensure effective desktop integration.

Do note that CLI applications do not require a .desktop file but TUI applications should have a .desktop file with Terminal=true.

Snaps are intended for back-end applications, too. But some would argue that such applications are better done with other containerization approaches. I would reply they have messy learning curves and maintainability.

I have de-snapped because I begrudged the space taken up in my incremental backups. The several GB seemed to churn a lot. If I have to reinstall snapd, I'll have to work out a way to put it in its own subvolume, and have its own backup regime.

[oshunluvr]

I have de-snapped because I begrudged the space taken up in my incremental backups. The several GB seemed to churn a lot. If I have to reinstall snapd, I'll have to work out a way to put it in its own subvolume, and have its own backup regime.

Well, according to Snapcraft:

/var/lib/snapd/snaps Contains all the versions of snaps installed on your system. /var/lib/snapd/snapshots/ Contains both the manually generated and automatically generated snapshots

Seems like it would be easy enough to make a subvolume mounted at /var/lib/snapd/. Since BTRFS snapshots do not recurse into nested subvolumes. If you snapshot the root subvolume, the resulting snapshot will not contain any nested subvolumes including home or snapd.

[jglen490]

In my opinion, single issue containers are, at the very least, a waste of space and are generally installed incorrectly - relative to the rest of the distro, and with the ridiculous LOOP device distraction. There may be issues/nitpicks that others have, but that's my opinion.

[claydoh]

And then there are things like this: Heads up, snap had scam stuff… again (I honestly can't remember if something similar has already happened with Flatpaks…).

Well, I personally discovered something interesting just now:
A flatpack that actually grabs a snap package and extract contents, to basically convert them to flatpak, if you will
It doesn't install snap, or run using snap, or anything, but it is extracting binary files. Imagine if this were doing this with the crypto snaps that someone keeps trying to upload uploading to the snap store.....



( I have read - take it with a grain of salt - that this bad crypto scammer snap has been uploaded to the snap store, or at least attempted to, a few more times since this latest one has been pulled. I sort of want to dig out, dust off, re-energize, and put on my rusty corroded tin foil hat for this one Someone who *hates* snaps or Ubuntu scripting this to push the malicious snap to prove a point, or create bad press lololol )

[Schwarzer Kater]

claydoh : I just read your post.
Did you notice if there is something being done about this Flatpak ?

Honestly I do expect from a company like Canonical to keep the Snap Store safe from malicious software!
(also see Brodie's video Canonical Keeps Shipping Malware Snaps!!)
As I do expect the same from the Flathub guys and girls (despite not being a company but a bunch of volunteers…).
I am feeling a little bit disillusioned atm…

In contrary I would expect malicious software potentially from the AUR or Pling/KDE Store (where now has happened what I have thought about for years: Do not install global themes!) or some random GitLab or GitHub project or some third-party PPA…

Well, at least the distributions' own repositories seem to have been "safe" for years now (as far as I can tell)…

[claydoh]

Did you notice if there is something being done about this Flatpak ?

No, I haven't looked. The yaml config file seems to be designed to be able to do this, and in itself is not a bad thing - I can see a company building a snap for their binary, then using this to 'convert' it to flatpak.

The snap issue is purely one of mis- and under-management.
I don't know how easy it is to get something int to flathub, or how quickly. Other than being able to view the build setup, I am not even sure what or how much vetting is being done.
And don't forget one could set up their own flathub to distribute stuff. There are more than enough crypto-crazed and copy-pasta morons out there..........

[TinyTim]

I Have you guys had problems with Snap? I honestly haven't.

I got in at the end of the switch from flatpak to snaps. I use LibreOffice, GIMP, Thunderbird and Firefox a lot and I had no problems. Once snap was introduced, Firefox kept crashing. While looking for problems I noticed loop after loops of mount points. It seemed that all these assorted programs integrated with KDE Plasma desktop in some way, I did not require or like it. Maybe I'm wrong on some of my assertions, but Firefox was crashing a lot. Now things have calmed down a bit, it is rare that Firefox crashes. What is also rare is me forgetting about snaps poor performance, and all those mount points. (any info on that is appreciated)

[GregM]

If you are a fan of "Tabs Below" you run into a problem in the placement of the corrective code used in the css file.
Usually it is located in the .mozilla subdirectory. Not so using a snap app. It must go the snap directory and under the mozilla subdirectory there.
Still working on getting that file to work they way it is supposed to. It does work (sorta) but you have the Bookmarks toolbar activate or the tabs are buried in the active Firefox screen.

Still working