Is it me or Ubuntu secretly replaces DEB Firefox with Snap Firefox?

[zod000@lemmy.ml]

Definitely not you, they absolutely do this with snaps and have for a while. This was the main reason I stopped using Ubuntu.

[corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca]

From a security standpoint? Not even close. From a software-release validation requirement, not even in the same galaxy. If they look the same, it's only due to Clarke's law.

[corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca]

Debian will have snaps and flatpaks and all the same insecure black-box drek.

[yozul@beehaw.org]

It's not as up to date as other rolling releases, unlike stable it doesn't get security patches right away, it gets frozen for months during the switch from one stable to the next, and in my fairly limited experience it just has more bugs. It's not bad, but it's a testing branch. It's not intended as a daily driver, and it shows.

[morphit@feddit.uk]

In Ubuntu they are the same. firefox version 1:1snap1-0ubuntu5 is a deb that literally runs the command snap install firefox in the preinst script. Check line 77 in firefox-1snap1/debian/firefox.preinst in the source tarball: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/1:1snap1-0ubuntu5

There's no magic there.

[bcsven@lemmy.ca]

There is RedHat and SUSE. Which are also the only two certified distros for running corporate/enterprise CAD/CAM/FEA and PLM software. They both provide rock solid stability.

[technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

I feel like snaps are black boxier tho.

[gpopides@lemmy.world]

Unfortunately it's my only option at work because my employer wants the security of Ubuntu pro

[pebbles@sh.itjust.works]

I'm a bit of an anarchist so I disagree on principal lol, but I do agree that that would help Linux usurp windows.

My fear is that it would just then become windows within a decade or less. Getting big and institutional may work out. I've just seen a lot of cases go sour.

To me the beauty of Linux is that it is less connected to large impersonal capitalistic structures. That's why it feels different from Windows.

[technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

The installer, last time I tried it, was glitchy and unintuitive.

I used it a few months ago and it was pretty smooth.

[irritableocelot@beehaw.org]

That is not the same thing as "snap and apt Firefox are the same". They just hijacked apt to force snap in.

[morphit@feddit.uk]

So both commands do the same thing... right? I'm not saying snap and apt are the same.

[aphelion@lemm.ee]

I'm a relative Linux noob and Manjaro Arch works perfectly for me, no babysitting required.

[baaahb@feddit.nl]

You are missing the attribution. The person you are replying to is making a home that canonical says they are the same, not that they are actually the same.

[baaahb@feddit.nl]

You are missing the attribution. The person you are replying to is making a joke that Canonical says they are the same, not that they are actually the same.

[morphit@feddit.uk]

Well, yes, except Canonical have made them actually do the same thing in the case of Firefox. I'm not aware of any other packages that have the deb install just run the snap install.

[secret300@lemmy.sdf.org]

Yeah it's not really a secret

[aliteralcabbage@feddit.uk]

I used it decades ago (using the CLI installer for a Sid install I eventually fucked up beyond repair) and it was okay for a slightly tech savvy teenager, even then.

I suspect a lot of these issues are down to hardware compatibility more than anything else.

[captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works]

Yeah, there's an entire page bitching about it on Linux Mint's website.

[irritableocelot@beehaw.org]

Yeah for sure, I read your comment as excusing canonical screwing with user intent but I see that's not what you meant.