Screenshot doesn’t even show half.

  • digdilem@lemmy.ml
    3·
    1 year ago

    Try it in enterprise where you have automated systems that deploy alert sensors and they instantly go off because each mount is 100% full.

    • exi@feddit.de
      1·
      1 year ago

      Pretty much every alerting system I know also has a filter option to only apply automated discovery rules to certain filesystem types.

      But yes, most don’t first squashfs or mounted read-only snapshots by default and it sucks.

  • rotopenguin@infosec.pubEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    On the plus side, snaps also crap your system log full of petty little AppArmor events. And when snap gets its permissions wrong, you can easily fix it with SnapSeal.

    (If Flatpak would just fucking stop rewriting every file path as /var/run/1000/blah, it would be the unquestionably superior package tech)

    • SirNuke@kbin.social
      4·
      1 year ago

      Friction between Snap and AppArmor is to be expected. The corporate sponsor of Snap, Canonical, is well known for their icy relationship with the corporate sponsor of AppArmor, Canonical.

    • Fisch@lemmy.ml
      1·
      1 year ago

      If you don’t want flatpaks to do that, you’ll have to give them permission to see the entire file system

    • ferret@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      As another commentor pointed out, you can just use flatseal to give the app full access to whatever dirs you need.

  • robinj1995@feddit.nl
    21·
    1 year ago

    There are many reasons one could choose to hate Snap packages, and this not one of them. It’s like hating a webbrowser because it spawns 20 processes that (the horror) you would all see when you run ps. It’s just a part of how container technologies work.

    • planish@sh.itjust.works
      31·
      1 year ago

      This is truly why I also hate snaps though. The snapd people and the mount people need to work out how to hide these by default.

  • I_like_cats@lemmy.one
    21·
    1 year ago

    I think Snap has the potential to be better than Flatpak. It’s a real sandbox instead of the half-assed shit Flatpak has going on. The problem I have with Snap is that Canonical keeps the Server closed-source. I don’t want a centralized app store where Canonical can just choose to remove apps they don’t like. So as long as the Server is closed-source, I will stay on Flatpak

  • technologicalcaveman@kbin.social
    1·
    1 year ago

    Switching to Gentoo has been the best. If I don’t want something I just blacklist it in my make.conf. getting errors from an odd package? Blacklist. Don’t want systemd or gnome software? Blacklist. It’s great. My shit runs insanely fast and my system only breaks when I explicitly do something stupid, and it’s usually just one minor adjustment away from getting fixed.

  • Zeppo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    Sigh, I was a sysadmin on my own system from 1999-2008 and on a busy server from 2008-2012… then essentially quit. Now with flatpak and snaps it seems I have no idea what I am doing.

    • Gamey@feddit.rocks
      1·
      1 year ago

      Flatpaks aren’t very relevant for servers if I am not wrong but Canonical definitely tties to push Snaps for that usecase, I feel like other container technologies like Docker or Podman are a lot more relevant in that context and containerization in general is really nice especially for server use and not that hard to wrap your head around! ;)

    • Gamey@feddit.rocks
      1·
      1 year ago

      Appimage literally requires more storage for the apps because it dublicates all dependencies so in terms of storage flatpak and dnaps win by FAR, there are valid reasons to criticize all three but your comment is a sad joke!

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      1·
      1 year ago

      Runtimes are okay, the problem is there is no runtime package manager and often you have like 7 of them, which is horrible. But on modern hard drives also no problem.

      Appimages cant be easily ran from terminal, you need to link then to your Path.

      For Flatpak I made a tool that aliases their launch commands to be very easy.

    • QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
      1·
      1 year ago

      snap/flatpak >500mb

      Don’t know about Snap, but Flatpak download sizes decrease significantly after installing the main platform libraries, they can become really small; of course that’s pretty much fully negated if you’re installing Electron apps, but even then 500MB isn’t very accurate, more like 150MB on average

      flatpak run com.very.easy.to.remember.and.type.name

      Yes I hate it, what is even more annoying is that you can do flatpak install someapp and it will search matches on its own, it shows them to you to let you decide, but after that you can’t do flatpak run someapp because it “doesn’t exist”

  • fernandu00@lemmy.ml
    1·
    1 year ago

    That’s why I moved to fedora recently…didn’t like to see 30 or so mounted filesystems every time I did an fdisk -l to mount some disk