Ubuntu trying to install snap AND Firefox even though I have removed them a year back
Ubuntu trying to install snap AND Firefox even though I have removed them a year back
I just tried to upgrade Ubuntu and I suddenly see that new packages want to be installed; snapd and firefox. I don't need Firefox because I'm already using Firefox-ESR as a deb and I certainly don't need snaps.
Why is Ubuntu doing this? I get it you like snaps but I don't, so don't try to force install it. I had to use apt-mark hold to block the install of snapd and firefox. This is also not an isolated incident. I just checked Reddit and someone made a thread 8 hours back regarding the same issue.
This thing is giving me Microsoft vibes.
You're viewing a single thread.
My advice: time to move on. Ubuntu has been like that for a while and they have plans to go even further, so move to Debian, which is basically Ubuntu without the issues. Even Firefox-ESR is the default in Debian.
I don't get these posts saying "Debian is basically Ubuntu"..? It's the other way around, Ubuntu is literally built from Debian, with Debian itself being the second oldest linux distribution. I had nothing but problems with Ubuntu, but everything has been rock-solid since I moved all my machines to Debian about 15 years ago.
If you want bleeding-edge crap that's going to break, choose Ubuntu. If you want a machine that always just works and doesn't ignore your preferences, choose Debian. Yes I have strong opinions on the subject, I have servers that sometimes run for a year between reboots and I don't put up with crap like security updates completely breaking all networking on all my machines in the middle of the night.
You can use testing (or sid, if you feel lucky) to get newer packages. I have been using testing for a year and I feel great.
One downside of testing is that it isn't monitored by the Debian security team. Combined with the fact that updates are delayed compared to unstable, it can take many weeks to get important security updates.
If you are not setting up a server I don't think it matter that much.
Hows the latest debian for gaming? Im thinking of switching but need my steam to just work
As a longtime Debian user, I would look elsewhere for gaming.
Afraid I couldn't tell you, I've never been a gamer.
Works really well with Flatpak Steam
Pop!_OS has entered the chat.
yea going to have to give pop a try. the bad thing is getting all my shit moved over. Ive been on ubuntu for the last 7 years
As a longtime Debian user, Steam can work really well on Debian, but rarely there are some things that fall between the cracks when some packages get updated. There's also a bit of latest-and-greatest envy because Debian (even testing) is a little bit behind. If you're only using your computer for Steam, look elsewhere. If you want a mostly reliable desktop computer and are okay with occasional hiccups, Debian is pretty awesome. Honestly, any computer you use will run into some issues eventually. If you get familiar with the Debian way of doing things, you're gonna have a good time!
I would recommend Mint for an easier transition, its what I jumped to from Ubuntu due to Canonical's behavior and I've been happy. It is definitely simpler to use than Debian - which is not to say anything bad about Debian. It's just less hand-holdy. I like it for servers.
Yeah, Mint actually still maintains packaged versions for stuff that Ubuntu went snap-only crazy on
I also recommend Fedora if OP wants a similar “just works” experience as Ubuntu.
Been using it for a while now on my desktops/laptops with no issues.
I like Pop! OS too. I think it's a better Ubuntu than Ubuntu is now, if that makes sense.
I quickly tried out Fedora and was very surprised how good it is. Just wondering how the fact that RHEL plans to go closed source will impact Fedora in the long term. Do you know?
I don’t think it will have any impact tbh
Historically the flow of code has pretty much been:
- Fedora
- CentOS stream (as of a couple years ago)
- RHEL
CentOSRocky Linux / Alma Linux
I think there’s been discussion on what will happen with Rocky/Alma, but nothing should change with Fedora.
How is Debian for servers?
I'm currently running Ubuntu server. And it's really convenient. I even appreciate snaps as they keep things clean for the server.
Certainly I wanted something Debian based, I know some people using Fedora por servers but I really like Debian/Ubuntu LTR and not having to worry about updates so often.
Debian is great. It's basically Ubuntu (it also uses apt for example) but bit more traditional. In fact it's probably one of the most popular distros used in servers when you don't need the support that someone like Redhat can give you especially as a business. And if you can't live without "snaps" then you can install snapd on Debian.
Download the netinst image. You get the option of installing a de or none entirely.
Better than it is for desktop. Stable has tended to live up to its name and has always been my go-to for servers, but may not always be the best choice if for example you want to use new/uncommon hardware with a newer kernel and drivers etc (though compiling your own kernel is always an option, of course)
Debian packports provided what I needed when bullseye had outdated packages before the bookworm release. For qemu, libvirt, kernel and ZFS.
Perfect for servers, best there is.
It's Ubuntu server minimal without snaps and their ubuntu-cloud, that's it.
I think they use network manager instead of net plan too, but I think you can switch.
Just solid as all f*. My hypervisor is debian, freebsd and other debian running the apps underneath.
Recently switched my servers from Ubuntu to Debian and it feels virtually identical except much snappier and lower numbers on my resource-usage graphs.
Does anyone know if Kubuntu does the same with snaps?
Every *buntu has been forced to comply, they took longer but now they are all aligned in this "Snap-it-all, don't support Flatpak" approach.
Define "forced to comply". I understand Canonical can do anything with Ubuntu, which is why this random forced snap install happened.
But do they have similar authority over the rest of the bunch?
As per this article, it seems like Canonical finally had to specifically enforce it on the remixes, and required them to comply with the "new rules".
It sounds like that's just part of the game if you want to be considered "official".
Ah too bad... I liked KDE.
KDE neon is your place. Or Debian with KDE, or Fedora KDE, or Arch with KDE...
Didn't know about them, thank you for the heads-up.
Your choice of desktop environment is totally independent from your choice of distribution. You can always change it to what you prefer.
I bet you could even run KDE Neon (KDE's own distribution) with Gnome if you wanted to.
Wow, always something new to discover. I didn't know KDE had their own distribution! I'll check that out. Cheers.
or LMDE