Yeah, it was an issue of Gun Lovers Monthly
Yeah, it was an issue of Gun Lovers Monthly
The moment I can get a laptop-style RISC-V device with virtualisation support I’m doing it. Double bonus if I can actually use it as my daily driver.
It doesn’t - that’s the point.
I would guess that they’ll be sourcing a next-gen RISC-V processor ASAP, since those will enable virtualisation. If they stick one in a laptop shell I’d probably buy it pretty quickly. Doubly so if it has EFI.
I write developer tools. When I was doing web stuff I hated my job.
Oh I think we all know why…
Man I’m so glad I love my job.
I’m sure I’ll get shouted down for this suggestion by the haters, but I’m going to make it anyway because it’s actually really good:
Use an Ubuntu LTS flavour like Kubuntu. Then, add flatpak and for apps you want to keep up to date, install either the flatpak or the snap, depending on the particular app. In my personal experience, sometimes the flatpak is better and sometimes the snap is better. (I would add Nix to the mix, but I wouldn’t call it particularly easy for beginners.)
This gets you:
I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to reveal to the world that your butt is an outie
Lol imagine a canonical employee using nixos
And they’re providing Ubuntu for free. If you were a paying customer and the contract you’d signed with them said they’d provide Firefox as a deb, that would be a different situation.
I agree, but unfortunately our opinions don’t move a gazillion finance bros
over the course of a few updates, they replaced half of your programs with snaps (without telling you),
You don’t need to lie. A full list of debs that have been transitioned to snaps is:
as you can see on other comments I’m not alone with that stance.
Being in the majority doesn’t necessarily make one right, as shown by [insert election result you disagree with here]. But if you actually are serious about that, you do realise how entitled it sounds to demand that someone do free work for you in the particular way you want it done?
And I believe you mean prerogative.
Because the separate installation means you can actually end up with both an apt installed and a snap installed.
This is something that can happen any time you have multiple package managers or even multiple repositories in the same package manager. Google’s official Chrome apt repo has debs for google-chrome-stable
, google-chrome-beta
and google-chrome-unstable
, quite intentionally.
My comment about docker was a specific example of such a case, where vulnerabilities were introduced. It was actually a commonly used attack a few years ago to burn up other CPU and GPU to generate crypto
Can you provide a link to a source about that? I can’t find anything about it.
and you ended up with both a snap and apt installed docker
If you installed both the docker.io
package from apt and the docker
snap, yes you wound up with both. Just as if you install both google-chrome-stable
and chromium
you’ll end up with two packages of (almost) the same browser.
The fact that they are both packaged by Canonical is both irrelevant and a perfect example of the problem.
Then I’m gonna ask that you elaborate what specific problem you’re trying to explain here, because these seem pretty contradictory.
Yes, you are literally forcing me to accept your dollarinos, which, unless I exchange them MYSELF, are USELESS!
Hold on, have I fallen for Poe’s law?
In both cases, the packages are owned by the same people? (Fun fact: mozilla actually owns both the Firefox snap and the firefox package in the Ubuntu repos.) I’m non sure how that “potentially introduces vulnerabilities” any more than “having a package which has dependencies” does.
I’m not sure what you’re referring to with Docker. Canonical provides both the docker.io
package in apt and the docker
snap. Personally I use the snap on my machine because I need to be able to easily switch versions for my development work.
If you don’t want to explain, you’re perfectly welcome to not explain. But saying what amounts to “if you don’t know I’m not telling you”, especially when you weren’t specifically asked, is a pretty unkind addition to the conversation.
The pawpaw in the Jungle Book is what’s known in the US as papaya. It’s been cultivated in India since at least the 18th century. Likewise prickly pears have been brought all over the world. By the time Kipling wrote The Jungle Book, both fruits were well established in India, just as many old world fruits have made it to the Americas.