News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by willtim on Friday February 03, 2017 @03:11AM (#13558488)
Didn't Snap appear first? Why is FlatPak not an example of NIH?
Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by seenitall on Friday February 03, 2017 @03:26AM (#13558536)
Exactly. Snaps grew out of the work to make Ubuntu mobile phone apps secure and easy to update. They are a great way to publish software, worth creating regardless of all the anti-canonical trolling. And they work fine across distros except where RH has actively tried to cripple them. That's their right, but wow, toxic.
Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by vetinari on Friday February 03, 2017 @07:41AM (#13559370)
Snap is not vendor neutral - it has hard coded dependence on Canonical infrastructure. If you want to provide your own, tough luck.

Calling to attention about that is not anti-canonical trolling. It's avoiding creating a dependence on a third-party.

Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by mhall119 on Friday February 03, 2017 @02:58PM (#13562746)
s/tough luck/patches welcome/
Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by vetinari on Friday February 03, 2017 @03:01PM (#13562778)
Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by jhasse on Friday February 03, 2017 @07:04AM (#13559206)
> RH has actively tried to cripple them

Source?

Snaps require AppArmor which is used by Ubuntu and openSUSE. This makes it harder to integrate Snaps into Red Had (SELinux) distros, but I wouldn't say that this is something RH does actively to cripple them.

Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by mhall119 on Friday February 03, 2017 @02:00PM (#13562243)
Snaps need a security backend like AppArmor in order to run in confinement. Without it, they can still be run unconfined. And while AppArmor+seccomp is the only working security backend, snapd is designed to support alternate backends, so one could be made for SELinux, we just need someone with SELinux experience to write it (our in-house expertise is in AppArmor)
Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by gens on Friday February 03, 2017 @09:00AM (#13559798)
It is rare to see something come out of Fedora that is not NIH.

As for all the mentioned package/image managers, IMO they all bring more problems then solutions (except maybe nix). Dependency resolution brings sloppiness and keeping the programs dependencies up to date would kill the internets and hard drives (compared to a normal package manager). They should just build a build bot and amen (or just not do anything). The only "problem" they solve is proprietary program distribution, and that is solved by a Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (and fd.o) compliant installer such as MojoSetup (as used by GoG).

Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by pmontra on Friday February 03, 2017 @09:23AM (#13559937)
Yeah, my worry is that when a vulnerability hits libc we have to download all the snaps again and the vulnerable libc is still there in the abandoned snaps. There are many other libraries used by many programs that would suffer from the same problem. I'm thinking about openssl.

Edit: somebody answered to my doubts in a comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13559060

Re:Snaps are universal Linux packages by the_why_of_y on Friday February 03, 2017 @07:34PM (#13564715)
FlatPak is a rename of xdg-app, which is the successor of Glick2, which is the successor of Glick, which was released in 2007, all by the same author.