Ubuntu’s snap store enrages the open source community

14.06.2020, 7:28 p.m.
Note: We used commission links in this article and marked them with “*”. If an order is placed via these links, t3n.de receives a commission.

With the current version 20.04, Ubuntu has switched to its own package format Snap. Above all, this does not please developers who set up their distributions on Ubuntu.

The most prominent critic of the new snap package format that Canonical has been using as standard since the April version of the operating system is likely to be the chief developer of the more popular distribution Linux Mint, Clement Lefebvre. Linux Mint is expected to be released soon in version 20 and based on the current Ubuntu.

Canonical’s snap packs cause resentment

So far this has not been a problem. However, Canonical is now using the new snap format instead of the previous open Debian packages. Snap packages can only be loaded from a so-called snap store. And the only snap store so far is operated by Canonical. The software for this is proprietary. Canonical also apparently does not want to issue a free license.

Basically, it would be no problem to work with several different package managers. This is common under Linux. The real problem is Canonical’s implementation of snap management.

Implementation as a sticking point

Because it provides that Ubuntu decides whether to install a Snap or a Debian package. Even if users choose to install an app as a Debian package, Ubuntu will deliver a snap if one already exists for that app. So it comes to the almost unnoticed use of the snap store, which Lefebvre therefore not quite unfoundedly calls “backdoor”.

In a detailed blog post on the subject, he makes it clear that snaps in Ubuntu reading do not correspond to his understanding of open source. From a user’s perspective, they should basically be seen as proprietary applications. The developer is particularly upset about the Snap Store. If each distribution could run its own snap store, the developers would have alternatives.

Mints answer: No free license, no installation

In fact, Canonical has put the software for operating a snap store under a proprietary license and has not given anyone else access. Therefore, neither the developers of Linux Mint nor those of other distributions based on Ubuntu can offer their own snaps.

In Linux Mint 20, Lefebvre therefore wants to technically ensure that snaps cannot be installed automatically. To do this, he wants to block the snap client and the snap daemon.

However, Lefebvre does not want to completely block it, but rather leaves it to the users of its system whether they want to use the snap store. However, this should be based on an informed decision and not, as it were, through the back door via automatic installation.

Chromium-Snap causes dispute

The starting point of the problem was the Chromium browser. Canonical had announced that it would only integrate Chromium as a snap package in the future and would forego the conventional Deb package. Since Chromium is part of the basic but not the standard scope of most Linux derivatives, Linux Mint should have snapped off the snap store for this important app. Lefebvre was not ready for this.

In the case of Chromium, the problem is ultimately not one. After all, the browser can easily be loaded directly from the manufacturer. Nevertheless, it is understandable that the developers do not want to accept a virtually uncontrolled distribution of software. With Chromium it was noticed, with other apps it might not even be noticed.

Canonical can hardly understand anger

Canonical can hardly understand the criticism of its own approach. In a statement opposite ZDNet Canonicals community manager Alan Pope explains the benefits of the Snap packages. For example, maintaining applications is much easier. In addition, the snap packages would only have to be created once per architecture. This is a significant relief from the previous procedure, in which applications for different versions with different compilers would have to be created. In addition, the containerization of the apps as a snap package adds an additional level of security. The apps run in a virtual sandbox.

However, Pope does not respond to the criticism of the proprietary form of his own snap store. This is precisely the central criticism of Canonical’s approach. If the snap server were under a free license, there would be no excitement.

Matching: Windows alternatives: These Linux distributions are perfect for those switching