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.

  • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • PlasmaK@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • what@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • PlasmaK@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you are not setting up a server I don’t think it matter that much.

      • code@lemmy.mayes.io
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hows the latest debian for gaming? Im thinking of switching but need my steam to just work

          • code@lemmy.mayes.io
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            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

        • ILurkAndIKnowThings@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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!

    • dragnet@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • phx@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, Mint actually still maintains packaged versions for stuff that Ubuntu went snap-only crazy on

    • SymbolicLink@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I like Pop! OS too. I think it’s a better Ubuntu than Ubuntu is now, if that makes sense.

      • eight_byte@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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?

    • daniskarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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.

      Does Debian offer a lightweight server image without DE as Ubuntu?

      • bookworm@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

      • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

      • phx@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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)

        • what@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Debian packports provided what I needed when bullseye had outdated packages before the bookworm release. For qemu, libvirt, kernel and ZFS.

      • null@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Recently switched my servers from Ubuntu to Debian and it feels virtually identical except much snappier and lower numbers on my resource-usage graphs.

  • TrivialBetaState@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I moved to Debian and MX Linux because Ubuntu was deviating from the principles that are important to me. Can I ask why you prefer Firefox-ESR? It’s the first thing I remove when I install Debian! And why do you stick with Ubuntu if you don’t like snaps? Do you have any compatibility issues with other deb-based distros?

    • xavier666@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The reason is pretty much just laziness. This is actually my work laptop. I told management that I needed Linux. They only know about Ubuntu and their “monitoring” tools have only been tested on that platform. Thus I couldn’t use any other random distro.

      I’m also a Firefox supporter (I use Chromium as backup since some company resources work better on that). I found out that the Firefox-ESR was still released as a deb and the installation is without a hassle. I just need stability and no the latest bells and whistles.

  • Fuck Yankies@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m convinced it’s just Shuttleworth with remote shell access to your system via the official snapd package and he’s just installing stuff for the hell of it.

  • fubo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The folks who run Ubuntu don’t seem to be appreciating the work done by Debian developers and other Free Software maintainers. I’d suggest switching to another distribution. I use Pop!_OS which takes Ubuntu and strips out most of the tentacles. Other good options include Mint and vanilla Debian.

    • xavier666@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe I’ll give Pop!_OS another go. I forgot why I didn’t want it in the first place, maybe it didn’t have a minimal edition or something.

    • xavier666@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s exactly what I wanted. Thanks.

      But makes me wonder how apt-mark is different 🤔🤔

  • INeedMana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m afraid Ubuntu has always been like that. For me it all started with core settings binaries being able to run only if X was running too and not including make tools in base installation in the times when not everyone had internet access

  • gabriele97@lemmy.g97.top
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yep I think it’s time to stop using Ubuntu because of snap and how they are forcing it. Nowadays the are many distros suitable as daily driver. If you don’t want something too much different I suggest Pop OS (I use it on all my machines). In those years it has proven to be very stable, maintainers behind it are very good in what they do and it’s pretty much updated (for example new kernels and new Nvidia GPU drivers are tested by the maintainers before they offer the update to you, so when you update you are 90% sure that everything will be ok)

  • EddyBot@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    at this point a lot of people who don’t like Snaps just ditched Ubuntu for something else like Linux Mint or Debian
    otherwise you will be constantly fight against your distro maintainers with every upgrade

  • Mount_Linux@vlemmy.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m hearing and feeling the bad vibes towards Ubuntu, but they’ve not done anything to totally ruffle my feathers just yet. I went full Ubuntu with about 10 servers and 2 desktops. I don’t mind snaps, but my senses are heightened after the red hat shebackle, so considered a next move in case Ubuntu disappoints me with these enterprise decisions. I’m happy to accept an immutable distro like they have planned, but with snaps being proprietary what would that make the distro? Hmm. Do I need to reconsider snaps?

    I heard canonical took lxd in house, however I thought it was canonical anyway, and i use lxd a lot, so I’m concerned there’s a play they are going to make… If the red hat thing never happened, I’d probably not have had much concern, but… Red hat thing did happen, and so did reddit. Anyway, hopefully it’s just a little paranoia from recent events. 😬

    • xavier666@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Canonical is a company, so they have their own direction which might not be aligned with a chunk of the community. I can understand and respect that. What irks me is that they are trying to force something upon their user.

      I don’t hate Ubuntu; I still recommend it to new users. But decisions like this is making me reconsider that stance.

    • Xylight (Photon dev)@lemmy.xylight.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Back when I was an Arch elitist I thought this too, but I now recommend Ubuntu or Mint if they’re completely new to Linux, otherwise if they have technical literacy I point them to Fedora

      • xavier666@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        An average person won’t understand the pains of snaps. So it’s better to guide them to a version (Ubuntu) which has the highest acceptance rate is most places instead of scaring them away by random distros.