Linux

125 readers

1 users here now

founded 2 years ago

How do you think about Snap? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by wave_walnut@kbin.social to c/linux@kbin.social

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm very beginner of Linux server admin. Few days ago I set up snap version of nextcloud server app on my own Ubuntu VPS server, and I found that Snap system might be focused to build original file system hierarchy in /snap directory, and I felt a little weird about that.

For example, Linux file system hierarchy is defined to set server app config into /etc/app/conf.d or so.
But snap version app tend to set it into /snap/app/current/app/config or so.
It sounds so complicated for me.

So I want to know about how Snap is thought by others. I'm happy if you might tell me something here.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] airclay@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As others have complained, canonical and a lot of extra overhead (like mount an entire FS for every snap running). I tried it and got rid of it quickly. I do use flatpacks but really only on my gnome desktop (arch) due to the ease of the gui software center being right there. (EDIT: This is how containers work, I get that, it's just a lot for system utilities or small apps)

Are you using nextcloud locally or facing public? I run nextcloud on a homeserver but for anything public facing I run in a docker container on it's own bridged network served up by Caddy proxy container. It's no where near "hardened" or full proof but it's something better than just facing a snap at the world tbh.

[–] popshabang@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

I really like the way Silverblue handles it--with flatpak being the standard for GUI applications and toolboxes being the standard for CLI applications