[opensuse-factory] Snap packages
Hi I just saw some Fedora contributor is providing snap support for Fedora. Anybody looked at it in our community? https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/zyga/snapcore/ Bo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 15 June 2016 at 07:39, Bo Simonsen <bo@geekworld.dk> wrote:
Hi
I just saw some Fedora contributor is providing snap support for Fedora. Anybody looked at it in our community?
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/zyga/snapcore/
Bo
A gentleman from Canonical is volunteering to work on it https://www.reddit.com/r/openSUSE/comments/4o2pdj/universal_snap_packages_la... If anyone else is interested in this, please contact him ( me@zygoon.pl ) and give him a hand - I get the impression he knows a great deal about snap but could probably do with help with RPMs, OBS, and getting stuff into Tumbleweed -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:31AM +0200, Bo Simonsen wrote:
I just saw some Fedora contributor is providing snap support for Fedora.
From the fedora-devel list:
There's an article on Ars as well. The "working with Fedora developers" claim is probably a misunderstanding on Softpedia's part; it's not true, and I doubt Canonical would have said that. What's going on is that Canonical beat us to market in development... and now their marketing folks have beat us in marketing, too. We of course have zero plans to adopt Snappy in Fedora, and in fact multiple Fedora developers are working on a competing solution, Flatpak [1] (formerly xdg-app), which is also being adopted by GNOME and Endless. Until today, Snappy was viewed as Ubuntu-specific, which is why there was so little interest in it. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/15/2016 04:50 AM, Michael Schroeder wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:31AM +0200, Bo Simonsen wrote:
I just saw some Fedora contributor is providing snap support for Fedora.
From the fedora-devel list:
There's an article on Ars as well. The "working with Fedora developers" claim is probably a misunderstanding on Softpedia's part; it's not true, and I doubt Canonical would have said that. What's going on is that Canonical beat us to market in development... and now their marketing folks have beat us in marketing, too. We of course have zero plans to adopt Snappy in Fedora, and in fact multiple Fedora developers are working on a competing solution, Flatpak [1] (formerly xdg-app), which is also being adopted by GNOME and Endless. Until today, Snappy was viewed as Ubuntu-specific, which is why there was so little interest in it.
Oh yes, let's all get on board with The One True Canonical Way. Like upstart, Unity, Mir... -- Glenn Holmer (Linux registered user #16682) "After the vintage season came the aftermath -- and Cenbe." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 15 June 2016 at 14:25, Glenn Holmer <cenbe@kolabnow.com> wrote:
Oh yes, let's all get on board with The One True Canonical Way. Like upstart, Unity, Mir...
Hey, let's not get all religious about it - people give Canonical a justifiably hard time when they do stuff like Unity and Mira and do not engage with other Projects, we shouldn't be jerks when they DO make an effort to work with us, which they are with this. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/15/2016 07:40 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 15 June 2016 at 14:25, Glenn Holmer <cenbe@kolabnow.com> wrote:
Oh yes, let's all get on board with The One True Canonical Way. Like upstart, Unity, Mir...
Hey, let's not get all religious about it - people give Canonical a justifiably hard time when they do stuff like Unity and Mira and do not engage with other Projects, we shouldn't be jerks when they DO make an effort to work with us, which they are with this.
But is it a good idea in general (snap, Flatpak, etc.)? I understand the issues it's trying to solve, but how much more disk space will it use? How much bigger will my operating system partition have to be? And how much longer will software installs take? -- Glenn Holmer (Linux registered user #16682) "After the vintage season came the aftermath -- and Cenbe." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am 2016-06-15 14:55, schrieb Glenn Holmer:
On 06/15/2016 07:40 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 15 June 2016 at 14:25, Glenn Holmer <cenbe@kolabnow.com> wrote:
Oh yes, let's all get on board with The One True Canonical Way. Like upstart, Unity, Mir...
Hey, let's not get all religious about it - people give Canonical a justifiably hard time when they do stuff like Unity and Mira and do not engage with other Projects, we shouldn't be jerks when they DO make an effort to work with us, which they are with this.
But is it a good idea in general (snap, Flatpak, etc.)? I understand the issues it's trying to solve, but how much more disk space will it use? How much bigger will my operating system partition have to be? And how much longer will software installs take?
I see not the problem in disk space. I see big problems in security and updates. And with snap, snappy or so on, package manager 'will be obsolet'. And then Linux is the sames as Microsoft. Many double packages and many old paclkage wich nevver be fixed or updated. And for me many more works to update 'snaps'. If i can do it even. I think snap and os one will driven by Manaufacture and Industrie. They need less people. For me it makes no sense and i will it not. -- Regards Eric -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 15.06.2016 15:48, Eric Schirra wrote:
But is it a good idea in general (snap, Flatpak, etc.)? I understand the issues it's trying to solve, but how much more disk space will it use? How much bigger will my operating system partition have to be? And how much longer will software installs take?
I see not the problem in disk space. I see big problems in security and updates. And with snap, snappy or so on, package manager 'will be obsolet'. And then Linux is the sames as Microsoft. Many double packages and many old paclkage wich nevver be fixed or updated. And for me many more works to update 'snaps'. If i can do it even.
All true and I agree, but let me bring in some thoughts with my 3rdparty vendor glasses (as the guy shipping the ownCloud client to many linux distros) on. With the ownCloud client we experience big problems in providing packages for the various distros, because of the huge variety of library versions out there on the different distros, in our case mainly Qt. We are forced to maintain the client code to work even with Qt 4.6 (yes, not longer supported from Qt project), only because of old distros like Ubu 14 LTS (or even CentOS), which is still widely used. And it's not only versions, its also patch sets. We have couple of patches against Qt which we a) would have to maintain for all the versions out there, and b) convince the distros to ship the patches. A LOT of work... For our win and mac builds, we build and ship exactly one Qt version, built with our patch set. I hate to say it, but it is way harder for us to properly support Linux than Mac or Windows, for the described reasons. It wouldn't be even possible if we hadn't OBS, so thanks for that. That hopefully illustrates why the idea of snappy appears overly useful from that POV. A lot of 3rdparty vendors do other dirty tricks such as static linking etc. regards, Klaas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 05:05:21PM +0200, Klaas Freitag wrote:
With the ownCloud client we experience big problems in providing packages for the various distros, because of the huge variety of library versions out there on the different distros, in our case mainly Qt.
We are forced to maintain the client code to work even with Qt 4.6 (yes, not longer supported from Qt project), only because of old distros like Ubu 14 LTS (or even CentOS), which is still widely used.
And it's not only versions, its also patch sets. We have couple of patches against Qt which we a) would have to maintain for all the versions out there, and b) convince the distros to ship the patches. A LOT of work...
For our win and mac builds, we build and ship exactly one Qt version, built with our patch set. I hate to say it, but it is way harder for us to properly support Linux than Mac or Windows, for the described reasons. It wouldn't be even possible if we hadn't OBS, so thanks for that.
That hopefully illustrates why the idea of snappy appears overly useful from that POV. A lot of 3rdparty vendors do other dirty tricks such as static linking etc.
As far as I'm concerned, this reasoning rather illustrates what exactly is utterly and terribly _wrong_ with the concept of snap. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 2016-06-16 07:54, Michal Kubecek wrote:
For our win and mac builds, we build and ship exactly one Qt version, built with our patch set. I hate to say it, but it is way harder for us to properly support Linux than Mac or Windows, for the described reasons. It wouldn't be even possible if we hadn't OBS, so thanks for that.
That hopefully illustrates why the idea of snappy appears overly useful from that POV. A lot of 3rdparty vendors do other dirty tricks such as static linking etc.
As far as I'm concerned, this reasoning rather illustrates what exactly is utterly and terribly _wrong_ with the concept of snap.
What is the better solution then? I do not see anything else, than tarballs with static-linked executables in the world of Linux with different package managers, versions of software, etc. Bo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
2016-06-16 8:49 GMT+02:00 Bo Simonsen <bo@geekworld.dk>:
On 2016-06-16 07:54, Michal Kubecek wrote:
For our win and mac builds, we build and ship exactly one Qt version, built with our patch set. I hate to say it, but it is way harder for us to properly support Linux than Mac or Windows, for the described reasons. It wouldn't be even possible if we hadn't OBS, so thanks for that.
That hopefully illustrates why the idea of snappy appears overly useful from that POV. A lot of 3rdparty vendors do other dirty tricks such as static linking etc.
As far as I'm concerned, this reasoning rather illustrates what exactly is utterly and terribly _wrong_ with the concept of snap.
What is the better solution then?
I do not see anything else, than tarballs with static-linked executables in the world of Linux with different package managers, versions of software, etc.
I like the idea of a hybrid solution - the rpm and deb based base system and snap on the top for bigger packages with difficult dependencies. I understand the argument of software vendors to have an universal package format. They cannot rely on having a maintainer for each distribution. From my point of view this is a big barrier for them to deploy to Linux. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Onsdag den 15. juni 2016 15:48:49 skrev Eric Schirra:
But is it a good idea in general (snap, Flatpak, etc.)? I understand the issues it's trying to solve, but how much more disk space will it use? How much bigger will my operating system partition have to be? And how much longer will software installs take?
I see not the problem in disk space. I see big problems in security and updates. And with snap, snappy or so on, package manager 'will be obsolet'. And then Linux is the sames as Microsoft. Many double packages and many old paclkage wich nevver be fixed or updated. And for me many more works to update 'snaps'. If i can do it even.
Nobody suggested to remove rpm/zypper. Snap or xdg-app/flatpack has been developed so it is easier for developers of proprietary software to distribute their software (think of it as a supplement). After all, most Linux users use at least one or two proprietary software packages and currently it is a nightmare to package. Snap/flatpack is trying to make life a bit easier for the packagers. See, for example, spotify. They only provide debs for Debian/Ubuntu since it is most mainstream. For rpm based distributions there is no unified way of installing. Some people create rpm generators, so people create rpms that will install the contents of the deb, etc. In a perfect world all software would be Open Source, but we don't live in such one. So we need in some way to support the users of our distribution in getting the software they need (proprietary or not). Bo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, 17:13:43 +0200, Bo Simonsen wrote: [...]
In a perfect world all software would be Open Source, but we don't live in such one. So we need in some way to support the users of our distribution in getting the software they need (proprietary or not).
agreed, but only on the proprietary part... But, why the heck did they then list htop as one example [1] to be available as a snap package? I'd understood if they listed some non-standard/non-open-source packages, but htop, libreoffice, ...? And, didn't we choose Linux because of its freedom because of mostly being open source? Why should we then compromise for getting *some* proprietary packages by switching to "snap", with an almost perfectly working package management in place - be it rpm or deb? I'm definitely not willing to do that! [1] <http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Portiert-Snap-kommt-fuer-viele-Linux-Distributionen-3238181.html> Just my 0.02 € ... Cheers. l8er manfred
Onsdag den 15. juni 2016 19:53:57 skrev Manfred Hollstein:
Why should we then compromise for getting *some* proprietary packages by switching to "snap", with an almost perfectly working package management in place - be it rpm or deb? I'm definitely not willing to do that!
I believe you misunderstood me. I see snap/flatpack as a supplement. Ubuntu still relies on deb, Fedora/openSUSE will continue to rely on rpm when flatpack is a reality. The point is for additional packages which we cannot package due to not being open source we need a better alternative than a tarball. Spotify was a great example, we don't have any state of the art unified approach for dealing with software like that. Bo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Content-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1606160253440.3002@zvanf-gvevgu.inyvabe> El 2016-06-15 a las 19:53 +0200, Manfred Hollstein escribió:
freedom because of mostly being open source? Why should we then compromise for getting *some* proprietary packages by switching to "snap",
Nobody said "switch to snap". - -- Cheers Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAldh+K4ACgkQja8UbcUWM1ycFQD+I7MYNXHxRZySDeAZ3CUs9l4x HaHQmA2BQtCxNxt/QR8A/if/AItkRIh14QT/05Mi00Ox+0zgs9gqw+74wN4bFpEk =lcy0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 15-06-16 15:55, Glenn Holmer wrote:
On 06/15/2016 07:40 AM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 15 June 2016 at 14:25, Glenn Holmer <cenbe@kolabnow.com> wrote:
Oh yes, let's all get on board with The One True Canonical Way. Like upstart, Unity, Mir...
Hey, let's not get all religious about it - people give Canonical a justifiably hard time when they do stuff like Unity and Mira and do not engage with other Projects, we shouldn't be jerks when they DO make an effort to work with us, which they are with this.
But is it a good idea in general (snap, Flatpak, etc.)? I understand the issues it's trying to solve, but how much more disk space will it use? How much bigger will my operating system partition have to be? And how much longer will software installs take?
In terms of disk space please consider the relation between snap and snapper (pun not intended). What if I install 5 snap packages consecutively (which can easily hit 500MB-1GB+) and snapper creates both pre and post snapshots of that?
On 15 June 2016 at 16:14, Kevin <kev_pi@mailbox.org> wrote:
In terms of disk space please consider the relation between snap and snapper (pun not intended). What if I install 5 snap packages consecutively (which can easily hit 500MB-1GB+) and snapper creates both pre and post snapshots of that?
Snapper wont unless someone writes a Snappy Snapper plugin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:39:31AM +0200, Bo Simonsen wrote:
Hi
I just saw some Fedora contributor is providing snap support for Fedora. Anybody looked at it in our community?
For the status of Fedora and whether it's a good idea for openSUSE you might want to have a look at: https://www.happyassassin.net/2016/06/16/on-snappy-and-flatpak-business-as-u... Classy Canonical project. Byte, Johannes -- Johannes Thumshirn Storage jthumshirn@suse.de +49 911 74053 689 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (12)
-
Bo Simonsen -
Carlos E. R. -
Eric Schirra -
Glenn Holmer -
Johannes Thumshirn -
Kevin -
Klaas Freitag -
Manfred Hollstein -
Michael Schroeder -
Michal Kubecek -
René Krell -
Richard Brown