[XFCE RC5] Isn't that beautiful?

I think enabling access to snap is opening the door to malware sooner or later.

It already happened: https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/05/ubuntu-snap-malware

It is a strategical mistake for me. But I'm only an advanced end-user :slight_smile:

2 Likes

pacui is pretty slick. I saw you mention it in another thread and grabbed it to check it out. I really like it, so thanks! :wink:

1 Like

It seems like there are two options:

  1. Jump ship because you are worried over speculation about what might happen in the future.
  2. Wait and see what is happening and make an informed decision at that point.
9 Likes

I'm sure you never heard me criticizing Canonical. O just sai I'd personally prefer the flatpak concept to snaps (on another thread), but that's not related to Canonical at all. I'm sure I have also expressed more than once I fully understand Manjaro's goals and I support it. I'm just not the regular user out there (nor a nerd, something in between maybe).

What I have expressed is that having 3 distinct ways to manage software all in your face at the same might not be the best way to reach a wider audience. If you really want the casual user to switch for Manjaro you need to make things clear for that user. That's why I'd pick one way to present software management by default, not 3, which doesn't mean those wouldn't be available to who knows how to handle it. I say this in a constructive way. When I say that I don't know how long I'll stay I don't say it in a bad way. I only say it because if I had your goals I know the distro would get to point it wouldn't be my cup of tea anymore. But I'd still be happy for the community. No hard feelings. Just do your thing.

I want to wait and see, but I have the right to be sceptic/afraid about these choices

1 Like

That is the problem with the gnome-software package and maybe also with plasma-discover. Therefore we might ship with fpakman instead. Will put this on the latest RC I'll release tonight. We will see how that works.

What I simply don't like is to talk about companies in OpenSource in general here in this thread. It seems everyone is somehow blaming Canonical for some reason. If they are not exist you won't have the nice Nividia driver support or patches other companies don't even care about. They made the Linux Desktop were it is now. Sure, some mistakes happened during that approach, but bumps in the street are normal.

On our end we prefer snaps over flatpak for several reasons, but this is just more related to the Phone stuff we are involved. We will see how all points out.

3 Likes

Second choice is better. But snap hadalready proven it is possible to hide malware in it : https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/05/ubuntu-snap-malware

I prefer from far an Android OSP based phone. Other linux based phones were failure every single time. Good night and good luck! :smiley:

Same try to obtain DJI Go 4 to control a Mavic Pro with Canonical phone solutions :slight_smile:

Thank you for the clarification. I also don't like the kind of talk against companies. I always abstain from that kinds of arguments. Snaps do make a lot more sense on the phone industry. Ubuntu failed on that department. Let's see how Manjaro goes.

The same recipe will lead to the same result. PhoneOS market is locked by Android and iOS since at least 2008-2009.

Good luck for trying to fix that!

Of course, you're correct. I apologize for my backhand remarks against Canonical, honestly.
I have a bad taste in my mouth regarding Ubuntu. But it's not an excuse.

And thank you for your clarifications.

Well, in all fairness, Canonical do have a habit of barging off in their own direction and getting stroppy when we don't all follow worshipping at the heels of Shuttleworth. They also have a history of somewhat dodgy privacy decisions.

All that said, in my case anyway, it's more about the concept of both snap and flatpack. Sure they're easier for developers to package, but they are a lot harder to trust. They will, I predict, turn out to be not much more secure that .exe files on Windows over the longer term. You could say the same , and probably worse, about the aur but it is easy to read through the build file and actually see what it is going to do then make an informed decision whether you trust it or not.

Another way of looking at this thread is that if we didn't think Manjaro was great and if we didn't care then we wouldn't worry and we'd just piss off somewhere else. Like I said earlier, have a backup plan and hope you don't have to use it!

5 Likes

I will not apologize for my mistrust of Canonical , they earned my mistrust by their disregard for user's privacy . It took them far too long for them to admit to some mistakes and correct them . I will try to keep an open mind going forward , because they have done a lot of good so we'll see . Trust but verify is my motto in regards to Manjaro . I do have backup's in place though .

Manjaro Juhraya ISOs got updated to RC6, including flatpak and snap support pre-activated via fpakman: XFCE, KDE, Gnome

1 Like

Unless you've used Gentoo or LFS.

4 Likes

In this & various other threads touching on this controversial topic, there seems to be an awful lot of Vroomfondelling and Majikthising going on. I'm just content to sit in the wings & await Deep Thought's eventual result.

3 Likes

In addition to EndeavourOS & ArchLabs, i've only just v recently discovered the Arch graphical installer Zen Installer https://sourceforge.net/projects/revenge-installer/. Having now learned more about it via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEgW0xzLyEs & https://www.ostechnix.com/installing-arch-linux-using-revenge-graphical-installer/ & https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/06/10/arch-linux-os-challenge-2-alternatives-install-gui-script-easy/#cfb61964d940, I'm d/l it atm & feel keen to try it out soon. Spoiled for choice?

1 Like

Seems like one approach here is similar in nature to Fedora Silverblue, where you have an unchangeable base, but can install whatever you want on top of it without screwing up the base. This could come in handy for many applications, and especially in business where you don't want things to change or be changed accidentally by users who don't quite know what they are doing. Some say this is a future direction for GNU/Linux in general. As long as options remain, and the Manjaro team continues to offer what it has traditionally, I don't see an issue. Both cases are satisfied in this regard. As far as I see it, use repos, snaps, flatpak, appimage, just get the job done, any way possible.

As far as I know, Manjaro is allowing the users to use what they want and they want to make it convenient. Sometimes, we may not need some of the part and may call it bloatware. However, there is a large section people like to see most their requirements are installed by default. It would be difficult cater both the section at a time. The concept of Manjaro Community Editions allow us to create Manjaro in the way want and Manjaro provides many tools for that.

I feel the problem for some of our fellow mates are due to their earlier experiences. It is good have your eyes open and point of some unethical things going on. But, currently, I don't thing it is the situation. As the people concerned repeatedly saying they are doing these steps to take Manjaro some other level. It is normal that a developer wants the OS to be stable such that could be used in the phones and enterprise systems of (common) people.

**I trust the words of @philm as per my experience, Manjaro allows user to make their decisions in how to use it. **

** It is also great to hear that we are hopefully getting Manjaro phones or notebooks :smiley:**

1 Like

Forum kindly sponsored by Bytemark