classic 32 bit application

James Henstridge james.henstridge at
Fri Mar 31 07:08:39 UTC 2017

On 31 March 2017 at 05:38, Seth Arnold <seth.arnold at> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:10:26AM +0200, Alistair Grant wrote:
>> I'm trying to package a 32 bit software development environment: Pharo
>> Smalltalk (
>> I've got it working OK as a devmode package, but as soon as I switch it
>> to classic confinement it fails to run.
> I was under the impression the usual progression is from devmode to
> strict. Are you certain classic is the correct direction for your snap?

I ran into a similar conundrum for the Python snap I built.  If your
package contains a language runtime and interactive shell, it is
difficult to decide what sort of confinement policy makes sense.  It
is possible to run under strict confinement with few or any interfaces
connected, but depending on what the user wants to do might want a lot
more permission (e.g. ability to access the network, ability to write
to the home directory, etc).

At present the best option seems to be to package things with strict
confinement but ensure that it will be functional if installed with
--classic.  That gives safety by default, but full functionality on
request.  Of course, this means snapcraft isn't giving any help with
the necessary link flags to get things working reliably on non-Ubuntu
systems.  I guess that's something to try and solve next.


More information about the Snapcraft mailing list