Portability and security of snaps - Was: Question about Snaps

[C de-Avillez]

On Mon, 10 Oct 2016 11:20:26 -0400
Peter Silva <peter at bsqt.homeip.net> wrote:

> apt-get install
> 
> it knows what the dependencies of the package are, and installs them
> for you.

Yes. So, you end up with a system where everything is consistent.

Now, picture the following scenario: you want to install a new version
of something, but it breaks the dependencies. So, apt will refuse,
correctly, to install this new version.

But snap will allow a new version of something to be installed, since
it carries all necessary dependencies.

Yes, it does use more disk space [1]. But it does not interfere with
your base system.

What I mean to say here is that there are pro and cons, and the user
experience will vary.

I frankly like the idea of snaps on the desktop.

Cheers,

..C..

[1] is disk space *that* critical nowadays? I know I myself still look
at conserving disk space as one of my personal commandments; but I am
not sure anymore.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20161010/8d97f43d/attachment.sig>