After creating a fresh installation of Ubuntu 24.04, I installed DEB Firefox from APT by following Mozilla’s instructions from here. But I noticed that it was secretly replaced with Snap Firefox. I was able to verify this by checking the About Firefox page. This is the third time I noticed this.
I battled that for about a year and then ditched Debian based diatros altogether.
OpenSUSE ftw
You could have gone pure Debian. There are no snap shenanigans over there :)
OpenSuse is also a great pick tho!
Is KDE Neon still broken? For awhile it was the only Ubuntu based distro I’d recommend. Yes, I know about Mint but no HDR or Wayland.
I’m reasonably happy with XFCE/Xubuntu - it’s not as slick of a desktop as KDE or Gnome, and in some ways that’s a great thing.
Yup. They also did this with Docker, and it broke my setup (and was a bitch to debug).
This was a couple of years ago, and I haven’t used Ubuntu unless absolutely necessary (and then usually in a container).
Docker in a snap is too meta for me.
Just wait for snap 2.0 which actually runs everything inside docker containers /s
Not a secret, but annoying as hell. I usually replace it with a Flatpak and uninstall Snap.
Agreed, not a secret, and not wanted. I uninstall Firefox and install Google Chrome from a .deb - disadvantage: you have to update it manually. Advantage: it doesn’t update itself automatically.
Disadvantage: you’re now using a browser from the biggest
spyad-ware company and killed web heterogeneity.Too late, they own my soul already. I have successfully resisted Meta, X, Microsoft, and any number of lesser daemons, but the one true G has shown me their light and I am unable to look away.
Try sunglasses? But maybe other souls can still be saved from evil…
They delivered their promise: they were at least not evil, at first.
Why would you use an inferior product? Firefox via Snap is shit but it’s still better than any version of Chrome
I have used both, back and forth for years.
Chrome serves me better.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_(The_Twilight_Zone)
Jesus Christ this is Windows-tier insane computing behaviour from Ubuntu. Fuck Ubuntu.
Switch to Debian and you’ll be fine :)
They started doing that in a couple of years back. Saw quite a bit of backlash in the Linux news media at the time.
That snap shit was so bad it made me switch to Arch.
No defending Ubuntu but wasn’t this clarified to be Mozilla’s deploying it via Snap and requesting to remove the apt installation?
It was a collaboration, although I’m having trouble finding a source for who wanted it first.
I’m aware that when the user runs(without adding Mozilla’s apt repository),
sudo apt install firefoxthe snap version of Firefox is installed. But I never heard that, though APT is configured to install Firefox from Mozilla’s repository, the DEB version will be uninstalled and the Snap version will be installed.
Firefox now has instructions on their “Debian-based” install section about pinning their repo over Canonical’s so that doesn’t happen.
Because you’re right, Canonical does think so highly of their product that they will constantly attempt to undermine other options against your will.
Yes, this is known. They do the same for Chromium. If you want a browser from ubuntu, it’s going to be a snap.
w3mis a proper deb 😛Looks like only firefox, chromium-browser and thunderbird are these dummy transitional packages. There’s a
fwupd-snap, but the defaultfwupdis a full deb.
It is one of the reasons many people turn away from Ubuntu.
It’s a known and documented issue that Ubuntu does. They secretly install the Snap version, even if you tried to install the Deb package. This is an issue since years: https://askubuntu.com/questions/1345385/how-can-i-stop-apt-from-installing-snap-packages (posted 3 years and 7 months ago)
My problem is not like that. I’m aware that when the user runs(without adding Mozilla’s apt repository),
sudo apt install firefoxthe snap version of Firefox is installed. But I never heard that, though APT is configured to install Firefox from Mozilla’s repository, the DEB version will be uninstalled and the Snap version will be installed.
Yes, that’s the exact issue. Ubuntu does that for years. You use apt to install deb, but Ubuntu installs silently the Snap version. The article I linked was talking about that almost 4 years ago and talks about how to stop that. It’s an old issue not many are aware off.
Wasn’t that one of the main critiques of snap/ubuntu/canonical a few years ago already?
Among my personal dislike for its shade of purple, that has been my primary reason to not recommend ubuntu for a while, at least.
It’s a dilemma; most Windows and Mac users would benefit from that kind of locked-down, idiot-proof format. Even having the choice of multiple repos is too much for them. So while I personally hate it, that’s what most people (i.e. non-Linux users) want and need.
I recommend Ubuntu as the beginner distro for everyone, but with the hope that they eventually drop the training wheels and switch to Debian.
That’s why I recommend mint. You have all the benefits of ubuntu but without the corporate stuff. And flatpak instead of snap.
For awhile I was getting firefox crashes in Mint all the time. Turns out it was the snap version being unstable.
Why even enable snaps? It’s like asking to have headaches.
How did you get snap on mint?! 😆I once tried it as a noob and mint was always “snap bad! Don’t do this! You will regret” even on try to circumvent it 🤣
I swear it was the default already installed. Maybe I’m misremembering.
Mint never preinstalled the snap. They package their own version of Firefox. I believe they have an agreement with Mozilla.
I suspect that what’s happened is you installed the apt version, then at some point upgraded it and there was a version in the main repo that had a higher version number and installed the snap version. If two repositories both have a package with the same name, and no other rules in place, the higher version number wins.
If that is the case, you need to pin the firefox package to the mozilla repository. You can find more details here: https://wiki.debian.org/AptConfiguration
This explains situation.
From a security standpoint? Not even close. From a software-release validation requirement, not even in the same galaxy. If they look the same, it’s only due to Clarke’s law.
It’s a joke based of the fact that when you type apt install firefox on ubuntu, it will install the snap instead of the deb package, which is what you would expect when you use apt to install something.
In Ubuntu they are the same.
firefoxversion1:1snap1-0ubuntu5is a deb that literally runs the commandsnap install firefoxin the preinst script. Check line 77 infirefox-1snap1/debian/firefox.preinstin the source tarball: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/1:1snap1-0ubuntu5There’s no magic there.
That is not the same thing as “snap and apt Firefox are the same”. They just hijacked apt to force snap in.
You are missing the attribution. The person you are replying to is making a joke that Canonical says they are the same, not that they are actually the same.
Well, yes, except Canonical have made them actually do the same thing in the case of Firefox. I’m not aware of any other packages that have the deb install just run the snap install.
Yep, I am agreeing with you. The statement was never snap and deb are identical, its that canonical is making them do identical things.
Chromium too iirc
So both commands do the same thing… right? I’m not saying snap and apt are the same.
Yeah for sure, I read your comment as excusing canonical screwing with user intent but I see that’s not what you meant.
Yeah, I really dislike snap and have puppet clean it out and add in the real mozilla repo for me. If I wanted sandboxed apps I’d probably look at flatpak but I think there’s still work to be done there also.
You are missing the attribution. The person you are replying to is making a joke that Canonical says they are the same, not that they are actually the same.
Clearly they’re cosplaying as a Canonical engineer whose internal explanation and pleas for them to not take this approach fell upon deaf ears /j
Not secretly, no.
Since when this became a known thing? I’m aware that the snap version is installed when the user is trying to install the deb version of Firefox by running,
sudo apt install firefoxBut I never heard that the installed DEB version of Firefox is replaced by Snap version of Firefox.
The deb version is a pointer to the snap in their repos. Nothings being replaced, it no longer exists. The deb version of Firefox in Ubuntu repos is a wrapper that installs snap and has no binaries in it. Has been for 3 years or so.
It’s more than that. Ubuntu copies the Debian repos and then applies their own changes on top. Debian has a native (DEB) Firefox package, so Ubuntu specifically has to remove it for every new version.
Well then you haven’t been following it closely. As someone else said, the reason is simple: the Snap version is more recent (like it or not) and in Ubuntu
aptis configured to take into account Snap packages.Canonical added an epoch prefix to the firefox version number. Because that epoch (1) is higher than the implicit default (0), the official ubuntu dummy package is always considered to be a higher version than the official Mozilla package. apt doesn’t look at snap packages, it installs the deb, but the ubuntu deb just runs
snap install firefoxand basically nothing else.
I had it happen a few times. I moved away from Kubuntu as a result.
At least a few years. I switched to Linux a year ago and that was a huge consideration for me when choosing Debian over Ubuntu.
But it’s not obvious either. When I say ‘apt install firefox’, specially after adding their repository to sources.list, I’d expect to get a .deb from mozilla. Silently overriding my commands rubs me in a very wrong way.
It takes a little more than just adding a different repository to your package manager, you have to tell apt which to prefer:
echo ’
Package: *
Pin: origin packages.mozilla.org
Pin-Priority: 1000Package: firefox*
Pin: release o=Ubuntu
Pin-Priority: -1’ | sudo tee /etc/apt/preferences.d/mozillaTrue, but more often than not mozilla should have newer packages on their repository than any distribution. And the main problem still is that Ubuntu changed apt and threw snap in to the mix where it doesn’t belong.
I’m not disagreeing with anything you’ve said?
I’m saying that just adding Mozilla’s PPA to your sources won’t change apt’s behavior when installing Firefox unless you tell apt to prefer the package offered by the Mozilla PPA.
As someone who uses Kubuntu as a daily driver, I’m well aware of the snap drama and have worked around it using the method I pasted above.
Even though it’s an underhanded move by Cannonical, I’m still glad the OS is open source since it makes the workaround so trivial.
Exactly. Enough with the inane conspiracism.
At this point, why is anyone using Ubuntu for desktop? You have soooo many options
Unfortunately it’s my only option at work because my employer wants the security of Ubuntu pro
Because not everyone wants to spend their time babysitting an OS and Ubuntu has a 20-year track record of dependability.
And there are still other options!
While I get that, Debian fits that role extremely well.
I was waiting for this! Debian is great. I used it for years. But IMO it’s not polished enough for normies. The website is fugly and the onboarding funnel assumes too much knowledge. The installer, last time I tried it, was glitchy and unintuitive. I think that techies underestimate how offputting even ostensibly minor issues like this will be to ordinary users. Also, Debian has a ton of unmaintained packages (altho I gather that something is being done about this). Debian is fundamentally amateur in the best and unfortunately worst senses. I think a Linux flagship distro needs to be more pro and systematically thought out. For that, it’s always going to help to have a big company or organization behind it.
I have a laptop that needs a proprietary wifi driver. I just “love” it when the debian net installer works out of the box, but after first boot wifi dies because the driver is missing in the installed instance :D I need to find a lan cable, do some athletics to get to the router, then install the driver and only then I can connect via wifi :D
The installer, last time I tried it, was glitchy and unintuitive.
I used it a few months ago and it was pretty smooth.
I agree Ubuntu is the easy choice. You can totally find a desktop you don’t have to baby sit, but Ubuntu has the marketing to help you find them and feel safe.
I’ve had no issues with fedora, I’ve been running it for about a year.
Exactly. But I would go further. I think Linux needs flagship distros with big solid institutions behind them, and it needs us to support those distros by using them. I know this is not an popular opinion here.
I see those flagship distros precisely as Fedora and Ubuntu.
Red Hat and Ubuntu.
I’m a bit of an anarchist so I disagree on principal lol, but I do agree that that would help Linux usurp windows.
My fear is that it would just then become windows within a decade or less. Getting big and institutional may work out. I’ve just seen a lot of cases go sour.
To me the beauty of Linux is that it is less connected to large impersonal capitalistic structures. That’s why it feels different from Windows.
I think fedora is best for user that want a recent kernel and reasonably fast update cycle (like not a year behind) but are not interested in rolling (for whatever reason ever).
I love rolling and had no issues due to rolling yet
I’m a relative Linux noob and Manjaro Arch works perfectly for me, no babysitting required.
