[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: What's going on with snapd?



On 10/27/2020 6:54 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
What release are you running (stable, testing, unstable, etc.)? The
package in stable will only receive security updates.

I'm running unstable. But if I've got the dates right, some of them were reported before Buster became stable.

I suppose my main concern here is that most of the listed bugs seem to have gotten no response at all, for a few years, so a framework that (I was told) is considered a reliable tool for daily use at Canonical seems to be badly broken on Debian, so there's some break  in communication, and I'm wondering if there's anything to be done about it.

The immediate reason I ran into an issue was that I wanted to try out Ember, a client for WorldForge, an open source MMO; it's in the Debian repository as a snap package -- which strikes me as an odd choice, and I gather there was some controversy about it. Anyway, it seems like the issues I ran into were all issues with snapd, which seems like a tool intended for more extensive use and a broader concern.

Please provide some example for the bugs you're interested in.
The ones I ran into myself:

#880174 snapd: swrast error (nvidia-legacy-340xx) while launching UI installed-snaps
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=880174

#911906 snapd: Boot hangs due to snappy/snapd: `A start job is running for Snappy daemon (../1min31s)`
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911906

#931776 snapd: Installed snaps do not appear in desktop launcher in Debian buster.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=931776

#947325 snapd: strict confinement is not enabled
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=947325

Of those, #931776 looked the most like a problem I understood; it looks to me as if someone simply copied over a configuration script meant for headless servers and didn't check if it would work with GUI desktops, which it doesn't, because the script's not executed in that case. But startup configuration dotfiles are a maddening labyrinth.


Reply to: