Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hobbyware WinCrap 11 strikes again
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 06:23:26 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <voeqct$1lgc9$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vo75q5$3vki0$1@dont-email.me> <zCJpP.39$EyH6.1@fx45.iad>
 <vo7ttl$3nof$1@dont-email.me> <qhLpP.67094$za5e.59176@fx09.iad>
 <vo830p$4ntj$1@dont-email.me> <f_1qP.80552$YsRf.33634@fx18.iad>
 <vocbbn$1444h$1@dont-email.me> <1WoqP.4088$NgFa.1524@fx46.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 07:23:30 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2ffb2c1d2030123da2885010d80eeb6b";
	logging-data="1753481"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Ay7v+jeebQaco+z4Er8Gg"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vUkTsze0W8FxqMCqnmKiTEE4fw4=
Bytes: 6878

On 2025-02-10, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 2025-02-10 2:54 a.m., RonB wrote:
>> On 2025-02-09, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 2025-02-08 12:07 p.m., RonB wrote:
>>>> On 2025-02-08, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-02-08 10:40 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-02-08, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-02-08 3:49 a.m., RonB wrote:
>>>>>>>> I guess checking the battery capacity is the last thing my Latitude 5300
>>>>>>>> will ever do on Windows 11. When I exited it did a small update. When I
>>>>>>>> rebooted after the update it wanted to do a disk check (and I stupidly let
>>>>>>>> it do so). After doing that and rebooting it ran into a BSOD ("we ran into a
>>>>>>>> problem"). It then wants to run diagnostics, attempts a repair and... we
>>>>>>>> start the whole loop all over again. (I tried this about six times and
>>>>>>>> finally told myself, "well, enough of that bullshit.")
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Adios WinCrap 11. the space can better be used by Linux Mint anyhow (which
>>>>>>>> still boots fine). Another computer that will be completely freed from
>>>>>>>> Windows.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would be lying if I said that it never happened to me before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was beginning to think Windows 11 was fairly solid. This surprised me. I
>>>>>> don't why, but I had a bad feeling when I let it do a "disk check." I was
>>>>>> more worried that Windows would trash my Linux grub setup for booting,
>>>>>> though, I didn't think it would trash itself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I went ahead and deleted the Windows partitions with GParted and installed
>>>>>> Debian 12 in its place. I'm experimenting with creating .deb packages for
>>>>>> Trelby (which I found isn't that hard to do) so it'll be nice to have a
>>>>>> Debian install for testing purposes. (Linux Mint is more like Ubuntu and
>>>>>> Debian and LM are actually different enough that I have to test both.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Speaking of Ubuntu, I've come to despise it and it's damn Snaps. I found out
>>>>>> that the Snap version of Firefox refuses to read .html files if they're not
>>>>>> in the home (and/or, I suppose, the Snap) directory. The documentation for
>>>>>> Trelby can't be read by it (installed in its normal directory). When I
>>>>>> uninstall the Snap version of Firefox, it won't allow me to install the .deb
>>>>>> version. They're definitely turning into control freaks at Ubuntu (kind of
>>>>>> like Windows and Mac OS).
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not a fan of Flatpak or Snap anymore and see them both as something
>>>>> to use if you don't have a choice. I like the theory behind both, but
>>>>> they often ignore your theme, take longer to load or have trouble
>>>>> integrating with the rest of the system. If I absolutely had to go for
>>>>> one or the other though, I would choose Flatpak even though Snap is
>>>>> theoretically superior.
>>>>
>>>> I don't like Snaps at all. I do tolerate FlatPaks (and use a few of them)
>>>> but if I knew how to make AppImages that's what I would prefer for Trelby.
>>>>
>>>> And it's not Snaps I really dislike, it's Ubuntu forcing them on you.
>>>> There's other things I don't like about Ubuntu. It would definitely not be
>>>> in my top 20 list.
>>>
>>> I have to admit that during the short period of time during which I used
>>> Ubuntu recently, I was surprised that just about everything I was
>>> running was a Snap. For security reasons, it made sense (the browser,
>>> the e-mail client), but certain other things would have run just as well
>>> if they were simple .deb files. They want to make Snap a standard, that
>>> much is clear, and they're taking advantage of the distribution's
>>> popularity to do so.
>> 
>> I think you're right. I think they're completely sold on the "container"
>> idea — everything in its own "silo" (or whatever they call it, "sandbox"
>> maybe). To me that means you lose the advatage of Linux, where small
>> applications are combined to create bigger applications, in one nice "flow."
>> This may be a good idea for servers, but I don't think there are other ways
>> to secure (harden) servers. I don't like it on a personal computer at all.
>> 
>> I think they call these "container" distributions. Fedora has one, CoreOS,
>> but they keep it separate from their standard install. That's what I wish
>> Ubuntu would do as, apparently, they have something called Ubuntu Core. Save
>> the damn Snaps for that. I guess the big one (so far) is Alpine. I don't
>> know if these use special containers, or Snaps or Flatpaks, or what.
>
> I have no doubt that taking an all .deb or all .rpm approach might 
> result in some things breaking along the way. However, there is no doubt 
> that it's quite secure and much faster than the container approach. When 
> all the software you're getting is coming out of a repository which has 
> been checked thoroughly by professionals, and not anywhere on the web, 
> I'm not sure what the need for contained software is. Granted, Flatpak 
> and Snap make software which _isn't_ available to a repository available 
> to your choice of a distribution, and that is definitely an advantage. 
> Security, however, should not be the main reason for using Snap or Flatpak.

Personally I like (well made) AppImages better than either Flatpaks or 
Snaps, but I do use about five Flatpaks. I quit using Snaps when I 
discovered they showed up like drive partitions when I did a _df_ to check 
my drive space. I didn't like that.

-- 
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy 
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.”  —J.R.R. Tolkien