Linux

48397 readers

1184 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

Snapless Ubuntu (programming.dev)

submitted 1 year ago by cmeerw@programming.dev to c/linux@lemmy.ml

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Not sure what others are doing to use Ubuntu (23.04) without snaps, but this is what I am doing:

for Firefox I found a guide here
for chromium I am actually using the Linux Mint packages (which work absolutely fine), and I have just set up a small repository I can add to apt:

deb [arch=amd64 allow-insecure=yes] http://snapless.cmeerw.net victoria upstream

this just syncs from Linux Mint and only republishes chromium in the Packages file (with downloads redirected to a Linux Mint mirror). BTW, I am not signing these...

What are others doing?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] vojel@feddit.de 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Snapless Ubuntu is called Linux Mint, no guide needed.

[–] cmeerw@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

but it's limited to Ubuntu LTS versions

[–] ares35@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

that's not necessarily a downside.

[–] cmeerw@programming.dev 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How is only having an LTS version vs. having a choice between using an LTS version or a non-LTS version not a downside?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The LTS versions are more stable, so why bother with non-LTS versions? If you want faster updates, you probably want a rolling release like Arch or openSUSE Tumbleweed.

[–] DryTomatoes@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

I've used a lot of Ubuntu over the years starting on 9.04. Let me tell you the six months releases are ass and always have been.

Also I'm switching to Debian.

[–] vojel@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago

True but it depends on your usecase- of you need all the fancy new stuff and want to move on quickly you should go another route instead of fucking around with forced software you do not want. Maybe Debian testing or Fedora? If you do not care about the newest stuff I guess Mint is a perfect fit.