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.

  • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
    91·
    16 hours ago

    Ubuntu uses Snap as first-class method to install software. So if a piece of software is available as DEB or Snap, Ubuntu will always use Snap.

    • sourov@lemm.eeOP
      5·
      16 hours ago

      I’m aware that when the user runs(without adding Mozilla’s apt repository),

      sudo apt install firefox

      the 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.

  • zod000@lemmy.ml
    20·
    13 hours ago

    Definitely not you, they absolutely do this with snaps and have for a while. This was the main reason I stopped using Ubuntu.

  • Revan343@lemmy.ca
    5·
    2 hours ago

    I suggest Mint or straight Debian. I prefer Mint for anything graphical, Debian for headless

      • Revan343@lemmy.ca
        1·
        2 hours ago

        I’ve just found it’s more polished right out of the box. Definitely more new-user-friendly, like Ubuntu, but with Snap gutted out.

        I have been using the regular Mint (based on Ubuntu), but I’m probably going to use the Debian edition next time I install a new system

    • sourov@lemm.eeOP
      51·
      16 hours ago

      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 firefox

      But I never heard that the installed DEB version of Firefox is replaced by Snap version of Firefox.

      • Routhinator@startrek.websiteEnglish
        10·
        15 hours ago

        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.

        • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
          2·
          14 hours ago

          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.

      • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
        21·
        14 hours ago

        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 apt is configured to take into account Snap packages.

        • Morphit @feddit.uk
          3·
          10 hours ago

          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 firefox and basically nothing else.

    • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      18·
      16 hours ago

      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.

      • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        14 hours ago

        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: 1000

        Package: firefox*
        Pin: release o=Ubuntu
        Pin-Priority: -1’ | sudo tee /etc/apt/preferences.d/mozilla

        • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          1·
          6 hours ago

          True, 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.

          • BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            5 hours ago

            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.

  • TxTechnician@lemmy.ml
    1·
    23 minutes ago

    I battled that for about a year and then ditched Debian based diatros altogether.

    OpenSUSE ftw

    • beeng@discuss.tchncs.de
      5·
      10 hours ago

      I… I… I don’t know why I haven’t done that myself. (Am now on NixOS btw) but for work maybe I ask for Debian cloud box.

      • N.E.P.T.R@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        1·
        9 hours ago

        For work, you could also try Fedora Workstation or Linux Mint Debian Edition. Debian is pretty barebones, but if that isnt a bother then do whatever.

        • beeng@discuss.tchncs.de
          1·
          9 hours ago

          I like gnome, but i guess i could look at fedora.

          I would like to stay with apt as package manager so the package names stay the same to what I know, or is yum/dnf/etc gonna use the same for most?

        • fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.comEnglish
          2·
          24 minutes ago

          It’s not barebones. I use it as my main desktop and barely notice any difference from Ubuntu, it has every package I’ve ever needed. I think that mentality of Debian being “bare” is outdated.

          @beeng@discuss.tchncs.de this is for you, too.

    • ritchie@lemmy.world
      3·
      9 hours ago

      I must have hit that 1% last time. I assembled a new PC, wanted to install debian and could not get a login screen after installation. At that point I wanted something that just works. I installed Xubuntu and had the machine ready right away.

  • phar@lemmy.ml
    181·
    15 hours ago

    At this point, why is anyone using Ubuntu for desktop? You have soooo many options

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      1013·
      14 hours ago

      Because not everyone wants to spend their time babysitting an OS and Ubuntu has a 20-year track record of dependability.

      • Aphelion@lemm.ee
        2·
        12 hours ago

        I’m a relative Linux noob and Manjaro Arch works perfectly for me, no babysitting required.

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          41·
          13 hours ago

          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.

          • morbidcactus@lemmy.ca
            1·
            13 hours ago

            Was a kubuntu person for a long time, I haven’t really loved the default Ubuntu DE for a while, but that’s personal preferences. At the end of the day, use what you like.

            I personally like debian (swapped from Kubuntu over time) but keep mint on my thumb drive for family who needs something on older hardware, especially those used to windows it seems to be an easy jump. I love that there are so many options available to people with various levels of prepackaging and configurations.

            • C A B B A G E@feddit.ukEnglish
              1·
              11 hours ago

              I used it decades ago (using the CLI installer for a Sid install I eventually fucked up beyond repair) and it was okay for a slightly tech savvy teenager, even then.

              I suspect a lot of these issues are down to hardware compatibility more than anything else.

          • ritchie@lemmy.world
            2·
            9 hours ago

            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

      • pebbles@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        31·
        14 hours ago

        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.

        • Petter1@lemm.ee
          5·
          13 hours ago

          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

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          1·
          13 hours ago

          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.

          • BCsven@lemmy.ca
            1·
            12 hours ago

            There is RedHat and SUSE. Which are also the only two certified distros for running corporate/enterprise CAD/CAM/FEA and PLM software. They both provide rock solid stability.

          • pebbles@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            2·
            12 hours ago

            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.

    • gpopides@lemmy.world
      3·
      12 hours ago

      Unfortunately it’s my only option at work because my employer wants the security of Ubuntu pro

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.caEnglish
      15·
      13 hours ago

      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.

        • IrritableOcelot@beehaw.org
          14·
          12 hours ago

          That is not the same thing as “snap and apt Firefox are the same”. They just hijacked apt to force snap in.

          • Morphit @feddit.uk
            9·
            11 hours ago

            So both commands do the same thing… right? I’m not saying snap and apt are the same in general.

            • IrritableOcelot@beehaw.org
              4·
              11 hours ago

              Yeah for sure, I read your comment as excusing canonical screwing with user intent but I see that’s not what you meant.

              • Morphit @feddit.uk
                1·
                8 hours ago

                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.

          • Baaahb@feddit.nlEnglish
            5·
            12 hours ago

            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.

            • Morphit @feddit.uk
              1·
              11 hours ago

              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.

              • Baaahb@feddit.nlEnglish
                2·
                10 hours ago

                Yep, I am agreeing with you. The statement was never snap and deb are identical, its that canonical is making them do identical things.

                • Morphit @feddit.uk
                  1·
                  8 hours ago

                  Yeah, I just liked that bit of the meme. In the prank the meme is based on, they really are the same.

                • Morphit @feddit.uk
                  1·
                  11 hours ago

                  Yup, apt install chromium-browser calls snap install chromium. Looks like thunderbird is the same. There’s a fwupd-snap deb but fwupd seems to be the default.

      • Baaahb@feddit.nlEnglish
        9·
        12 hours ago

        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.

        • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
          4·
          10 hours ago

          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

  • Decker108@lemmy.ml
    33·
    13 hours ago

    You could compile it from source yourself, and you won’t even have to worry about packaging and package managers.

  • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    8·
    7 hours ago

    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).

  • Yozul@beehaw.org
    11·
    15 hours ago

    The whole apt ecosystem is kind of a mess, if you ask me. Debian stable updates on archeological timescales, Debian testing just isn’t a very good rolling release disto, you’re better off with Arch or OpenSuse Tumbleweed if you want to actually use a rolling release as a daily driver, Ubuntu is a mess of annoying corporate decisions I hate from Canonical, and all the others are all just kind of disjointed in how they try to fix those issues.

    My personal favorite is Mint. They just try to make Ubuntu with some classic, boring desktop design and minus the more controversial Canonical decisions, but obviously that’s not everyone’s cup of tea. I dunno, there is no perfect distro, you just have to find the one that for you it takes the least amount of effort to fix. Ubuntu really just kind of makes it a pain in the butt to fix all their weirdness though.

      • Yozul@beehaw.org
        1·
        12 hours ago

        It’s not as up to date as other rolling releases, unlike stable it doesn’t get security patches right away, it gets frozen for months during the switch from one stable to the next, and in my fairly limited experience it just has more bugs. It’s not bad, but it’s a testing branch. It’s not intended as a daily driver, and it shows.