[...] idea that snap packages—or something like them—are the future for all of linux. I think most of us here recognize that as nonsense, but to the "outside world" it may not be so obviously non-sensical. I've had colleagues with computer science degrees who work in computational fields suggest as much that distros would soon disappear as everything would be replaced by docker apps, or whatever they are called.

Not only do these people suspect that is the future, they are actively pushing to make that future a reality. When they write software they release it exclusively as a app-like bundle. If we value the way our system works, it is reasonable to push back and say we like the way it works, there's value in the way it works, and we don't want all of linux to fall into snap/docker/app-store land.

Trilby on Snapd/Flatpack/Docker


[...] reality is sometimes less convenient. The first problem is that security bugs are typically also, well, bugs. They may make your software crash or misbehave in annoying but apparently harmless ways. And when you fix that bug you've also fixed a security bug, but the ability to determine whether a bug is a security bug or not is one that involves deep magic and a fanatical devotion to the cause so given the choice between maybe asking for a CVE and dealing with embargoes and all that crap when perhaps you've actually only fixed a bug that makes the letter "E" appear in places it shouldn't and not one that allows the complete destruction of your intergalactic invasion fleet means people will tend to err on the side of "Eh fuckit" and go drinking instead. So new versions of software will often fix security vulnerabilities without there being any indication that they do so, and running old versions probably means you have a bunch of security issues that nobody will ever do anything about.

mjg59 on backporting security fixes