Canonical's Steam Snap is Causing Headaches for Valve - OMG! Ubuntu
www.omgubuntu.co.uk
Canonical may be ramping up its efforts to improve the Ubuntu gaming experience — yasss — but it seems their Steam snap package is causing a few headaches

Timothée Besset, a software engineer who works on the Steam client for Valve, took to Mastodon this week to reveal: “Valve is seeing an increasing number of bug reports for issues caused by Canonical’s repackaging of the Steam client through snap”.

“We are not involved with the snap repackaging. It has a lot of issues”, Besset adds, noting that “the best way to install Steam on Debian and derivative operating systems is to […] use the official .deb”.

Those who don’t want to use the official Deb package are instead asked to ‘consider the Flatpak version’ — though like Canonical’s Steam snap the Steam Flatpak is also unofficial, and no directly supported by Valve.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      0·
      1 year ago

      Debian is one of the distros where flatpaks are most appropriate lol, it’s the best way to not have programs that are really old

      Adding weird third party repositories that can cause all kinds of issues probably isn’t the best idea

      • superbirra@lemmy.world
        0·
        1 year ago

        tbf, flatpaks are problematic shit noobs tend to appreciate because reasons. That said, beside the fact steam ships its own chroot, I’m a happy sid user and I don’t even have this imaginary problem of things being ‘very old’ sooo … but I can confirm you shouldn’t add weird third party repos or shitty flatpaks :)

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          0·
          1 year ago

          It’s not just noobs that appreciate flatpak. Flatpak is good all-round.

          And the problem of Debian packages being old is very much not imaginary lol. Debian has only just moved beyond Gnome 3.38/Plasma 5.20/kernel version 5.10.

          That’s ancient. And that’s not to mention the other software repos, which are often updated at an even slower pace.

          Don’t assume that just because you want extremely outdated packages, everyone else must want the same.

          • superbirra@lemmy.world
            0·
            1 year ago

            you normally skip reading half of the comments you reply to, eh? :) ciao ciao from my debian system which does everything, including paying my rent and a bit more, w/o this shit ;)

            • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
              0·
              1 year ago

              I didn’t ignore anything.

              And you don’t need to be so defensive. Nobody said Debian is bad or that you can’t use it to make money, just that it being severely outdated can be an issue, and it can. Flatpak helps, but it doesn’t completely fix it.

              My comment wasn’t meant to hurt your feelings.

              • superbirra@lemmy.world
                0·
                1 year ago

                lol I’m not defensive at all hahahaha rest assured my opinions aren’t changed by such a stupid zealot conversation, also this fact you don’t entirely read comments you’re replying about contibute to the lulz. Don’t react too bad to the money thing, one day or another you could also start working in this industry but if I could choose I’d go w/ dog training (I’m speaking for me, I’d really go that way). Cheers my friend

                • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                  0·
                  1 year ago

                  I dunno, it sounds awfully defensive to me. It wasn’t meant to hurt you, it’s just a discussion about software packaging. There’s no personal attacks here.

                  I did read your comments, and despite trying to change the topic, create strawmen, and shout ad-hominems, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s reasonable to say Debian packages are often very, very old and outdated. Because they are.

                  That may not be an issue for you, but it is for many.

                  You shouldn’t let that make you upset, it doesn’t invalidate your use-case.