[02:41] <lotuspsychje> good morning
[03:16] <lotuspsychje> start a topic here plujon
[03:17] <plujon> I just asked in #ubuntu: Why is chromium a snap in the first place?
[03:17] <lotuspsychje> evolution chosen for devs liking the snap way
[03:18] <lotuspsychje> a LOT of snaps are coming our way
[03:19] <plujon> If a lot of snaps come our way, won't that require a lot more physical memory?
[03:20] <lotuspsychje> plujon: the start of chromium snap had some rough ways, but it actually improved a lot on 20.04 now
[03:20] <lotuspsychje> rocketfast on my side, cant say it lags my system memory-wise
[03:21] <plujon> I'm using 20.04, first time using chromium as a snap, and it is broken in a few ways for me.  That's why I started asking.  I'm considering leaving ubuntu over it.
[03:21] <lotuspsychje> broken how
[03:22] <plujon> Broken like I can no longer sign extensions.  Broken like native messaging no longer works.
[03:22] <lotuspsychje> plujon: did you browse the latest bugs on chromium?
[03:23] <plujon> bugs on chromium?  Do you mean ubuntu bugs?
[03:24] <lotuspsychje> plujon: if you use ubuntu, yeah chromium bugs are ubuntu related
[03:24] <plujon> The only ubuntu/chromium/snap bug I looked at indicated there was no resolution planned for the breakage; just a number of people complaining about it.  It was reported quite a long time ago.
[03:24] <lotuspsychje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bugs?field.tag=snap&orderby=importance&start=0
[03:24] <lotuspsychje> check if you affect relevant bugs for your cases before complaining please
[03:25] <plujon> Check if I affect relevant bugs?
[03:25] <lotuspsychje> plujon: yes, you just said you have 'broken' issues on chromium
[03:26] <plujon> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/1741074 is one of the breakages
[03:26] <lotuspsychje> plujon: ok, then help the community, and 'affect' to the bug in the left upper corner
[03:27] <lotuspsychje> as part of the community you can influence/help
[03:44] <plujon> How is a snap different from or better than static linking?
[03:45] <plujon> Well, obviously, it is different in a number of technical ways, but big picture, why not just statically link most of the problematic dependencies?
[03:53] <lotuspsychje> plujon: you would have to discuss with some devs about that
[04:13] <plujon> Apparently brave-browser, OTOH, is not a snap.  I guess I'll be using that.
[04:15] <lotuspsychje> brave was a snap before, but they seemed to remove it
[07:22] <lordievader> Good morning