Linux Lite Forums
Software - Support => Installing Software => Topic started by: MS on April 01, 2019, 02:20:15 AM
-
Trying to install apps from the snapcraft.io using the "sudo snap install {appname}" command, I consistently get the following error:
x509: certificate signed by unknown authority
What is the cause of it, how to fix it?
-
See the fifth response from GBrayUT for using systemd to bind your certs from startup rather than by application.
https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/certificate-substitution-and-snaps/1077/5
TC
-
See the fifth response from GBrayUT for using systemd to bind your certs from startup rather than by application.
https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/certificate-substitution-and-snaps/1077/5
TC
I cannot believe for the problem that I described to be uncommon. Why does the snap not work by default? Why is the workaround only being provided in an obscured commentary or a forum post, without even any article on the web or a Q&A section, properly - even if briefly - covering the issue?
-
It's my understanding it's not something that's going to change anytime soon for several reasons. Read up on it a little.
TC
-
It's my understanding it's not something that's going to change anytime soon for several reasons. Read up on it a little.
Are there practical or ideological reasons to it? Any exemplary links or phrases I should google out?
-
Snaps are still very new, kinda "beta" quality. Development might be slow too, because what we already have is really awesome anyway. I won't even try snaps until the whole thing has matured quite a bit.
-
I did catch that some people feel so-so about the way Canonical goes or where they might end up, projecting forward, but look at the problem from a different perspective. The convolution of the Linux world itself, speaking of distributions, hinders anything built upon the Linux kernel from evolving into something actually united, as far as the influence of kernel reaches. That could be good, paradoxically, certainly it is some autoregulatory mechanism, defending the current state of the GNU/Linux landscape. But on the other hand, it could be a sign of deadly inertia, a succumbing into black hole of plain inefficiency. Linux wants 10% of the market share? Pursuing the way it goes, we may soon not be able to speak of even half a percent, since if distros further fall away from one another, loosing mutual compatibility seems real. What is Linux, then? Android has gone own way and it seems to be the only truly successful Linux distro remaining open source in existence. But it has solid corporate backing. Nothing open source to the core seems to actually win the market game. Because open source, is deeply incompatible with the currentday capitalist market and in fact the world of property, this is the reason rendering failure. This is also the reason why open source - and the Linux space it has so thoroughly claimed - is being mistrusted. Because it bases upon unknown principle and has unknown goals. But the goals of open source Linux are clear. It is socialism.
So, what does Canonical try to do? Do they try to break down Linux or do they try to help it out? Unless we simply want failure. Because if so, discussion is over.
-
We're way off the topic now, but I think you would find a whole lot of capitalists in the Linux world. Simple idealism and broad idealistic characterizations only really exist in an idealist mind. I think of Linux only as it relates to the pragmatic world. I only count three categories worth mentioning.
1) What is the most useful to me for work? :: Debian stable, FreeBSD open SSH, Apache servers.
2) What is the easiest Linux for new users? :: Linux Lite
3) Everything else Linux that anybody else has an opinion on.
I attend to the first two regularly. I'm usually not interested in the third. However, if someone gave me new Windows server for free I'd sell it to the North Koreans.
TC
-
So to get back on topic, snap was intended as a universal way of packaging, to work all across the variety of Linux incarnations, was it not? This is not for certain to say the current packaging systems are bad, I believe. It is perhaps to acknowledge the local default distro "nationalism" to be so strong that a new entry could be needed to overcome the mutual prejudice, giving something new instead of picking up one existing above another.