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.

  • @leopold@lemmy.kde.socialEnglish
    5•11 months ago

    I have found no such instances. Software which is only officially packaged as deb will usually be unofficially repackaged on the AUR regardless.

    • @dev_null@lemmy.ml
      1•11 months ago

      I distribute an app I made for Linux, macOS and Windows. The Linux version I only have available as a .deb. Released recently and has about 200 users so far, but definitely exists. No Arch user contacted me yet.

      • @octopus_ink@lemmy.mlEnglish
        2•11 months ago

        When folks start wanting it, someone will package it for the AUR, or if it becomes even somewhat mainstream it will end up in the main repos eventually.

        • @dev_null@lemmy.ml
          1•11 months ago

          Possibly, though I wonder how updates would work then. Currently I have a Debian repository that contains a single package, and installing the .deb from my website also installs the repository so you get updates as with any other package.

          If someone repackages it on AUR, I guess they will also need to update it every time I update the .deb, so it’s always behind? Of course it would be better if I provided a first party package for AUR, but I can spend time on that when there is actual interest. Most of my users are on Windows anyway.

          • @octopus_ink@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1•11 months ago

            Usually what you describe is what they do. Someone “owns” the AUR package (and it’s not quite literally any random user IIRC - you have to be accepted as an AUR maintainer I think) and they then take on the responsibility to repackage it whenever the author (you) releases a new version. There is also a mechanism for users to flag the AUR package as out of date in case that maintainer misses a release, and if they abandon it (or even if folks just don’t like how they package it) someone else can package it, assuming someone else wants to.

            Sometimes the AUR maintainer is the dev themselves. I can’t think of a good example currently, but I know I’ve seen it before.

            I don’t know the process for how things end up in the official repos, but I would guess it’s similar to however any other distros identify software they want to officially package.