I own two of the supported glucometers and one of those requires access to a hid device and the other requires access to a block device corresponding to the connected device - on my computer, it was /dev/sda . I tried using the hidraw interface to get access to the first device. I found out that I cannot pre-declare the path to the hid device (as documented in https://snapcraft.io/docs/hidraw-interface) because I cannot predict the name of the hid device that will be created for the connected glucometer on each of the users’ computers. So the snap package will not be able to access the device.
So I have currently configured the snap to be a classic snap. And as per the documented process, I am requesting approval for it.
Please let me know if there are any concerns with this request or if you need any additional information from me to process this request.
as a trusted bystander (not a reviewer so I can’t vote on this) I can’t see any way with the current interfaces we have available for you to achieve strict confinement with your app yet. Therefore I encourage the reviewers to approve this with a view to getting it converted to strict confinement after appropriate interface improvements are made to snapd.
To that end, @guruprasad, it might be useful to post details of how your app interfaces with the glucometers in a launchpad bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapd with a request for interface improvements or additions to support your usecase so that you can switch to strict confinement in the distant future.
@kyrofa, can you please indicate which unsupported use case you’re referring to on the list? It will help the author to understand why, rather than a nebulous “it’s not supported” message. This is something that should be done in all cases, not just this thread.
In general, classic confinement is intended for software that by design isn’t useful without classic. This includes specific categories of software: compilers, IDEs, and more outlined in the link above. Difficulty getting one’s software working under strict confinement, or otherwise wanting to use classic as a “bridge” to strict, is in my experience not really the intended use-case for classic confinement.
Hi @guruprasad apologize for the delay, and thanks @kyrofa for your feedback, its very nice to “read” you around :).
As @kyrofa mentioned, we have a process to grant classic and the snaps that are granted such confinement should belong to one of the supported categories. In this case, I believe we still need more information to proceed.
@emitorino, @pfsmorigo, sorry for the very late response. I have been very busy with my personal life and haven’t had the time to check and get back to you on this. I hope to do this in the coming week.