Issue with discord snap in Arch

Hey, let me try this on my Arch installation (with a more recent snapd, I cannot get the maintainer to update). I’ll keep you posted.

Thanks! i will be waiting

Any way to get it working? did you find the problem?

Not yet, I spent time figuring out weird errors I was experiencing on Arch in the first place. I built a 2.27.3-1 package (I will attach it here) and I can now investigate the problem you were interested in.

Were you able to regenerate the error?

Not yet, I just finished working on the update to snapd on Arch. You can get the updated package from the github release page https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/releases/download/2.27.3/snapd-2.27.3-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz

I will fetch discord next.

I tried to install this on my Antergos. There are file conflicts with the existing snap-confine package. Can you provide good steps to do this for testing? I don’t want to bork my system (as the arch wiki suggests forcing this may bork it).

[alan@antergos-amd64 ~]$ sudo pacman -U snapd-2.27.3-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz 
loading packages...
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...

Packages (1) snapd-2.27.3-1

Total Installed Size:  41.54 MiB
Net Upgrade Size:      14.90 MiB

:: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y
(1/1) checking keys in keyring                                                                          [##############################################################] 100%
(1/1) checking package integrity                                                                        [##############################################################] 100%
(1/1) loading package files                                                                             [##############################################################] 100%
(1/1) checking for file conflicts                                                                       [##############################################################] 100%
error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
snapd: /usr/bin/ubuntu-core-launcher exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/lib/snapd/snap-confine exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/lib/snapd/snap-discard-ns exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/lib/snapd/system-shutdown exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/lib/udev/rules.d/80-snappy-assign.rules exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/lib/udev/snappy-app-dev exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/share/man/man5/snap-confine.5.gz exists in filesystem
snapd: /usr/share/man/man5/snap-discard-ns.5.gz exists in filesystem
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
[alan@antergos-amd64 ~]$ pacman -Qo /usr/bin/ubuntu-core-launcher
/usr/bin/ubuntu-core-launcher is owned by snap-confine 2.26.1-1

Aha, then perhaps the recommended procedure for merging two packages (snap-confine and snapd) into one (snapd) is not really working today.

Can you try with -f which will force overwrite this?

Note, can we keep this thread focused on discord and the other thread on the general update to the arch package please.

Ok, with that snapd, discord launches and works as expected…

Same here, it just finished downloading and it starts OK. Apart from me having insanely slow network I don’t see anything wrong anymore.

1 Like

Thanks!! I think its because arch linux was using older package. Got Arch linux still got old snapd package. :frowning:

But thanks for your hardwork. I think arch linux should update there package by replacing there’s by yours :smiley:

Edit: Just a small question, Where does discord download update?

stack smashing again. this sounds similar to Call for Testing: Gnome Twitch and Chromium snap doesn't work with the nvidia proprietary driver

Though it’s fixed with the new release, but still facing this issue in chromium!!

No HW Acceleration on Chromium.

I’m trying to resolve that issue. The problem is that the TU (trusted user) that maintains the snapd package became non-responsive and I cannot commit to the community repository directly.

What’s the best way forward here?

  • Keep kindly requesting the TU update the package?
  • Request another TU with more time take over the snap* packages?
  • Have @zyga-snapd or someone else on the team apply to be a TU for the snap* packages in Arch?

Seems the first is where we are now, and the TU in question is updating other packages, but doesn’t have time to update the snap ones. Is there anything we can do to help them land these changes with less effort on their part?

The second seems rude if the first TU is still active, but with no updates for a couple of months it’s not unreasonable to ask.

I asked in #archlinux about any TUs willing to help and got some non-optimistic replies:

jelle zyga-suse: I know you told me that yesterday
snap is however something I wouldn’t touch with a ten foot pole

According to the rules https://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html

Special Removal of an Inactive TU

A TU who has not done ANY of the following for a period of at least 2 months:

-   added, removed or updated a package in [community] or the AUR
-   performed any action that required TU privileges on the AUR>
-   posted a message to aur-general

OR who has not voted in a consecutive series of voting periods, the starting dates of which span 2 months or more, shall be brought up for special removal due to inactivity.

In this special case, the motion may be made by one TU instead of two, and SVP is followed by a discussion period of 3 days, a quorum of 66%, and a voting period of 5 days.

The current maintainer of snapd is close to being inactive. Still this requires a motion to remove him and another motion to do something with individual packages. I honestly believe Timothy is just busy and is still acting in good faith. As far as I know there’s no way to transfer a package from one TU to another.

What if we can update snapd from snap?

that is exactly what we do on distros that support it … snapd is used from inside the core snap if the version in core is newer than the one installed by the distro package… (but i think arch isnt in the list of capable distros for re-exec into core (someone may correct me if i’m wrong))

That’s right. Eventually Arch will be supported but there are a few more technical issues I need to solve. Fortunately it’s all going in the right direction and we have no known blockers apart from just more time on hacking.