snapstore VS shared-modules

- from https://github.com/noise/snapstore/

the snapstore demonstrated there is no longer in the github repo, or compatible with snapd anymore https://github.com/noise/snapstore

The current Snap Store is not open source. The one you referenced is dead as proven by the repo you're article refers to: https://github.com/noise/snapstore/

If you're referring to the old HOWTO article for hosting your own snap store server, the software it used to do that stopped working several years ago.

That's nice and all, but besides the complete lack of official serversoftware that can be hosted by anyone, I'm going to guess that forcing another URL would mean that it uses that repo INSTEAD OF the official one. With regular package managers and Flatpaks, that's not the case. You can add repo's in ADDITION to the originals with those. The only mention of a self-hostable snap server that I can find, is this one. However, it is an unofficial server and has been depreciated. In other words: it's not compatible/functional with the latest version of Snapd (the clientside) anymore and will remain like that.

They used to have an example implementation here, though: https://ubuntu.com/blog/howto-host-your-own-snap-store https://github.com/noise/snapstore

interesting read. unfortunately, the 'snapstore' github project (here) that it links to now says:

Your link is an blogpost from 2016 that points to: https://github.com/noise/snapstore README: snapstore was a minimalist example of a "store" for snaps, but is not compatible with the current snapd implementation. As a result I have removed the contents here to avoid further confusion.

In fact, Bret Barker has published an open source (Apache License) SNAP store on GitHub. We’re already looking at how to flesh out his proof-of-concept and bring it into snapcore itself.

https://github.com/noise/snapstore/

You can probably use the shared-modules file for Python 2.7 as a starting point, assuming they didn't change their build process too significantly between 2.7 and 3.8.

If it's not guaranteed to be provided by the runtime (which I imagine freetype2 would be), then it's a bug and should be reported. (I submitted a fix for sdl12-compat.json not listing its dependency on GLU.)

Not sure about it, but the gimp flatpak builds gtk2 so I'm not sure if it's part of any runtime or not: https://github.com/flathub/shared-modules/blob/4c83a37cf50fa4c03ceffaf075a189031b5e8e94/gtk2/gtk2.json

There are some cases where libraries are not shared: Old libraries for example like Python 2 must be bundled with the application, so they can differ. Even then, most stock 'legacy' libraries share the same shared-modules.

Flathub has a shared module for libusb: https://github.com/flathub/shared-modules/blob/master/libusb/libusb.json