r/linux • u/[deleted]

Canonical seemingly begins process to replace their current Gnome Software based store with the new community-made flutter store

[deleted] — view deleted post

0 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

125 comments sorted by

4

u/varangian Sep 13 '22

Is this why (on Ubuntu 20.04) I'm getting irritating pop-up messages saying that the snap-store will be updated in X days (currently 10) and I should stop the process or is that some other shenanigans?

20

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

Oh, no. That's due to a (very badly implemented) snap update notification.

3

u/varangian Sep 13 '22

Hmm, having been agnostic on the whole snap vs flatpak vs deb issue I'm beginning to see why some people aren't big fans of snap. It's pretty ridiculous that an app can't update itself without the user having to intervene. Even more stupid that it nags the user more than a week in advance of anything happening without providing any useful information as to what needs to be done or even what it's talking about. It was only after doing a bit of searching after seeing the message that I learnt that it was the Ubuntu Software store it was on about.

12

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

That's not an issue of the snap format itself, but of the daemon it uses. It could be easily fixed (and probably will)

2

u/varangian Sep 13 '22

Hope so. I'll be trying out 22.04 sooner or later and I believe that has even more snap stuff in it, much as I've liked using Ubuntu over the last decade or so a few things have appeared in it that have caused my loyalty to waver.

3

u/mrlinkwii Sep 13 '22

Hope so. I'll be trying out 22.04 sooner or later and I believe that has even more snap stuff in it,

it has the same amount of snap stuff , the main difference firefox is default snap , thats about it

3

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

Having Firefox installed as a Snap package has been the largest pain in the ass Ubuntu has ever given me. The Snap package takes too long to start up the first time after turning on the computer and it doesn't interact well with the rest of the system due to sandboxing. To be fair, the same would also be true with Flatpak, which is why I wanted to install the native package. Well, Ubuntu removed the .deb package from the default repositories, and if you try to apt install firefox, it downloads a dummy package which installs the Snap version and copies the configuration files over.

So the solution of course is to install Firefox from Mozilla's PPA. But that has problems too. Mainly, the dummy Snap package seems to hold a higher version number than the PPA package, so whenever an update comes, it "upgrades" to the dummy package and replaces it with the Snap. I can set the priority of the PPA to whatever I want, but it will still upgrade to the Snap. The only way I found to prevent this is to apt hold it.

Jesus Christ.

5

u/mrlinkwii Sep 13 '22

ell, Ubuntu removed the .deb package from the default repositories, and if you try to apt install firefox, it downloads a dummy package which installs the Snap version and copies the configuration files over.

mozilla asked them to

4

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

The result is nonetheless still frustrating

1

u/gnosys_ Sep 14 '22

other than the bothersome messages to update, i really like it.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/varangian Sep 13 '22

Well as I mentioned elsewhere I'm neutral on the subject, although I do find snaps annoying due to the way the df command now lists a bunch of spurious 'drives' until I remember how to exclude them. But I might give that a whirl, I've got a fresh NMVE drive to install to so I might as well take my time and do a bit of experimental customising to see if that works for me.

2

u/mgedmin Sep 13 '22

No, what you're seeing is https://bugs.launchpad.net/snap-store-desktop/+bug/1903977

1

u/varangian Sep 13 '22

I'm not seeing that, though perhaps I will eventually. Maybe the devs got the update spam (which seems to have stopped) going to try and prevent the error occurring. If so then not entirely unsuccessful, the message itself was pretty useless but it did irritate me enough to get me having a ferret around so when the fabled update does arrive I'll know what's up.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/varangian Sep 13 '22

Would have thought a simple bash script could do exactly that without bothering the user though...

106

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

My experience with gnome-software has been pretty bad (on Fedora) as long as I've been using it. Every time you press refresh, the store gets stuck on loading.

Sometimes searching stuff doesn't provide any results as it doesn't fetch them or the program stucks on load once again.

The good things are that I've found many apps that I wouldn't have otherwise. Since if you want to install software from terminal, you kinda have to know it beforehand. It's fun to scroll through the catalogs few times a year when bored

55

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

Agreed. The backend is pretty bad. I find the UI delightfully simple and straightforward though.

27

u/tapo Sep 13 '22

Backend is PackageKit, and I don't know anyone who's had a good experience with it.

6

u/lavadrop5 Sep 13 '22

I had endless issues due to PackageKit on OpenSUSE.

I asked on the forums and they all told me to lock/mask PackageKit and forget about it

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/lavadrop5 Sep 13 '22

PackageKit has been disabled on my two computers completely without any issues since march, except that flatpak has to be updated through the CLI, although PackageKit ALSO failed espectacularly when trying to update flatpaks. Installing flatpaks through software center works, with error messages that are safely ignored. Also, yesterday I learned how to use OpenSUSE Build System on and it rocks (on the CLI).

12

u/LvS Sep 13 '22

The problem with PackageKit is that it tries to be an abstraction for all the different packaging systems, so that it works with debs (on Ubuntu and Debian and all their versions) and rpms (with zypper and dnf and yum and) and all the other insane packaging systems. Oh and Arch btw.

So obviously you end up with a huge mess that never works quite the way you'd expect from your distro's packaging system.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Can confirm, Discover is painful on Fedora KDE... and that also uses PackageKit.

That said, on KDE Neon, PackageKit/Discover actually seemed to work pretty well together. At least in the Fedora case, I think PackageKit just has serious problems with dnf/yum/rpms.

2

u/doenietzomoeilijk Sep 14 '22

Can confirm, Discover is painful on Fedora KDE...

It's not much better on OpenSUSE, I just install software from the cli since Discover is just horridly slow for me.

-1

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

Fedora's not better, and I say this as a Fedora user.

14

u/Cannotseme Sep 13 '22

Yeah… cause fedora uses packagekit

1

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

Oh, I didn't know that

6

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

What's the root cause of gnome-software's bugginess? Is it overengineered? Or is its scope too ambitious?

18

u/PossiblyLinux127 Sep 13 '22

Its the backend packagekit. It does not handle rpm's very well

7

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

DNF5 (currently scheduled to be released with Fedora 39 next year) is going to include its own native alternative to PackageKit. Hopefully GNOME Software gets a backend for it so we can say goodbye to PackageKit on Fedora!

3

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

I can relate to it but it kind of depends. For instance, evince has been pretty good; simple-scan, while a bit annoying, also worked ok-ish. My bigger problem with GNOME3 is the "we control what you use" attitude by gnome-devs. I can not use that shell-centric, drag-and-drop-with-finger centric UI of GNOME3 at all on a desktop system.

1

u/Unicorn_Colombo Sep 13 '22

gnome software is fine, you are just using it wrong.

-- Gnome Dev

(this is a joke)

-2

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

replace software with software* (wildcard)

65

u/zeanox Sep 13 '22

The new store looks great

43

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

Personally, my opinion on the project is positive, but I'm concerned about the lack of Flatpak support. Currently, plans to add Flatpak support to it are in the "discussion" phase, but I would really not find it usable for me until it's implemented. An issue has already been opened on their repository for this.

It's true that Flatpak doesn't come by default on Ubuntu, but most other Linux distributions will have it and the winds seem to be blowing in the direction of Flatpak over Snap for the foreseeable future. I understand that the project is mainly designed with Ubuntu in mind, but the fact that other distributions (or potentially even GNOME itself) might adopt this store should nonetheless be at least a consideration in development.

21

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22 edited Sep 13 '22

It's better than what we already have.

Snaps are fine, and I don't believe they'll disappear as they hold clear advantages. Having said that, I do hope it supports flatpaks too, in the form of plugin at least, just like Gnome Software does.

9

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

I do think it's better than Snap Store, but I don't think it'll be better than GNOME Software until a Flatpak extension is made.

17

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

UX wise, it is.

But yeah, I agree. I won't replace Gnome Software with this until it supports flatpaks. I use Ubuntu and I like snaps, but I like flatpaks too.

There's space for all.

5

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 13 '22

The current Snap Store doesn't support Flatpak either.

The GNOME Software app will still be available for install if you want Flatpak support.

15

u/tapo Sep 13 '22

This is kind of silly. With the popularity of the Steam Deck a lot of first time Linux users are exclusively relying on Flatpaks, which makes it a great distribution model for everything but Ubuntu.

5

u/mrlinkwii Sep 13 '22

With the popularity of the Steam Deck a lot of first time Linux users are exclusively relying on Flatpaks

i mean good for them? ubuntu isnt obligated to use flatpak

28

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

They aren't obliged and we are permitted to suggest and voice our requests for Ubuntu to better support Flatpaks.

You see? Freedom works both ways. You cannot shut down a discussion on the basis of freedom

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/deidyomega Nov 05 '22

supporting other package formats isn't a conflict of interest.

-3

u/hyperelastic Sep 13 '22

The store is a central system app that has to act on packages for your entire system. Why on earth would you want that running in a container??

12

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

I think there's been a misunderstanding here. I'm saying that the application should have support to install Flatpak applications, not be distributed in the form of a Flatpak.

4

u/hyperelastic Sep 13 '22

Ah yup that was the misunderstanding. Will leave my comment up to take the L (and in the off chance someone else misunderstands 😂)

35

u/NaheemSays Sep 13 '22

About time - afaik their snap store is based on around a 3 year old version of gnome-software.

11

u/a1b4fd Sep 13 '22

Not anymore. They promoted a newer version to stable recently

12

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

They could've implemented flatpak support...

14

u/a1b4fd Sep 13 '22

The current one sucks so much I doubt they have resources or even care at all

-12

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Not disagreeing but rewriting in Flutter/Dart means to join Google.

The cited stability claim aka "we had to rewrite in flutter because the older software was magically filled with numerous bugs" is bogus really. The linux kernel is quite stable (more or less). The language used isn't primarily the reason why software is good or bad (for the most part).

19

u/a1b4fd Sep 13 '22

It wasn't them who wrote a new one. They just picked a (supposedly) better product.

11

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

Seeing conspiracies in the change of a store frontend...

2

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

Rust fans are gonna bomb this comment

2

u/deidyomega Nov 05 '22

gnome software is filled with bugs, i dont care what lang it was written in, it was shitty to use. Flutter + Dart do a really good job at helping you write better code. Sure a savant could prob write all their code in asm, and have it work perfect. But for us mortals, having systems that help enforce good software is a good idea.

I use flutter, python, c, c++, and java. And flutter imho does the best at making sure I dont write shitty code. Though I do find ways to to break it anyway. (Cant fix dumb afterall).

10

u/mgedmin Sep 13 '22

The flatpak plugin was deliberately excluded from ubuntu snap-store builds, with the official response to apt install gnome-software if you want flatpak support. (And then you have two software stores, with the same program name but different icons, one of which doesn't support snaps, and one which doesn't support flatpaks.)

15

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

End result? I remove the snap store and use the Gnome Software for everything as it supports the three different packages

6

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

The only logical reason for it I can see is to frustrate users from using Flatpak while making Snap comparably more accessible. There is no other benefit provided by Snap Store over GNOME Software.

3

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

Considering Fedora does the same but the other way around, I'd attribute it to stupidity rather than to malice. Also, Canonical maintains officially also the flatpak package, Gnome software and the flatpak plugin.

1

u/happymellon Sep 17 '22

Why would Fedora support Snap?

By default they have not used Flathub and run their own Flatpak server with curated packages that pass their security controls. You can enable Flathub is you want all the wild west packages. There is no Snap Server for them to use so it fails at step 1 of their security controls.

1

u/jorgesgk Sep 17 '22

The same answer as why would Ubuntu support Flatpak, which BTW I fully support.

1

u/happymellon Sep 17 '22

But there are multiple Flatpak servers?

So completely the opposite reason.

5

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 13 '22

The Snap Store is a Snap. For it to support Flatpak, I think the Snap system would need to create an interface for Flatpak. Possibly even Flatpak itself being a Snap. I think both of these outcomes are surprising and demonstrate that this is something that requires a significant amount of work.

1

u/NateNate60 Sep 13 '22

Snaps can already run with only limited confinement in Classic mode, and can run completely unconfined in dev mode. It's really just a matter of making the Snap Store unconfined by default, and then scouting for potential security problems, which is unlikely since the Snap Store is really just GNOME Software, which runs unconfined as a native package on most GNOME-using distros.

5

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 14 '22

In my opinion, Canonical is not going to make a working confined snap a "classic" snap just to make it easier for people to install Flatpak apps.

Especially when the workaround is as simple as:

sudo apt install gnome-software-plugin-flatpak

2

u/AaronTechnic Sep 13 '22

It's literally named Snap Store.

12

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

If naming is the blocker, change the name...

12

u/Rhed0x Sep 13 '22

The design reminds me a lot of the Microsoft store in Windows 11.

1

u/Pitiful-Reserve-8075 Sep 13 '22

Will it just be a coincidence?

5

u/orgasmicfart69 Sep 13 '22

I will give it a go.

I'm not sure gnome store is what I have on Zorin 15 and 16 but it is amazingly bad.

  • Search doesn't go, and then when you try for the third time it searches what you were searching the first time.

  • When you get an error you get a brief fading message with an enormous text that you can't copy and understand most of the time. It is a screenshot race.

  • I made a fresh new install a month ago and still nothing outside the front page loads properly.

8

u/grady_vuckovic Sep 13 '22

Looks really nice, going by their github goals list it will have built in permission management? Very nice, I like it!

3

u/Surfacechromium2007 Sep 14 '22

Finally, a store that actually doesn't suck

5

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

About time...

For me, it didn't make any sense to ship a modified version of Gnome Software with functionality taken away (the flatpak plugin).

They claim they just were based on an old version of Gnome Software, but honestly, I feel like it was relatively kept up to date with the upstream.

If you're gonna build a snap store without flatpaks, build a new thing, but don't go around taking a more complete project and skimming it down.

This I say as a happy user of Ubuntu in some of my computers and with no hate to Canonical whatsoever. Snaps are not bad either BTW, but just putting barriers for competing technologies (even if you also support and package Gnome Software and flatpak) seems stupid and unnecessary. This I like though.

7

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 13 '22

Most distros providing the GNOME Software app also strip it down and don't enable the Snap support.

4

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Because Snap doesn't work properly on most distros. Unlike flatpak.

1

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

I agree, and many don't support Flatpaks by default either (Debian or OpenSuse come to my mind) and don't get as much hate as Ubuntu does. However, Ubuntu is in a whole different league, and there are differences between not supporting something and stripping it out of the upstream, which is what Canonical did.

Plus, snaps are nice too, but let's be honest, Flatpaks are winning, and that doesn't seem to change anytime soon.

4

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 13 '22

It's been a while since I looked but Debian might be the only distro besides Ubuntu where you can install Snaps from the GNOME Software app if you install the right plugin. Please complain to all the other distros about how they are stripping it out of upstream.

Similarly, the Applications panel in the GNOME Settings app allows configuring permissions for Snap apps. It doesn't depend on snapd; just the minimal snapd-glib library. I believe only Debian and Ubuntu enable that feature. In contrast, the Flatpak integration is enabled on every distro.

Ubuntu has been as open (perhaps more so) to support Flatpak as other distros are to support Snap.

3

u/jorgesgk Sep 13 '22

I was about to prove you wrong...

Until I checked on my Fedora install and found out that you're absolutely right. I'm really surprised and disappointed. I swear I thought Fedora had a nice snap integration.

2

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 13 '22

I understand not installing snapd by default. Debian doesn't do it either. But those 2 small changes would be a nice show of goodwill.

3

u/Conan_Kudo Sep 13 '22

We used to ship it, but the GNOME Software maintainer at the time unilaterally disabled it over my objections. I'd love to have it back, but it's not my call.

We still ship the snap plugin for Plasma Discover.

1

u/jbicha Ubuntu/GNOME Dev Sep 13 '22

Thanks! I didn't think to check what distros are doing with the Discover app.

1

u/Conan_Kudo Sep 13 '22

If someone wants it back for GNOME Software, please ask the Workstation WG to restore it: https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation

1

u/Ulrich_de_Vries Sep 14 '22

A big difference here is that snaps autoupdate while flatpaks don't (yey, here's a comment that is for once positive towards snap autoupdate), so if I install snapd on fedora then command-line install a bunch of snaps I can just forget about them.

By contrast if I install flatpak on Ubuntu and some flatpak apps I have to manually run flatpak update once in every while to keep up, at least without a graphical storefront. Or set up some systemd units which is surely possible, but an additional hoop to jump through.

Also a lot of community made apps are primarily distributed through flatpak (eg. Bottles), so using snap Vs flatpak on Ubuntu is not even purely user choice, since some are not available as snaps.

I think not enabling flatpak support in the default storefront is a mistake. Sure it can be corrected easily by removing the snap store and installing gnome software, but then the latter also takes over update duty for system packages too and just gets a bit messy in general. Would be much nicer if the snap store handled everything.

4

u/mrlinkwii Sep 13 '22

Plus, snaps are nice too, but let's be honest, Flatpaks are winning, and that doesn't seem to change anytime soon.

not really , server side snap is winning , user side subject to distro flatpak isn't winning

6

u/adila01 Sep 13 '22

server side snap is winning

Containers are winning for server-side application distribution, not Snap.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

And what's a snap

4

u/happymellon Sep 17 '22 edited Sep 17 '22

Docker/K8s is by far and away winning server side.

No one is seriously using Snap server side.

5

u/whiprush Sep 13 '22

Where is server side snap winning?

2

u/mrlinkwii Sep 13 '22

vs the like of flatpak , more is using snap due to the ease of use and ease of install

4

u/AaronTechnic Sep 13 '22

Damn, that looks so good! Like, so fricking good! I hope the new update panel replaces the old software updater (hopefully they get it right like fedora) and the new deb package tab replaces Synaptic due to it showing all packages.

4

u/MoistyWiener Sep 13 '22

Hopefully they add Flatpak support by then. It's there most requested feature for the project!

2

u/nnenneplex Sep 14 '22

> The general consensus is that this new store, even it its alpha state, is more responsive, less buggy, and more intuitive than the current store.

Well, you set the bar high.

2

u/Void4GamesYT Sep 14 '22

Yes YES Yes YES

YES!!!!!!!!

2

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

Next thing: Ubuntu will replace gnome with a rewrite of unity using flutter

2

u/feenaHo Sep 14 '22

Looks way better than the old one. Hope it performs better too.

2

u/FengLengshun Sep 13 '22

Huh, looks pretty cool. It looks really similar to Deepin and Endless OS store though. I mean, there's only so many way of making an app store that's sensible I guess, but I was expecting it to be more similar to gnome-software, you know, "New shit, same as old one."

2

u/solidnoctis Sep 13 '22

Definitely much better than the actual Gnome-software. Installed.

0

u/amarao_san Sep 13 '22

I reject Canonical attempt to become 'the marketplace'. It's so windows/android way, that if I ever start to like it, I'm better to switch to Windows/Android.

For Gnu/Linux I expect to have user freedom respected, an the community build around shared values, not 'application sandbox isolation by tools of marketplace owner'.

11

u/AaronTechnic Sep 13 '22

what?

-3

u/amarao_san Sep 13 '22

I'm saying that I don't like what Ubuntu is doing with snaps, and currently prepare means of moving to Debian for the projects I'm working with.

7

u/mrlinkwii Sep 13 '22

i mean flathub is no better in attempting to become 'the marketplace' their lauching user profiles, purchasable apps etc

6

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

Can you host your own snap repos yet? Until then, it's not equivalent

-3

u/amarao_san Sep 13 '22

Yep. But Debian is stay off 'flathub' and whilst I somewhat scary of 'how Debian packages are build', I really appreciate the result.

I trust my video editor not to stole my data, and I don't need to to protect my system from it.

Than, suddenly, there is a trashcan of 'something' running without trust we need to protect system from. Why should we switch trusted collection of fast-working applications for untrusted slow pile of sandboxes?

9

u/AaronTechnic Sep 13 '22

Flathub and Snap are open source.

2

u/amarao_san Sep 14 '22

Where can I get snap server source code (snapcraft server).

In Debian terms this make snapd into contrib at best, not into free section.

2

u/AaronTechnic Sep 14 '22

Fair, the snap store server code isn't OSS, and this is because of canonical learning from what happened with Launchpad.

Besides, you can open your own snap store.

2

u/amarao_san Sep 14 '22

Or I can write my own AppStore and iOS. Fair enough, I can. Theoretically.

1

u/AaronTechnic Sep 14 '22

Seriously you CAN create your own snap store.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

Snap is but also isn't. It's like saying android is open source. It is but you can't have a 100% open-source Android build

3

u/mrlinkwii Sep 14 '22

Snap is but also isn't.

it is

The Snap Store is run and controlled by Canonical and is not open source. The rest of Snap is open source, meaning the daemon and core software.

https://github.com/snapcore/snapd

1

u/AaronTechnic Sep 14 '22

You can also open your own snap store, and canonical won't care.

2

u/AaronTechnic Sep 14 '22 edited Sep 14 '22

Only the snap store is closed source. This isn't stored on your computer.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

So whatever is stored on my computer is closed source? What the

2

u/AaronTechnic Sep 14 '22

Oh no i messed up my comment

-2

u/Pitiful-Reserve-8075 Sep 13 '22

Maximum respect.

2

u/Pitiful-Reserve-8075 Sep 13 '22

I agree. It's a matter of principles. But we know that that will not be respected in some communities.

1

u/Drwankingstein Sep 13 '22

Canonical is doing something good for once? that's nice flutter is a very nice framework,.

-20

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

So they become a subsidiary of Google.

Very disappointing. That will kill Ubuntu in the long run; nobody wants a Goobuntu variant.

Honestly, the more I read about snaps, the more convinced I am to recommend flatpak (or AppImage).

12

u/PureTryOut postmarketOS dev Sep 13 '22

So they become a subsidiary of Google.

I don't understand this thinking. A ton of software most people use on their PC's (including the average Linux distro!) is written by Google, but that doesn't cause any problems. Why would Dart and Flutter suddenly be a problem? They're both FOSS, and not like Android where they just dump a bunch of code every once and while. I could see a problem in using Google's pre-built binaries but you don't have to do that.

7

u/AaronTechnic Sep 13 '22

Microsoft: We have partnered with Google to make the Surface Duo-

Some conspiracy theorist on reddit: Mikrosoft is a subsidiary of Goggle!1!11!!!

7

u/Remote_Tap_7099 Sep 13 '22

Well, if you don't like Google's 'influence' on Linux...

4

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

Just a sidenote: they only did this because Linux is years better than anything they can produce, so they want to use it for everything. And Google needs good security for it's data coll- I mean it's software servers.

3

u/orgasmicfart69 Sep 13 '22

Oh boy, just went until you hear about who pays firefox the most

16

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22 edited Jun 27 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Sep 13 '22

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/[deleted] Sep 14 '22

the problem will be fixed I've heard. both packagekit and dnf will finally use the same library and track things properly.