On 31 March 2017 at 05:38, Seth Arnold <seth.arn...@canonical.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:10:26AM +0200, Alistair Grant wrote: >> I'm trying to package a 32 bit software development environment: Pharo >> Smalltalk (http://pharo.org). >> >> I've got it working OK as a devmode package, but as soon as I switch it >> to classic confinement it fails to run. > > I was under the impression the usual progression is from devmode to > strict. Are you certain classic is the correct direction for your snap?
I ran into a similar conundrum for the Python snap I built. If your package contains a language runtime and interactive shell, it is difficult to decide what sort of confinement policy makes sense. It is possible to run under strict confinement with few or any interfaces connected, but depending on what the user wants to do might want a lot more permission (e.g. ability to access the network, ability to write to the home directory, etc). At present the best option seems to be to package things with strict confinement but ensure that it will be functional if installed with --classic. That gives safety by default, but full functionality on request. Of course, this means snapcraft isn't giving any help with the necessary link flags to get things working reliably on non-Ubuntu systems. I guess that's something to try and solve next. James. -- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft
