Comment 6 for bug 1933392

> I tend to disagree with this line of thinking, no software is perfectly without bugs at a given point in time, by trying to upload a new version of snapd to backports we would be providing a fix for this bug, to me it sounds like you are saying that we can't fix bugs...

Not at all. You're framing this as a bug in snapd. This may be true, but the report points to the regression being triggered by a change in the core snap, and this suggests that the obvious resolution is to identify and immediately revert the change that triggered the issue. I'm surprised that an inadvertent regression that breaks users doesn't result in you immediately investigating and reverting the change that you made that triggered the bug. Instead you're leaving users broken while pushing the burden of dealing with this away from yourselves.

The problem with fixing a bug in backports is that users following your own instructions at https://snapcraft.io/docs/installing-snap-on-debian wouldn't receive the fix since backports is opt-in. That would leave things broken for Debian users by default.

> ...there was just a bug in that old version of snapd 2.21 that we have since fixed and so hence we would need to update snapd there.

I wonder if you could provide a minimal patch for snapd 2.21 please? Maybe it'd be possible to get such a fix into stretch-updates, although I'm not sure if that is still open.