jordy's questions

This applies to Nautilus, Gedit, and others. I would like to select, for example, Copy and Paste from a drop down menu, but I am forced to use either the right-click menu or Ctrl-C Ctrl-V shortcuts, because the drop-down menus are non-existent. These menus provided easy access for many essential functions, and I would like to use them on Ubuntu 18.04.

This image (from Ubuntu 16.04) shows the drop-menu feature I'm looking for.

I know there are similar questions about this issue, but the answers are not definitive and recommend installing Gnome Global Application Menu, which does not implement this feature properly. Also, there are rumors that this shell extension is no longer supported. In either case, it doesn't work.

I've tried several settings, installed Gnome Tweak Tool, logged in with Unity User interface, but nothing works. It doesn't matter if the menus are located in the window's title bar or the top menu bar, as long as they are available somewhere.

My question is: Is it even possible to have these drop-down menus, or should I just give up and stop wasting my time?

Gnome System Monitor is listed twice in Applications Overview. Using the Software center I determined one of them is a snap version, while the other isn't a snap. They appear to be identical in the applications Overview. Gnome Calculator is another example, and I'm sure there are more.

Can I remove the snap version and use the other one without any issues?

As the question clearly states: Why are two versions of software with identical names installed on Ubuntu 18.04? The suggested duplicate of this question does not answer the question.

By the way, the non-snap (apt version) of Gnome System Monitor is listed in the software Center twice, adding to the confusion, both listed as version 3.28.2-0Ubuntu1. Why is this happening?

Ubuntu release 18.04 new installation (not an upgrade).

Ubuntu is using swap files instead of swap partitions (as of Ubuntu 17.04) , except systems upgrading from 16.04 will retain their swap partitions and reuse them instead of swap files, as discussed in this answer. But, if I am upgrading and decide to use a swap file instead, can I place it in the old swap partition?

I realize this will limit the size of the swap file, but this way I can still make use of that drive space. If I can do this, would I have to format the partition to the same file-system type as Ubuntu? And would I have to keep it permanently mounted?

With the release of Ubuntu 18.04 (and 17.04) the swap partition will be replaced with a swap file. Has this been the case with previous Ubuntu releases?

I ask this because I've found several mentions of this term, "swap file" dated from 2011-2015 here on askubuntu, notably this post How do I configure swappiness?, but it's not clear if they are just using loose terminology referring to the swap partition (calling it a file), or if they mean an actual swap file.

According to 18.04 Bionic Beaver release notes:

For new installs, a swap file will be used by default instead of a swap partition.
Changes since 16.04

What will happen to the existing swap partition after the scheduled upgrade in July from my current Ubuntu 16.04 to Ubuntu 18.04? Will it still exist? If so, will it be used, or just take up dormant space?

As of Ubuntu 18.04 running lsblk shows 16 snap loops (2-3 times for each snap). The question is, why are they being listed as results for lsblk, fdisf-l, and blkid?

It creates a lot of clutter from the actual disks drive partitions I need to see, namely /dev/ partitions. I know a purported duplicate of this question exists, but it only asks why three loops are being listed per snap. I want to know why these snaps are being listed in the first place, and the purported duplicate does not answer this (perhaps those marking this as duplicate could help me by explaining why it is a duplicate). Technically, they qualify as file systems (which I neither created nor asked for), but they are getting in the way of the information output for the /dev/ partitions I am interested in. This becomes a problem when fdisk -l outputs a three page+ list filled mainly with snaps.

The output of a recent (1 week old) Ubuntu install and I have not installed any snaps:

$ lsblk  
NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT  
loop0    7:0    0  14.5M  1 loop /snap/gnome-logs/37  
loop1    7:1    0   2.3M  1 loop /snap/gnome-calculator/170  
loop2    7:2    0  86.6M  1 loop /snap/core/4486  
loop3    7:3    0  86.6M  1 loop /snap/core/4650  
loop4    7:4    0   1.6M  1 loop /snap/gnome-calculator/154  
loop5    7:5    0  14.5M  1 loop /snap/gnome-logs/34  
loop6    7:6    0   3.3M  1 loop /snap/gnome-system-monitor/36  
loop7    7:7    0   2.3M  1 loop /snap/gnome-calculator/178  
loop8    7:8    0    13M  1 loop /snap/gnome-characters/101  
loop9    7:9    0   3.7M  1 loop /snap/gnome-system-monitor/45  
loop10   7:10   0 139.5M  1 loop /snap/gnome-3-26-1604/64  
loop11   7:11   0   140M  1 loop /snap/gnome-3-26-1604/59   
loop12   7:12   0   3.7M  1 loop /snap/gnome-system-monitor/41  
loop13   7:13   0    21M  1 loop /snap/gnome-logs/25  
loop14   7:14   0  12.2M  1 loop /snap/gnome-characters/69  
loop15   7:15   0    13M  1 loop /snap/gnome-characters/96  
sda      8:0    0 298.1G  0 disk  
├─sda1   8:1    0   512M  0 part /boot/efi  
└─sda2   8:2    0 297.6G  0 part /  
sr0     11:0    1  1024M  0 rom  

(supplemental screen capture of above text):
screenshot.jpg

My snap list shows 6 results:

core
gnome-3-26-1604
gnome-calculator
gnome-characters
gnome-logs
gnome-system-monitor

Meanwhile, gnome-disk-utility shows nothing at all for snaps, only showing my HDD and optical drive.

It won't be very efficient if every installed snap gets listed as a block device (2-3 times each to add). Should I expect future updates to deal with this?

Edit:
fdisk-l also dumps out a very long list with 16 instances of these "disk loops" (Disk /dev/loop0, Disk /dev/loop1, etc., each with details which I won't show here because it's too long). This can't be intended behaviour, can it?
blkid also lists 16 loops, as TYPE="squashfs". At least parted -l works as expected, only outing my actual disk partitions.

I just tested this, and installing more snaps does add more to the lsblk output. Therefore, fdisk, lsblk, blkid could have potentially huge output lists, according to the number of snaps available, and installed.