360
Immutable Distro Opinions (www.linuxfordevices.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
237 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I recently took up Bazzite from mint and I love it! After using it for a few days I found out it was an immutable distro, after looking into what that is I thought it was a great idea. I love the idea of getting a fresh image for every update, I think for businesses/ less tech savvy people it adds another layer of protection from self harm because you can't mess with the root without extra steps.

For anyone who isn't familiar with immutable distros I attached a picture of mutable vs immutable, I don't want to describe it because I am still learning.

My question is: what does the community think of it?

Do the downsides outweigh the benefits or vice versa?

Could this help Linux reach more mainstream audiences?

Any other input would be appreciated!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Nixos tends to lean on the term reproducible instead of immutable, because you can have settings (e.g files in /etc & ~/.config) changed outside of nix's purview, it just won't be reproducible and may be overwritten by nix.

Interesting. If possible, could you more explicitly draw comparisons on how this isn't quite the same over on say Fedora Atomic? Like, sure changes of /etc are (at least by default) being kept track of. But you indeed can change it. libostree doesn't even care what you do in your home folder. Thus, changes to e.g. ~/.config (and everything else in /var^[1]^) are kept nowhere else by default.

  1. Which happens to be more crowded than on other distros as folders like /opt are actually found here as well.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    ~/.config is probably a poor comparison on my part; it's management is actually done by home-manager rather than Nixos proper, and I can't think of another OS that fills this same role.

    Nixos generates (for example) /etc/systemd/network to a path in /nix/store and symlinks it to it's appropriate locations. After the files are generated the appropriate /nix/store paths are (re-mounted? Over-mounted? I'm not sure the implementation) made read-only (by default), but anything that isn't generated is absolutely both mutable and untracked, and that "not tracking everything in /etc" is more what I'm going on about.

    If you use Nixos as intended (when you find that a package is lacking a config option you want, create your own nix option internally) the distro is effectively immutable, but if you use Nixos for anything moderately complex that changes frequently e.g. a desktop os, you eventually run into the choice: become competent enough to basically be a nixpkgs contributor, or abandon absolute immutability.

    I think the first option is worth it, and did go down that route, but it is unreasonable to expect the average Linux consumer to do so, and so something like fedora atomic is going to remain more "immutable" for them than nixos.

    This need to git gud is thankfully lessening with every commit to nixpkgs, and most people can already get to most places without writing their own set of nix options or learning how to parse //random markup language// into nix, but you'll eventually run into the barrier.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent