Can someone tell me the recent hype about immutable distros? What exactly is the immutable part, and why is it attractive?
this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
48208 readers
712 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
The system (the os files to be precise) is only mutable by package manager for specific tasks like updating. It can break certain workflows if the user wants to change system files, because they can't.
Bonuses from that are security and reproducibility. You can be sure that whatever package you have will look and behave exactly the same as on another device with the same OS. Malware won't be able to mess around with your OS so trivially as it does on mutable distros.
Interesting. Sounds like DevOps folks would love it. Maybe I’ll look into it more. Thanks!
Immutable, adjective: Unchanging over time or unable to be changed.
From the article: "We want a reliable desktop experience that runs everything, but we’re too lazy to maintain anything. So we automated the entire delivery pipeline in GitHub."
So, in other words... "Please don't ever update your system or everything will break"
It means the core OS is isolated from all the functionality in a way that allows you to modularly add all the functionality on top of it in a reproducible, robust way.
In theory. I haven't actually dug into any of them personally.
🥱
What a shitty tagline. What have I been doing these past few years, lol?
uses the GNOME interface
yeah thats a no from me.
Plus its just running off Fedora? Easy no.
Linux desktop will, most likely, fail for: Developers and sysadmins, because not everyone is using Docker and Github actions to deploy applications to some proprietary cloud solution. Finding a properly working FTP/SFTP/FTPS desktop client (similar WinSCP or Cyberduck) is an impossible task as the ones that exist fail even at basic tasks like dragging and dropping a file.
Linux desktop is great, I love it but I don’t sugar coat it nor I’m delusional like most posting about it.
It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want to spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.
https://tadeubento.com/2023/linux-desktop-a-collective-delusion/
Also, immutable distributions are a scam:
Guess what happens whenever people popularize immutable distros as the next hype in tech that will make everything better? You get yourself into a totally unreasonable and avoidable ecosystem just because those systems won’t cut it for most use cases… same that happened with Docker/Kubernetes.
I’ve been saying it for year and nobody cares: nowadays those companies are all about re-creating and reconfiguring the way people develop software so everyone will be hostage of their platforms. We see this in everything now Docker/DockerHub/Kubernetes and GitHub actions were the first sign of this cancer. We now have a generation of developers that doesn’t understand the basic of their tech stack, about networking, about DNS, about how to deploy a simple thing into a server that doesn’t use some Docker BS or isn’t a 3rd party cloud xyz deploy-from-github service.
The latest endeavor in making everyone’s hostage is the new Linux immutable distribution trend. Immutable distros are all about making thing that were easy into complex, “locked down”, “inflexible”, bullshit to justify jobs and payed tech stacks and a soon to be released property solution.
We had Ansible, containers, ZFS and BTRFS that provided all the required immutability needed already but someone decided that is is time to transform proven development techniques in the hopes of eventually selling some orchestration and/or other proprietary repository / platform / BS like Docker / Kubernetes does.
“Oh but there are truly open-source immutable distros” … true, but this hype is much like Docker and it will invariably and inevitably lead people down a path that will then require some proprietary solution or dependency somewhere that is only required because the “new” technology itself alone doesn’t deliver as others did in the past.
As with CentOS’s fiasco or Docker it doesn’t really matter if there are truly open-source and open ecosystems of immutable distributions because in the end people/companies will pick the proprietary / closed option just because “it’s easier to use” or some other specific thing that will be good on the short term and very bad on the long term. This happened with CentOS vs Debian is currently unfolding with Docker vs LXC/RKT and will happen with Ubuntu vs Debian for all those who moved from CentOS to Ubuntu.
Those popularizing immutable distributions clearly haven’t had any experience with it before the current hype. Let me tell you something, immutable systems aren’t a new thing we already had it with MIPS devices (mostly routers and IOTs) and people have been moving to ARM and mutable solutions because it’s better, easier and more reliable.
Let people enjoy things.
Are other distros not serious? I don't understand what this is.
You're just not cloud-native enough to understand how revolutionary it is to run GNOME on Fedora.
We are really experiencing a cloud native generation. These Zoomers don't even know how life was without a cloud over their heads.
"Cloud native" technology is double speak for your shit is running on other people's computers who will be tracking your use and selling it to pay for server upkeep and also maybe profit?
In this case it's referring to the fact that the OS is built upon the same containerization technology used on cloud platforms such as Kubernetes. As a marketing tool it's a bit buzzwordy, but it's not about running the core OS components outside of the physical machine here.
I don't get it. What's the spirit of ubuntu? Is the underlying OS based on ubuntu instead of fedora?
What's the actual difference to fedora silverblue?
Half the answer to "why did you make your own linux?" is that it's awesome being able to revert back to the original fedora OS.
Because it follows a cloud-native approach, the end user has the flexibility to rebase back to the stock Fedora or any Universal Blue image. It's more like having someone install, configure, and maintain a polished Fedora setup for you.
And the other half doesn't provide any info either
Bluefin utilizes Fedora's OCI features to compose and build an OS image. This process is overseen by a well-structured community that is committed to automation and sustainability. The end result is akin to a configuration management tool like Ansible or Salt, but without the typical challenges associated with maintaining a custom distribution.
What's the Linux desktop for the playful developer? 🤔
UwUbuntu