Opinions on immutable distros
Opinions on immutable distros
Hey! I’m currently on Fedora Workstation and I’m getting bored. Nothing in particular. I’ve heard about immutable distros and I’m thinking about Fedora Kinoite. The idea is interesting but idk if it’s worth it. CPU and GPU are AMD. Mostly used for gaming.
You're viewing a single thread.
I think immutable OSes serve two purposes: For the developer who needs to operate multiple environments at the same time, and for the utter novice who could screw something up otherwise.
This audience, us, is the exactly middle ground. We like tinkering. We like setting things up.
So, I don’t think immutable OSes are for us.
Not true in my opinion.
You can still tweak the image to your liking, you just have to approach it differently.One of the many things image based OSs offer is peace of mind.
It's just great to know my PC will work just as fine tomorrow as it did today, and I don't have to fix anything.I can definitely see what you’re saying. But if you start to add packages, what do you gain in terms of known stability? Seems to me you might as well then just “be good” about not adding too many packages to a malleable distribution.
If you use the workflow of an immutable system on a traditional one, you have almost all the disadvantages of the first and pretty much no advantages of the second.
The "immutability" (you can still change stuff) is the wrong thing to look at.
I prefer the term "image based", that fits better. Everytime you update your image system for example, it gets "pulled" or compared to the original image.On a traditional one, you have your original image you once downloaded, and that's it.
Over time, it will still change due to updates and stuff. An immutable is basically a "fresh install" every time.Most immutables use layering, so you still pull the original image, but after that some stuff gets changed.
It is generally strongly discuraged to install stuff (like GIMP and so on) directly. It should only be the last option, like for drivers.But even when you directly install, you don't use all the benefits. The OS is still rebuilt every time and package drift barely happens.
And, back to the beginning, the pros and cons.
It's like with PDFs. Yeah, it sucks that you can't edit them. But that's what they're built for. They can't be tampered with, but therefore they look the same on every device and you don't have to worry about fonts, formatting or symbols.And on immutables it's the same: some stuff is a bit more different/ complicated for some, but at the same time, they're less buggy, more secure, offer instant rollbacks, can be customized and rolled out super quickly, and much more. Read my other comment for more information, including customization by building custom images :)
Yeah man I don't know. I used to think I like tinkering(used endeavour for a few months) but I am enjoying the no maintaince life with uBlue very much. Most of the time the system updates on its own and I am not even aware that the system updated. Same with flatpaks which also auto update so they are always on the latest version provided by flathub when I use them. But I also like gnome so maybe I am not the tinker lover I thought I was