Hi there folks, I’m still learning about Linux and have yet to dip my toes properly in any arch based distro. Have for the moment fallen in love with the immutable distros based on Universal Blue project. However I do want to learn about what arch has to offer to and plan on installing default arch when I have time. But have been wondering why I haven’t heard of any immutable distros from arch based distros yet.

So, am left wondering if there are talks within that Arch community of building immutable distros?


While writing this post I found a project called Arkane Linux, which seem to be very interesting. Does anyone have nay experience with it? Is there a specific reason why immutable wouldn’t be a good idea when based on Arch?

Project: https://arkanelinux.org/

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    33
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    But have been wondering why I haven’t heard of any immutable distros from arch based distros yet.

    If your question is “Why doesn’t Arch have its own atomic/immutable spin/flavor like Fedora and openSUSE have in their Silverblue/Kinoite and Aeon/Kalpa respectively?”, then the answer simply lies in the fact that Fedora and openSUSE have a lot more incentive for venturing the unexplored waters of atomicity/immutability as their enterprise counterparts exist and will benefit majorly from it. And I haven’t even mentioned how most of the new stuff first appear on Fedora (systemd, PipeWire, Wayland etc) before they’re adopted on other distros.

    The enterprise counterparts also allow funding that is essential for erecting this from the ground. But, even then, the shift towards atomic/immutable is a difficult one with a lot of hardships and complexity. From the ones that have developed their atomic/immutable projects retroactively (so GuixSD and NixOS don’t count as they’ve been atomic/immutable (and declarative) from inception), only Fedora’s (I’d argue) have matured sufficiently. But Fedora has been at it since at least 2017, so they’ve had a head start compared to the others.

    In contrast to Debian (through Canonical), Fedora (through Red Hat) and openSUSE (through SuSE), Arch has literally no (in)direct ties to enterprise. Hence, it will only adopt an atomic/immutable variant if the incentive is high from the community or if it’s very easy and only comes with major benefits. But, as even openSUSE is currently struggling with their atomic/immutable variants, it has a long road ahead before it becomes something that can be easily adopted by Arch. Hence, don’t expect Arch’s atomic/immutable variant any time soon.

    However, if any derivative suffices, then at least the likes of blendOS, ChimeraOS and even SteamOS are worth mentioning here.

    • Detective'OP
      link
      fedilink
      86 months ago

      Thanks very much for the detailed response - this was very insightful!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      46 months ago

      The biggest issue with immutable OSs is the lack of containerized apps. Most devs simply don’t distribute their apps in flatpaks etc. Install fedora atomic. Fist think I want to do is install xpipe to manage my servers. Can’t be don’t in an unprivileged flatpaks. Great layer it on.

      Let’s try seafile next to sync my files and projects…the flatpak is maintained by a random volunteer and most up to date version is from a year ago. Great, layer that in as well.

      Let’s install a command line tool, before it was 1 line, now it’s a whole lot of googling only to discover that the best way is probably to just have a whole other package manager like brew

      The concept is great and it has lots of potential, just it will only work if devs start packaging their stuff in a format that works with the new paradigm (containers)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The biggest issue with immutable OSs is the lack of containerized apps.

        Disagree. This is a non-issue for NixOS and Guix System. If anything, what you say only (somewhat) applies to Fedora Atomic or otherwise immature and/or niche immutable distributions.

        For Fedora Atomic (and others that operate similarly), pet containers (read: Toolbx (and later Distrobox)) were originally envisioned as the solution. But, even Nix (and as you’ve noted brew on opinionated uBlue) has been used to that effect.

        Though, yes, I don’t ignore that sometimes you just gotta layer it. Thankfully, as that’s exactly why we got that feature 😉.

      • @Giooschi
        link
        English
        36 months ago

        Can’t those be installed in toolbox?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          I don’t think xpipe would work, it needs too many permissions.

          Something like seafile would work, better than overlaying it I guess but still isn’t park of a package manager with easy auto updates etc like it would be if the devs published to flatpak.

          At the end of the day it’s a lot more work that the promise of opening discover, searching an app and hitting install.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            36 months ago

            I know ssh -X works fine in a rootless podman container, and so does waypipe. I’d be shocked if xpipe didn’t.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        26 months ago

        Not everything should be flatpak’d. In your case, xpipe (and in the future, waypipe) should always be installed in a docker container containing your normal “mutable” OS. It’s why Fedora is evaluating Ptyxis: when you open a terminal, instead of defaulting to your immutable root, it can be set up to go to a container which has your home mounted but a traditional, mounted root.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          36 months ago

          Actually yes. Fedora atomic has a system called toolbox that uses podman to encapsulate desktop apps. Flatpak also provides a sandboxed container.

          The idea is to keep the OS and apps separate as much as possible for both security and stability.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      06 months ago

      In contrast to Debian (through Canonical), Fedora (through Red Hat) and openSUSE (through SuSE), Arch has literally no (in)direct ties to enterprise.

      LOL Fedora and opensuse are copying from the commercial distros, but Debian is not copying Ubuntu (literally the opposite)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Fedora and opensuse are copying from the commercial distros

        How are they copying if Fedora and openSUSE Tumbleweed are upstream to RHEL and SLE respectively?

        Btw, I don’t understand what your comment was set out to do. Could you elaborate?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          What matters is the important stuff like deciding what package format to use, how to handle the biggest bugs, default filesystem, systemd or not, and who gets to decide all this stuff and so on. Some distros follow the company decision and some do not. Get it?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Thank you for clarifying.

            I’m not very familiar with how stuff works over at (open)SuSE. However, for Fedora, we know that they’ve gone against Red Hat’s policy more than once. At the end of the day, it is (at the very least in name) a community distro.

            But, I think we can at least agree on the fact that Canonical’s influence on Debian is definitely less than Red Hat’s influence on Fedora or SuSE’s influence on openSUSE.

            Btw, consider conveying this better next time 😅. I think most others, like me, misunderstood you 😜.

            Have a nice day!