this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
83 points (96.6% liked)

Linux

46794 readers
1047 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

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So I've recently taken an interest in these three distros:

All of these offer something very interesting:
Access to (basically) all Linux-capable software, no matter from what repo.

Both NixOS and blendOS are based on config files, from which your system is basically derived from, and Vanilla OS uses a package manager apx to install from any given repo, regardless of distribution.

While I've looked into Fedora Silverblue, that distro is limited to only install Flatpaks (edit: no, not really), which is fine for "apps", but seems to be more of a problem with managing system- and CLI tools.

I haven't distro hopped yet, as I'm still on Manjaro GNOME on my devices.


What are your thoughts on the three distros mentioned above?
Which ones are the most interesting, and for what reasons?

Personally, I'm mostly interested in NixOS & blendOS, as I believe they may have more advantages compared to Arch;

What do you think?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (13 children)

I think NixOS is awesome, but it certainly doesn't offer "access to (basically) all Linux-capable software, no matter from what repo." - at least not natively. You can do that through containers, but you can do that with containers on any distro. Where it shines is declaring the complete system configuration (including installed programs and their configuration) in its config file (on file-based configuration, I wouldn't really consider blendos a viable competitor).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

I would disagree. I feel like nixpkgs has pretty much everything, more so than any other distro in my experience. The differences in how NixOS work can make it a little weird to run something off the cuff, but steam-run has your back in those situations.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

NixOS

  • "The new Arch"
  • Very customizable and minimalist
  • Semi-Immutable
  • Huge community and very old
  • Very different than others
  • Config-based
  • Not very (new) user friendly, wouldn't use it. Too complicated for me

BlendOS

  • Doesn't offer much new stuff for me, nothing they offer is substantial for me.
  • Small dev team

VanillaOS

  • "The new Linux Mint"
  • Huge focus on usability and user friendliness
  • Apx is basically only a wrapper for distrobox
  • Small dev team (the same one that also develops Bottles)
  • Huge potential, but not quite there yet
  • Will recommend it to new users when it's updated to 2.0

Silverblue

  • My recommendation
  • Is one of the oldest immutables and very well thought out
  • Biggest dev and userbase
  • You can not only install Flatpaks, but also everything else with Distrobox and rpm-ostree
  • Best feature: you can easily rebase to it's other spins or the custom ones from uBlue I just rebased this weekend from the SB to the Kinoite-Spin in just one command. I was able to "change distro" without resinstalling, and KDE was installed very cleanly without leftovers.
[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Calling NixOS the new arch is needlessly insulting lol.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean seeing how people here act after having been on nixos for a few weeks I would say it's an apt comparison. I swear we weren't that obnoxious when I started using the distro in 2019 D:

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

I don't think it's an apt comparison of the distros, but I agree that both have a cult-like following. I also feel like there's a bit of a difference in the evangelism of both distros... I don't really understand why people evangelize Arch, and my impression is largely that (1) people mention that they're on Arch so others know they might be having different configuration issues, or less charitably (2) people mention Arch as a weird brag because it's seen as an "advanced" distro. In contrast people seem to recommend nix and NixOS because it solves a frankly ridiculous amount of real problems that people experience with development environments, package managers, and system management. I.e., we bring up nix and NixOS because we care about you and think it might actually be useful for you. I don't really want to dictate what other people use or brag about using nix / NixOS, but people complain to me about different problems constantly that are just resolved by nix, so it feels wrong not to mention it. It's frustrating because it definitely makes you seem like you're in a cult, but it really is the right level of abstraction for package management, and as a result it solves so many problems and little frustrations.

Honestly, it's kind of frustrating to watch people not use nix. I have nix set up for the projects at work because I got tired of them not building and people randomly changing dependencies and it taking 3-4 weeks for somebody new to the project to get the thing to compile. Everybody new that I have set up with nix gets the project working instantly, and everybody else ends up spending weeks flailing around with installation. Unfortunately, I've given up on recommending people use nix for the project because a number of senior people have decided that they don't like nix and there's a bizarre amount of drama whenever I recommend a newbie just use it to get set up (even though it has always worked out better for them). It's just not worth the headache for me to stick my neck out, but I feel bad and it's really frustrating how literally everybody else takes 3-4 weeks to get up and running without nix :|.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I tried NixOS and was quite frustrating when I needed community help / documentation. I guess that's the aspect of "the new arch", the community will go "not my problem fix it yourself". I've seen some good tutorials on YT popped up since then, so I'll try it again once I get college vacation. It's hard for me as a non programmer/psychology student. My field doesn't overlap with programming not by a little, lmao. I think you need to recommend nix and have the way people need to do things. Like, a nix flake? You can get it to work 100 ways, and nix uses its own language and way of declaring things. That's one thing that made me go "I just need to have a working system and I have a Arch install script done". I like to fiddle around with things, but when you are stuck with something and there isn't a clear path to do it, it gets frustrating. The 100 ways to 1 thing makes copycat difficult, because you have to copy the same person, which will not have all the needs for you, or find people that did their config the same way (which is really hard). Like, overlays, packaging programs, making modules, even Arch had a "this is how you get things done" wiki. I really think Nix and NixOS is really good and I will try it out again in some months.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I don’t have good answers for you… I honestly don’t know what the best way to get people into it is. The resources really are not great.

FWIW I think when it does end up clicking everything is a LOT less complicated than it seems at first. Nix is sort of all about building up these attribute sets and then once that really sinks in everything starts to make a lot more sense and you start to realize that there aren’t that many moving parts and there isn’t much magic going on… but getting there is tricky. A lot of people recommend the nix pills, and honestly I think it’s the best way to understand nix itself. If you do earnestly read through them I think there is a good chance you will come out enlightened… they just start so slow and so boringly that it’s tempting to skip ahead and then you’re doomed. They also have a bit of a bad habit of introducing simple examples that don’t work at first which can be confusing, and eventually some of the later stuff seems like “ugh, I thought we already solved this” but it’s building up nicer abstractions. The nix pills give a pretty good overview of best practices in that sense, I think… so maybe it’s the source of truth you’re looking for (or part of it anyway). I think the nix pills are a bit more “how the sausage is made” than is necessary to use nix, but it’s probably the best way to understand what all of these weird mkDerivation functions you keep seeing are actually doing, and having an understanding of the internals of nix makes it a lot easier to understand what’s going on.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

ah I think that's where I'm at odds with a lot of lemmy NixOS users then 😅, since I am and have always been pretty hesitant to recommend NixOS to anyone in particular. I find the upfront costs of NixOS too big for me to recommend the OS to anyone who wasn't already looking into it and knows its downsides and upsides.

I do agree however on the fact that using nix is purely beneficial. It doesn't hurt if you just add a .nix file to your project, since it doesn't do any harm to an already existing project. It can just install your build tools and then consider itself done, and if you don't happen to like nix after all, the new installer makes uninstalling easier than ever. There is pretty much no downside to downloading the package manager, something I can't say about the OS.

Having said that, I don't think nix should be the end-all be-all standard in package management. I'm sure there will be other package managers that will be better than "nix but with yaml sprinkled in", and are capable of improving the state of the art. At least, that's something I hope to happen. For example, I have reservations about using a full-blown programming language for doing my project configuration (see people's problems with Gradle for why you might not want that). I think a maven-style approach (where you'd have just limited config options, but can expand the package manager's capabilities by telling it to install certain plugins (in the same config file!)), could be worth looking into, and I'd be lying if I said I wasn't on the look out for a potential better nix alternative

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

For sure! I don’t think we’re actually in disagreement at all, just the limits of text communication :). NixOS is certainly less important to me and I don’t really care if people use it or not at all (it’s nice but there’s enough differences that you have to be aware of that it’d be frustrating to some people — even if ultimately those differences are something that can be worked around… If you’re well versed in nix and Linux NixOS is kind of a no brainer, though). Nix for development (or something like it) is legitimately enough of a game changer to warrant some of the evangelism in my opinion, particularly since as you mention it’s pretty much free to try on any (non-windows) system, and adding nix to a project doesn’t harm non-nix users (more than they’re already harmed anyway, haha). I’ll admit that I worry about how “nix ugly and unintuitive” seems to be a huge problem for adoption, and frankly I don’t blame people for bouncing off of nix (I bounced off of nix in 2011 or so and didn’t come back to it for like 10 years — though it was a bit of a brain worm nagging at me the whole time). That said I think the impression people have of nix being this horrible and completely ugly language (an impression I’ve had in the past as well) is also somewhat untrue. The nix language itself isn’t so bad, but the expectation is for it to just be yaml because “I just want to list dependencies”, which is fair and it might be nice if we had some better abstractions to make that more clear. All of the phases in a nix derivation are confusing and poorly documented, and some operations on attribute sets should probably just have nice special syntax instead of these fancy update fixpoints that the average developer isn’t going to understand… ultimately I’m a little unclear on how much of this is “the nix language sucks and needs to be thrown out” and how much is “we really need a better introduction to what this is and how to use it, especially with some beginner examples and best practices for different languages”. I worry a bit about non-nix nix package managers just from the perspective that it’s really nice to have the one tool to rule all development environments, but maybe fragmentation won’t be a huge problem.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago

It just makes so much sense in a way other distros don't

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Fedora Silverblue and NixOS looking very interesting ✨👀

[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago (1 children)

While I’ve looked into Fedora Silverblue, that distro is limited to only install Flatpaks, which is fine for “apps”, but seems to be more of a problem with managing system- and CLI tools.

No. Your understanding to Fedora Silverblue is wrong. I can just run rpm-ostree install package.name in Silverblue, like other Fedora spins. The small disadvantage is that I need to reboot to apply this update. (re-construct)

but doesn’t that result in new A/B snapshots, or something like that?

Well, you can call it snapshots, but there is no need to think about it. In most cases, the system points to the newest snapshot (deployment 0). If a rollback is needed, I can pin to the older deployments. When a major change is to be applied (Like bump Fedora version), I'd manually mark the current deployment as dont-auto-delete.

Sure, but I’d like to have a more seamless experience, i.e. not having to open/start any “containers” or something like that.

I never used toolbox in my Fedora Silverblue system. I feel that I can't tell the difference between using Silverblue and the default Fedora spin

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Thank you; that was very insightful 😊

Also: I think rpm-ostree only supports rpm-based packages, tho; right?

Can I install .deb software too?
And is there any kind of system-as-a-config-file kind of solution available like in NixOS or blendOS?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

For other systems I think distrobox and toolbox are kind the intended way to mess with them. For configuration as code ansible is a popular answer.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

How well does Ansible work when I want to change my config? Is a quick reboot sufficient!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

It depends on if the changes needs it or not. You can set a reboot flag on a given task and at the end the system will reboot, but if no reboot is needed then it will just make the change live.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Also: I think rpm-ostree only supports rpm-based packages, tho; right?

Can I install .deb software too?

I don't think rpm-ostree could support .deb softwares, just like dnf/yum can't support deb packages.

Can you share your use case for trying to install a deb package in Fedora? I'm just curious.

And is there any kind of system-as-a-config-file kind of solution available like in NixOS or blendOS?

Good question. I only have a few computers, so I had never considered about it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Lots of great answers here already so I will only address a couple of things that haven't been mentioned:

Regarding Fedora Silverblue:

  • Currently, Fedora Atomic Desktops are in a major shift to accept OCI container images for delivery of packages. This means that the built image becomes one compliant to OCI and that we boot into an OCI container as our system. As OCI images are relatively declarative (not to the extent that NixOS does (yet)), it becomes possible to have a set of config files (most importantly, the so-called Containerfile) in which your system is 'declared'/'configd'. In case you're interested into how this looks/works, consider taking a look at uBlue's startingpoint or if you're more interested in the scope of configuration into Bazzite and/or Bluefin.
  • apx is available as a COPR on Fedora Atomic Desktops.
  • Nix can be installed on Fedora Atomic Desktops using Determinate Systems' installer.

Regarding Vanilla OS:

  • They're also moving to a model that's very close to where Fedora Atomic Desktops is heading towards. So, expect a similar way to config/'declare' your system.

What are your thoughts on the ~~three~~ four distros mentioned above?

It's a question of polish if you'd ask me. With Fedora Atomic Desktops and NixOS being advantageous due to being more established and better funded. I wouldn't write off Vanilla OS yet as they seem to know what they're doing. Though, I wouldn't keep my hopes up for blendOS as its main developer was unaware of which MAC was configured by default on blendOS (spoiler alert: none, at least at the time).

Furthermore, NixOS is literally its own thing and unfortunately infamous for its steep learning curve. If you can afford to learn and conquer NixOS, then NixOS should be the recommendation; unless (like me) you seek SELinux on your systems.

Between Fedora Atomic Desktops and Vanilla OS; Vanilla OS is still in its major rewrite/revamp. The alpha builds are there, but I wouldn't recommend using those on production machines. Fedora Atomic Desktops, on the other hand, has been going strong for a while now and the uBlue-team has even succeeded in making the OCI-stuff accessible for the general (Linux) public. So if you want to switch now and NixOS is/seems too hard; then Fedora Atomic Desktops it is. On that note, I recommend to check out the uBlue project.

Which ones are the most interesting, and for what reasons?

Honestly, all of them are really interesting, but NixOS does the most unique stuff; with only Guix doing something similar within the Linux landscape. To give you a taste of some of the wild stuff found on NixOS; there's the so-called Impermanence module which -to my knowledge- happens to be the closest thing to a usable stateless system we've got; period. Consider reading this excellent blog post in case you're interested to know what this entails.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Thanks for the detailed response.

I'll probably go for either a Fedora Atomic Desktop or NixOS.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You look at defaults and think this is linux.

Look again at Fedora Silverblue /any other desktop variant. VanillaOSses apx is just a wrapper around distrobox, which is preinstalled on ublue even.

Apx installs apps on containers just as it is possible on Fedora Atomic (the general name for all immutable desktops). You can also layer and remove apps to or from the base OS which is sometimes needed or nice for speed.

On Fedora Atomic you have

  • flatpak
  • podman containers (toolbx, distrobox: like apx on VanillaOS but without the great tooling and GUI management, yet)
  • rootful containers for stuff interacting with systemd, needing USB access etc.
  • layering or removing packages / changing the OS to something like ublue to let other people do the work, especially for NVIDIA drivers
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You look at defaults and think this is linux.

What do you mean by that?

On the Fedora Atomic website, they write:

Project Atomic is now sunset

The Atomic Host platform is now replaced by CoreOS. Users of Atomic Host are encouraged to join the CoreOS community

Do you think CoreOS is a good fit for a desktop?
I always thought it's more of a server distro.

On a related note: Would you recommend Fedora Silverblue?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

Oh no. The rebrand is not done. There is no Atomic site yet, Atomic= Fedora Desktop with OSTree (Silverblue, Kinoite, Sericea, ...)

If you like GNOME, yes I recommend Silverblue a lot.

Fedora has a very different system of the core distro. But with defaults I mean that they dont have apx by default but the same underneath.

You could use a bash function for DNF for example, but in general it is

distrobox-create Fedora39
distrobox enter Fedora39
sudo dnf install PACKAGE
distrobox-export --app PACKAGE

for GUI packages

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You van both use rpm-ostree and toolbox to install regular fedora packages on silverblue/kinoite

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

I would check out something like universal-blue.org. It is fedora silverblue but with fixes that make it more usable (like codecs by default). It also ships distrobox right out of the gate so you can use that for apps that aren't in the fedora repos, copr , or flatpak. You also don't have to layer packages if you install via distrobox so I think it ends up being pretty handy for stuff that you want that isn't available as a flatpak. Finally there are many different images for all different desktop environments so you can switch between them just by using rpm-ostree rebase and the link to the different image.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What is your usecase?

This is the key question.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Daily driver;

  • Dev work (VS Code) 👩‍💻
  • Using Firefox 🔥🦊🛜
  • Playing games every now and then (mostly Steam & Proton) 🎮
[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Is there something that attracts you to NixOS for that purpose?

I've got Nix OS running on one of my computers, and honestly, haven't found it to be particularly notable for those usecases.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Dev work is not specific enough. Pip is a nightmare because it just wanted to modify folders that were read only and you never know what it wants to do to your system. Your experience may vary depending on how much the language package manager assumes about your system. If you're in a container, it will work perfectly, though

Firefox just works, and I installed Steam from nixpkgs and it worked after enabling a few settings. Then I just enabled Proton on every game and it works okay, with a few weird bugs sometimes (although I blame Gnome for messing up alt tabbing sometimes)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›