I find that many Linux users have a misconception about immutable distributions without knowing what it actually is. There is a lot of misinformation and generalization in the Internet about immutable distributions being “locked down”, “inflexible”, etc., when we could argue the same with many traditional distributions. In this article, we’ll look at what makes an immutable distribution, the concept of an immutable distribution versus implementations, misconceptions about immutable distributions (both pro and con), and why they exist in the first place.
  • morrowind@lemmy.mlOP
    2·
    9 months ago

    Take a look at serpent os. It aims to provide a lot of the same benefits without being locked down

    • TCB13@lemmy.world
      1·
      9 months ago

      I believe this answers it in detail: https://lemmy.world/comment/4574094

      the article is very well written and effectively debunks a lot of misconceptions however those distros are still an unnecessary extra step that don’t provide a sufficient gain / improvement over “mutable” distributions and/or properly done setups. (…) 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

        • TCB13@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          9 months ago

          Yes and you did very well on that and I believe as well you can understand my POV on immutable distros after all the posts did. We’re most likely creating the next Docker / Docker Hub / Kubernetes BS by pushing them and immutability was proven by MIPS to be clusterfuck.