WTF Is a Composable Distro?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 вер 2024
- Maybe I'm just out of the loop, or maybe things are passing me by, but I had no clue this was a change that had been made.
👇 PULL IT DOWN FOR THE GOOD STUFF 👇
Patreon - / thelinuxcast
Paypal - paypal.me/thel...
UA-cam - / @thelinuxcast
Ko-fi - ko-fi.com/thel...
===== Follow us 🐧🐧 ======
MERCH - shop.thelinuxc...
Discord - / discord
Odysee - odysee.com/$/i...
TILvids(Peertube) - tilvids.com/c/...
Mastodon- fosstodon.org/...
gitlab.com/the...
Matrix - matrix.to/#/#the-linux-cast:matrix.org
The Website thelinuxcast.org
Contact us email@thelinuxcast.org
Amazon Wishlist - www.amazon.com...
Logo Courtesy of - pedropaulo.net
Intro Courtesy of - www.fragcgi.co...
Sign up for encrypted email with Tutanota - mail.tutanota....
==== Special Thanks to Our Patrons! ====
thelinuxcast.o...
==== Referenced ====
A reference regarding Linux distros - github.com/cas...
The reference I used in the video - www.webiny.com...
The LLN Podcast I talked about - latenightlinux... @LateNightLinux
#ramble #linux #thelinuxcast
Yes. I know this video is pointless. Just an old-ish guy bitching about a name change. Not all my videos can have a point. File complaints by following me on Mastodon: fosstodon.org/@thelinuxcast
I mean, there was a point made at 6:00. The new users adaptation to these kinds of distros
A huge win for mentioning projects need marketers to help. Being a great developer doesn't mean you are good at pitching your project. Or even naming it and communicating why it is good. We need to encourage projects to recruit a hype man. Thank you for your videos. I enjoy them.
To my understanding, *technically* every linux distro is a composable distro with a post-installation script
Immutable seems to be something different though, it seems like it's referring to core components that you cant change, while "composable" seems to refer to how packages are able to be put together in a way similar to Legos or something. They seem to be different.
It seems to me that immutable distros are becoming composable. But that's kinda my point. No one really knows what they're talking about unless you're a dev.
@@TheLinuxCast Yeah, this may be part of what causes the "linux is for programmers" narrative. Their are a lot of complicated things that seem the same at first glance (btrfs vs zfs).
A composable distro only offers you a Vivaldi browser.
lol
Vivaldi can do everything
Not to be mistaken with "compostable distros", that's just an euphemism to say it is dogshit...
🕳 ♠
I hear you just sprinkle some sawdust on top and you can't smell a thing.
I read "compostable" at first, and thought to myself "green washing has gotten too far!!1!"
Composable sounds like the opposite of immutable.
Sound like a more descriptive name to what immutable distros actually are doing
I still, and always will, use 'master' as my default Git branch so I completely understand the dislike over changing the name of things for no valid reason.
I use main, just because it's less letters to type.
But yeah in my opinion this was just pointless lol
Huh didn't know distros are compostable, can we compost gnome too? That would probably fertilize wayland development.
Bro the word is composable as in compose, composability. Not compostable as in compost. Let me know if you still don't get it lmao!!
Composable distro sounds like Gentoo or Arch.
Or any distro with a package manager.
Basically anything which js not windows lol
@@no_name4796 not quite. distros have package managers, but you don't get to compose the distro itself. In their minimal form the distro devs have already made all decisions for you. Gentoo and Arch are composable distros cause you decide every little component and you compose your own distro.
@@StupidusMaximusTheFirst ok they made decisions for you, but at the end of the day it's all installed through the pm, thus you can uninstall what you don't want, and even change the pm and recreate arch on fedora if you are crazy enough.
The only difference between distros like fedora and arch, is that in arch is easier to do it, but unless you use Win**ws, you can literally uninstall everything and do whatever you want
Gentoo is not composable, you can't change your libc to musl, openrc to runit, ban dbus globally, change login shell to ksh and live happily forever after.
The whole thing is a myth.
GNU/Linux is -
systemd, gcc, glibc, gnu, linux, openssl, ncurses, bash and few things here and there, you can probably change 1 of these things on a specialty distro, and still survive, but try changing 2-3 or all and it will not be usable anymore, because it will no longer be GNU/Linux.
I think Composable and Immutable are different. As i understand it, they are in fact referring to different characteristics more than it being a change of name.
If I understood everything correctly, immutable refers to the distro being basically read-only and every change you wanna make on the system causes some type of "snapshot" to be made. But it doesn't necessarily means modular or containerized, it just happens to be the best way to achieve that maing goal.
Composable distros focus on that aspect and refer to the fact that they are modular and those parts are fully independent wich can be linked to the "everything you add means a new snapshot of your system" philosophy and you will get a distro that is both but for me is more related to the philosophy behind microkernels or microservice-based clouds.
Anyway, sending my best wishes to everyone and Matt, keep the amazing job that you do with the channel 😄
this was my conclusion too.
Okay, so this is NixOS? Everything Else is Just using Containers to create the Illusion of components while in reality IT IS Something Else? I'm completely confused now, What a stupid new term.
"Because we are nerds we want to be as accurate as possible" got me laughing.
6:00 this
I've tried an Immutable Linux distro. But if I want an os to frustrate me I prefer Windows
i read it as compostable distro
Sounds like something that you are not going to want/need unless you are actively seeking it out anyway.
When i heard fomposable i thought immediately about cosmic desktop. The idea is that each functionality is capsulated in itself and extensions by third parties can possibly change the whole deskop behavoiur
Thanks, good show. I use one of those Immutable OSs with the sort of containerized special file system kinda thing. I too had not yet heard the term Composable Distro and that's why I'm here! Since there was no specific example to differentiate one from what I already got I'm going with your assessment of jargon to spruce up the verbal garbage describing a slowing of the creative juices in the Linux community. The great thing about all of Linux is the free and open source code to "Compose" whatever system you need.
New to me but easy to understand.
My first thought was the whole custom image oci ublue type things.
I haven't had time to look into it yet, but it seems like MiniOS might be the best example of composable distro, i.e. you pick either pre-defined modules or make your own, assemble your OS tailored to your needs, and build an ISO from that.
there may be too many terms and little explanation of what they are, so it may be best to have a word to group them.
now allow me to coin the unblella term...
ok, now I believe you, that we are roughly the same age. I (have to) use Windows on my work laptop and the other day MS changed their Teams GUI. I was pissed the whole day. What were they thinking!
Good luck, trying to change a popular name to a more-correct one. When you succeed, try changing "Stable" to "Long Term". :)
I would love it if I could write a script and it'll generate a live ISO of my distro of choice with all the packages and configurations I want. Upon loading the ISO, all I would need to do is setup the drives, user accounts, and other basic things that can't necessarily be set up during ISO generation.
You can do that using Fedora Atomic as a base with Blue-Build to declaratively and reprocably specify anything custom you want and have it automatically rebuilt in the cloud when the upstream image it's based on updates, and then use their tool to get an ISO of it!
I still don't get "independent part" wtf is in composable part. I understand that unix way is a meme at this point, but instead of fixing it(putting dbus to ls etc), it feels they want macos. I want parts to depend on each other.
Like take recent webp vuln. If programs are independent, you can't fix it in one libwebp only. You need to replace it in every part that as it's not dependent on anything. And I'm glad if apps can't destroy each other(immutability goes brr!) but if ~/Documents are destroyable as usual, it doesn't matter
IDGAF... I'm living in MX Land unless they do something really brain dead with it.
Compostible?
Probs someone has already said this down-thread, so forgive me, but your point about naming things and marketing being a problem surely is *exactly* because Linux is not owned by a mega-corp and the kids that look after one distro rather than another can call things whatever they want? As you went on to say, it doesn't really matter in the long run - you're trying to get people who want more of a Chromebook thing than a raw Linux thing, I guess.
Oh, and I have to say that when the vid first popped up I was reading it as "Compostable Distros", and I was like... 'wait, WTF?!' :)
redhat is taking over it is just a matter of time before systemd-linuxd
Eventually, the Windows Kernel will be some variant of Linux... I wouldn't dare predict if it will be opened or closed source, but it will absolutely be based on Linux.
I dont know, that definition does not sound like immutable at all. That just sounds like they want to go back to Linuxes past and work off of the core principals. Specifically, the Small, single-purpose programs and chaining programs together to perform complex tasks. Other than stopping the use of SystemD I dont know what that would mean in practice. And I dont think that is likely to happen.
I thought it was compostable distro...
6:30. Vanilla OS's website explains the main reasons you might want an immutable/composable distro on the main website. They explain it better than fedora's atomic desktop page does. I can't recommend it though until v2 leaves beta. V2 will be based on debian sid instead of ubuntu.
I would like to try out Debian Unstable-based Vanilla OS!
I've ran vanillaOS on my old laptop and it was near perfect. Only thing I didn't like was gnome.
And I haven't got a single clue on how you could change DE/WM on an immutable distro, if you even can.
@Skelterbane69 they are making it where people could make their own recipes/containers since it's still in beta there is not a lot of instructions. Vanilla Kattleya is the name of the unofficial kde
Immutable distros are interesting for companies who want to roll out dozens, hundreds or thousands of machines with the same config. While that's an important usecase, I think immutable distros never were made for the average Linux geek who wants to use the same config file on his desktop and laptop.
Right. It's a server/enterprise thing. Desktop Linux users need to be wary of it, and make our voices heard that we don't really want this being pushed into every distro under the sun, at least without taking desktop user needs into account. If there are security advantages to be had, without sacrificing usability and freedom for regular people, it may be worth doing. But the distro maintainers had better get everything worked out _perfectly_ before rolling it out across the board.
So I guess the term "Atomic" didn't quite work out? I really liked the term atomic.
Here you are: look at your Steamdeck? It just runs, updates, works (don't have one myself btw), in KDE/SteamOS, you run it in desktop mode if you want to and add a flatpak or two.. That's immutable. Build my own ublue/bluebuild image; adding and 'removing things from the main Fedora/ublue image: that's me composing a distro/spin. Marketing fluff. Btw, very useful for my uncle, who doesn't bother as long as everything works and it does. No sysadmin work for me there ;-)
This new name is confusing. I thought it was going to be another weird Linux rabbit hole. Anyway, my family and personal computer needs have lowered since I'm about to retire. Im well served with normal everyday Linux Mint, Zorin OS. Ubuntu, and Linux Lite.
Most of the big arguments in the Linux community are about development stuff. It's very rare that they are about user-facing things. Take Wayland for example. No user cares, as long as their software runs. It's only the developers who are getting into fights about the design of the thing. Same with systemd. Same with snaps vs. flatpak. Same with this composable/immutable stuff. Unfortunately the loudest Linux users tend to be Linux developers, and Linux development is done by engineers with little to no input by UI/UX experts or regular users. The typical user, as long as they can get the software they want, and it runs okay, they're happy. The underlying technology is irrelevant. But all too often the decisions are being made by developers trying to make their own lives easier as they develop Linux software.
I just want an immutable distro that doesn't use gnome.
What I'd REALLY want is an immutable distro that's using hyprland.
Also no systemd, but we can't have everything.
There are plenty of immutable distros that don't use GNOME! Fedora Atomic KDE (Kinoite), etc. You can even declaritively specify your own (automatically built in the cloud) version of Fedora Atomic based on an upstream image that starts with uCore and adds Hyprland, and is automatically rebuilt whenever upstream updates so you don't have to maintain it at all, using Blue-Build!
MODULAR
I listened to that same podcast. I kind of figured from what they were talking about, it was immutable distributions. I think composable is a better term. I'm fine with the name change. Terms can and do change over time. But yes, it's my first time hearing it called a composable distribution.
~~Immutable~~ Composable distros shouldn't be the only kind of distros that exist in the future but this is Linux community and that definitely won't happen
Where is the confusion ? A composable distro is any distro that has "composer" as the main package manager. EZ
I'll see myself out 😃
Im pretty much a noob and texactly that everyday user you describe. I understand immutable distros as meaning distros that are harder to break. (I break stuff a lot). On the downside Containerized stuff doesnt play well with things like audio production where you have VSTs via yabridge etc etc. But I like the idea of almost unbreakable.
So is openSUSE Aeon now a composable operating system? Thanks. :)
I'd say any DIY distro (like Arch, Gentoo, etc…) aims to be a "composable distro"
Also, GNU Guix would then be the ultimate composable distro!
So a composable distro is one that's made by a compositor.
I think that the benefits are easier system upgrade and easier system restoration.
Cutting edge Matt
Arch and NixOS are the future of Linux desktop.
No they are not
So what I want to know, what movies have you been watching because 2 come to mind and one has a Ford Torino and the other is a Dream... Lol
What doe this has to do with the video? Nothing!
Like these Linux term inventors, I'm changing the subject... 🤣
LLAP 🖖