Want a desktop Linux built on immutable Fedora with an Ubuntu-style desktop designed expressively for programmers? Then you want Bluefin.

From The New Stack

    • duncesplayed@lemmy.oneEnglish
      431·
      1 year ago

      You’re just not cloud-native enough to understand how revolutionary it is to run GNOME on Fedora.

      • Helix 🧬@feddit.deEnglish
        62·
        11 months ago

        We are really experiencing a cloud native generation. These Zoomers don’t even know how life was without a cloud over their heads.

  • GravitySpoiled@lemmy.mlEnglish
    191·
    1 year ago

    I don’t get it. What’s the spirit of ubuntu? Is the underlying OS based on ubuntu instead of fedora?

    What’s the actual difference to fedora silverblue?

    Half the answer to “why did you make your own linux?” is that it’s awesome being able to revert back to the original fedora OS.

    Because it follows a cloud-native approach, the end user has the flexibility to rebase back to the stock Fedora or any Universal Blue image. It’s more like having someone install, configure, and maintain a polished Fedora setup for you.

    And the other half doesn’t provide any info either

    Bluefin utilizes Fedora’s OCI features to compose and build an OS image. This process is overseen by a well-structured community that is committed to automation and sustainability. The end result is akin to a configuration management tool like Ansible or Salt, but without the typical challenges associated with maintaining a custom distribution.

    Source

      • GravitySpoiled@lemmy.mlEnglish
        9·
        1 year ago

        I think it boils down to: “because we can”. “We can automatically build our own setup on github and that’s what we do”

        Installing tailscale, zsh, fish, vscode, extension manager, codecs, etc. out of the box isn’t enough for a new distro. Especially because you break the signing of fedora by doing so.

        • russjr08@outpost.zeuslink.netEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          out of the box isn’t enough for a new distro.

          I’m a bit surprised that they mentioned “distribution” on the Bluefin website, as the Universal Blue site (the base project behind Bluefin) explicitly mentions not being a distro - and I know that Jorge tends to be very clear that they’re not building a distro:

          This isn’t a distribution, you can always rebase back to Fedora without reinstalling. This is a unique relationship between upstream and downstream that is popular in cloud, but still new to the Linux desktop. “Custom images” seems to be a decent place to start since that’s what people call them in cloud.

    • milkjug@lemmy.wildfyre.dev
      5·
      1 year ago

      This is the umpteenth time I’ve come across this project but I just don’t get what they’re going for here.

      These are just custom images, are they not?

      If I wanted Ubuntu I’d use Ubuntu. If I wanted Fedora I’d use Fedora. Maybe I’m not getting it but I wonder how big of a population that’s out there that wants some Ubuntu mixed in with a touch of Fedora and some buzzword salad thrown into the mix.

  • catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca
    11·
    11 months ago

    Can someone tell me the recent hype about immutable distros? What exactly is the immutable part, and why is it attractive?

    • misophist@lemmy.world
      8·
      11 months ago

      The base OS is a known unchanging set of bits. Squirt this datastream onto a storage volume and boot to it and you have a known-working system. Then you can futz around with all the self-contained packaged apps you want, and no worries about weird interactions fucking over your whole system.

      It’s not for me, but I kinda see the appeal.

    • moreeni@lemm.ee
      3·
      11 months ago

      The system (the os files to be precise) is only mutable by package manager for specific tasks like updating. It can break certain workflows if the user wants to change system files, because they can’t.

      Bonuses from that are security and reproducibility. You can be sure that whatever package you have will look and behave exactly the same as on another device with the same OS. Malware won’t be able to mess around with your OS so trivially as it does on mutable distros.

    • caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
      3·
      11 months ago

      It’s when you can’t set the volume to 0% so that everyone around you has to hear how hard you’re working.

    • Asthmatic_Goose@lemm.eeEnglish
      319·
      11 months ago

      Immutable, adjective: Unchanging over time or unable to be changed.

      From the article: “We want a reliable desktop experience that runs everything, but we’re too lazy to maintain anything. So we automated the entire delivery pipeline in GitHub.”

      So, in other words… “Please don’t ever update your system or everything will break”

  • TCB13@lemmy.worldEnglish
    729·
    1 year ago

    Linux desktop will, most likely, fail for: Developers and sysadmins, because not everyone is using Docker and Github actions to deploy applications to some proprietary cloud solution. Finding a properly working FTP/SFTP/FTPS desktop client (similar WinSCP or Cyberduck) is an impossible task as the ones that exist fail even at basic tasks like dragging and dropping a file.

    Linux desktop is great, I love it but I don’t sugar coat it nor I’m delusional like most posting about it.

    It all comes down to a question of how much time (days? months?) you want to spend fixing things on Linux that simply work out of the box under Windows for a minimal fee. Buy a Windows license and spend the time you would’ve spent dealing with Linux issues doing your actual job and you’ll, most likely, get a better ROI.

    https://tadeubento.com/2023/linux-desktop-a-collective-delusion/

    Also, immutable distributions are a scam:

    Guess what happens whenever people popularize immutable distros as the next hype in tech that will make everything better? You get yourself into a totally unreasonable and avoidable ecosystem just because those systems won’t cut it for most use cases… same that happened with Docker/Kubernetes.

    I’ve been saying it for year and nobody cares: nowadays those companies are all about re-creating and reconfiguring the way people develop software so everyone will be hostage of their platforms. We see this in everything now Docker/DockerHub/Kubernetes and GitHub actions were the first sign of this cancer. We now have a generation of developers that doesn’t understand the basic of their tech stack, about networking, about DNS, about how to deploy a simple thing into a server that doesn’t use some Docker BS or isn’t a 3rd party cloud xyz deploy-from-github service.

    The latest endeavor in making everyone’s hostage is the new Linux immutable distribution trend. Immutable distros are all about making thing that were easy into complex, “locked down”, “inflexible”, bullshit to justify jobs and payed tech stacks and a soon to be released property solution.

    We had Ansible, containers, ZFS and BTRFS that provided all the required immutability needed already but someone decided that is is time to transform proven development techniques in the hopes of eventually selling some orchestration and/or other proprietary repository / platform / BS like Docker / Kubernetes does.

    “Oh but there are truly open-source immutable distros” … true, but this hype is much like Docker and it will invariably and inevitably lead people down a path that will then require some proprietary solution or dependency somewhere that is only required because the “new” technology itself alone doesn’t deliver as others did in the past.

    As with CentOS’s fiasco or Docker 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 is currently unfolding with Docker vs LXC/RKT and will happen with Ubuntu vs Debian for all those who moved from CentOS to Ubuntu.

    Those popularizing immutable distributions clearly haven’t had any experience with it before the current hype. Let me tell you something, immutable systems aren’t a new thing we already had it with MIPS devices (mostly routers and IOTs) and people have been moving to ARM and mutable solutions because it’s better, easier and more reliable.

    • andruid@lemmy.ml
      121·
      1 year ago

      There is always some solutionizm in tech, but I’m interested in containerzation as a solution to problems I’ve had with configure drift building up on my systems and make it easier to share and work with the community.

      The immutable desktop work to me is specifically working on bridging the gap between the UX of a local admin (you know wanting custom configuration and fast reaction to user input) and the industrial expectations of being able to test and track every change and reduce the number of different pieces you need to operate a system.

      Hopefully we can lose some of the industries bad habits though. Like “relying on this proprietary piece is ok because we can move faster” or making other excuses as if you are going to have to explain to your boss why some metric looks bad instead of just trying to make the best system or solution we can.

    • Helix 🧬@feddit.deEnglish
      4·
      11 months ago

      The amount of times my Windows installation(s) broke is just as high as the amount of times my Linux installations had issues. The article you quoted seems to be from someone with more Windows experience than Linux experience.

      One example: FileZilla is a capable GUI SFTP and FTP client, but so is nearly every file manager. I can drag and drop files from Dolphin into a fuse mounted FTP, SMB or SFTP folder just fine. Skill issue?

      EDIT: omg, I just realised they use WinSCP for deploying applications. It really seems like a skill issue since you can automate that even without proprietary clouds. I can probably replace this person with a PowerShell script, which is even more efficient than them doing their job on Windows.

      All operating systems sadly need lots of maintenance nowadays. The main reason I use Linux is that I feel in control of the system and the vendor doesn’t actively try to fuck with my installation.