KDE's New Distro: Btrfs-Based, Immutable Linux OS, with Flatpak and Snap
https://linuxiac.com/kde-announced-its-kde-linux-distro/Open linkView original on lemmy.ml237
Comments124https://linuxiac.com/kde-announced-its-kde-linux-distro/Open linkView original on lemmy.ml
I vote to kill snap
I can’t believe they used this as a pro for their distro…
I am currently only on Linux on my Steam Deck and I do have two RPi's (though I don't actively use them) so I don't have personal current knowledge of differences between Snap, Flatpak, and App Image beyond that A: Snap always brings up lots and lots of hate in comments and B: is from Canonical.
But is it possible that they might choose to use Snap for having more program options due to Ubuntu being such a "mainstream" distro? I know lots and lots of programs do release Flatpaks, but are there more of them or does Snap have more? Real question since I am aware of how heated some threads get with folks being really "fuck Snap" or "it is fine." Mostly just curious since I am more and more likely to move my main PC to Linux as my main OS after Windows 10 is dead.
Snap doesn't just bring lots of hate in comments it also brings a lot of bloat in your system which is a big no in Linux community. Another thing is canonical is going out of their way to force snap. In Ubuntu even if you do apt install it is installing snap packages.
I'm not sure if there are more snap packages than flatpaks or .deb/.rpm but most Linux users are competent enough to either add custom repos or follow simple build instructions to build from source.
But flatpak also brings a lot of bloat. That's the point of these 2 formats. You are trading bloat for portability.
The question here is not which one but why not both[*]? Also the target audience for this distro doesn't know how to add repos, that's the point of it.
[*] the answer is that Snap Store has had malware in it multiple times but that could imo be solved by a disclaimer
I wasn't aware of Snaps being used in-place of regular installs with apt. Are they shown to be Snaps in the name of the program when using apt search? And if there is a Snap and a regular deb, do they both show up (again if using apt search)?
Think of it as the Mac appstore VS the Windows App store. Mac apps (flatpak) are the same as desktop apps, but sandboxed, the store isn't intrusive, and people found it convenient, so it was fine. Then the windows app store (snaps) launched and it did basically the same thing but slightly worse, except Microsoft (canonical) forced it down its users throats, so people hated it.
Both camps are right, from a technical perspective, snaps are fine, but philosophically, it sucks, and the Linux community cares way more about the latter than the former, otherwise they'd all be running windows.
I think that your example of the App Store and the Microsoft Store is helpful! I work on both systems at my job fixing computers for consumers. The only thing I dislike about the App Store is that it doesn't let you install things without first signing in with an Apple ID (the spam levels of pop-up messages trying so freaking hard to make you sign in is infuriating). But the MS Store feels like all the worst parts of the Play Store and really fucks things up if it breaks. I will likely remember your reply the next time I think about Flatpaks and Snaps though. lol
What is so hated about snaps? I’ll admit I haven’t used Ubuntu since they started using snaps, but I don’t understand the hate about them in the Linux community.
The place to get snaps is proprietary and exclusive.
Oh… yeah I see the issue.
Snap? Can we not?
If it's only there like in KDE Neon, I'm fine with it. I don't want any of my distro apps to come as Snaps though.
Why? What's the issue with Snap? Is Flatpak any better?
Yeah, Flatpak is far better. The most glaring issue: Canonical hosts the only Snap backend, you can't host it yourself. Flatpak on the other hand is fully open.
Don't introduce proprietary crap just so companies can profit off of it.
I agree but I think it's the user who should be able to make the informed choice (ie. during installation)
Honestly, why enable this kind of behavior in any way? Any user is free to make an informed choice by installing it themselves.
We all know how this goes. Once a critical mass is reached, enshittification begins to milk everything dry. By making it an installer option, you're legitimizing it and supporting a worse future for the Linux desktop.
Ok but KDE has official Snap packages so they already are "legitimizing it". Also snap won't be able to entshittify anything. Snapd is still open source, so you can just repackage the software for different package system.
My guy. There is no open backend for Snap. If Ubuntu enshittifies Snap, nobody can host an alternate backend for them. How does the client being open source help you?
You simply use a different packaging format as I said in the previous comment.
No, optionally free is not enough.
This is a stupid argument. In FSF's eyes even having nonfree repository (ie. for drivers) is bad so this is completely irrelevant for anyone considering flatpak or snap. Both have nonfree stuff in there.
But flatpak's backend is open source and self-hostable, while snap's is proprietary and not self-hostable. Flatpak is the lesser of evils from this point of view.
I'm not arguing whether snap or flatpak is better. Flatpak is better.
But your arguments are going against each other. You disagree that FSF should tell you what software you can use but then you want to tell other users what software they can use. If you use flatpak despite of FSF's opinions, you should let people use snap despite of your opinion.
I use Karch, btw.
Burn Snap out of there and I'm in.
Edit: looks like they're not putting much towards snaps, it's mostly Flatpak and systemd-sysext. I'm good with that.
I like that snap support is included. You can't easily add it to immutable distros and there is still some software out there only easily available via snaps.
This article is far too hypey. One dude has started this initiative and needs people to work on his concept to get it off the ground. I'm not opposed to a red-hat free immutable system, but this one is so far from maturity this article is selling a first drawing like an almost finished product. Remind me in two years how this went.
Harald, the main architect behind it is already running it as his daily driver. Many others (myself included) are already testing it in VMs and on spare hardware with only very minor papercut issues to be resolved.
Sounds great! I'll have a look once the user infrastructure is in place.
So it looks like there will finally be a distribution that Windows, Mac, and ChromeOS users can jump to and just start using without having to learn much and with a much better and more familiar GUI than GNOME.
I think you're exactly right, honestly I think this has potential to be huge. Whether we like it or not, in order for a lot of mid-level savvy users to feel comfortable switching over they need a "default" option (like joining mastodon.social) to get their feet wet. A distro specifically built for KDE I think could appeal to a lot of people.
EDIT: Also for the people buying laptops in businesses and schools obv
So you're telling me that if snaps take off and become a standard there's a good chance I'll have to use them just to get my drivers? Now I hate them even more!
No but you see the drivers will be (must be) approved by Canonical which surely makes things better :|
it's actually the other way. Canonical has had troubles policing Snap Store from malware
This is highly unlikely. Snapd is open source so you can just repackage the software for your distro of choice. I don't think giving users the ability to use both Flatpak and Snap is bad. Though I would put Snap behind a disclaimer due to Snap Store's history.
99% of people don't understand anything about Snaps except from thinking they're worse than Flatpak
Ooo damn that sounds exactly what I'd like to try.
On the other hand I feel like I'm too old for this shit. My system works fine, I understand everything, and things rarely break and never in an unrecoverable way.
I'm a bit the same but I tried the switching between versions and it's amazing.
The beauty/advantage of Linux Eco-system is one can pick and choose based on his/her preferences.
Maybe they'll fix the sddm custom theming? It's currently broken on all immutables and doesn't allow custom themes.
Yeah that's certainly annoying but still relying on SDDM to solve this. There is a movement to see if we can import SDDM into the KDE umbrella but it's a bit stalled at the moment.
Snap WTF?
Ingl, this sounds like exactly the thing I want. Immutability aside, this is how I use EndeavourOS right now, but more sophisticated.
I'm sold on it.
I use Fedora KDE but this one sounds like exactly what I need. I primarily use Linux for software dev and web browsing and Windows for gaming and Office.
Fedora Kinoite exists already. It's my daily driver for dev and gaming and works great for me.
I wonder what the differences will be!
I use normal KDE because I don't know how much of a hassle it would be to put everything in containers and use flatpaks for everything.
I thought we all agreed that "immutable" is a confusing term and that we should call it "atomic"
edit: I was wrong
What does atomic mean in this sense? That seems more confusing than immutable.
It means a change either applied completely and successfully, or not at all (think "atomic transactions" in databases).
Atomic in software refers to an operation that cant be interrupted because it happens in one step. This one of the big selling points of atomic or immutable distros. Your system will not be left in a broken state by cancelling an update because updates do not take multiple steps, unlike traditional distros.
How could you install anything or change any setting if it was truly immutable?
Immutable OS makes sense in certain scenarios, but not in home computing.
Do a little research, dude... Do you think you're the first person to have those questions/issues? That's all been addressed.
I've been on an atomic/immutable distro for a few months now (Bazzite), and the experience has been great.
I disagree, because they are not the same thing.
Immutable means read only root.
Atomic means that updates are done in a snapshotted manner somehow. It usually means that if an update fails, your system is not in a half working state, but instead will be reverted to the last working state, and that updates are all or nothing.
I create a btrfs snapshot before updates on my Arch Linux system. This is atomic, but not immutable.*
There is also "image based" which distros like ublue (immutable, atomic) are, but Nixos (also immutable and atomic) are not.
*only really before big updates tbh, but I know people do configure snapshits before all updates.
Who said that?
Fedora has pushed for the change by rebranding their immutable distros as Fedora Atomic Desktops, and these are likely the most popular immutable distros. Bazzite's homepage also describes the distro as atomic, but never mentions the term immutable.
No? Why?
How is atomic less confusing? Immutable means that something doesn't change, atomic means that it's the size of an atom or has nuclear energy
EDIT: I've learned that some people are overly pedantic about the meaning and practical use of the word "immutable", so much so that they decided to create a bigger confusion by giving another word a completely different and exclusive meaning
Atomic in software refers to an operation that cannot be interrupted, like the updates in these distros. Immutable is a more confusing term, as it leads users to believe that cannot control parts of the system, when in reality these distros still have tools to do so.
It's not semantics, they are two different things.
And to your edit... Are you upset that there are two different words that mean two different things? I don't understand.
Isn't this just how words work...?
How could you install anything or change any setting if it "doesn't change" ?
Settings live in user space. Software exist in containers like AppImage, Flatpak or Distrobox. If something need deep system integration, they can be layered on top of the system in the user layer. Immutable does NOT mean less control. Just exerting control over the system in a different, usually more systematic, automatic and deterministic way.
Ah yes, the immutable OS, except for all of the various mutable parts.
We should totally not call it anything less confusing.
It's not confusing at all... How is this any more confusing than:
Flatpak - they're not literally flat...
Snap - I've never seen or heard any evidence of something snapping by any definition of the word I'm aware of.
Dolphin - what the fuck is this, no sea life whatsoever!
Kate - this is a text editor, not a person.
Distrobox - not in an actual box.
etc.
The main difference to your examples is that an "immutable OS" is in fact mutable, while none of your examples describe themselves with an adjective that is contradicting with their function/inner workings.
Flatpak is a pretty good name, because it makes software flat in the sense that it avoids having a (tall) dependency tree.
I installed Bottles, but was disappointed when it didn't actually have anything to do with bottles.
If you think every name of every product, etc., is going to be literal... you're gonna have a tough time in life.
Alright I am installing this
Will they be using btrfs snapshots or subvolumes to make it immutable?
Snapshots are subvolumes.
Subvolumes.
Supporting both snaps and apparmor above selinux would be disappointing to me. Snaps more so, I at least get why AppArmor has supporters
Yes it is an Arch base. Not sure on the apparmor stuff and snap is basically banned from the Arch repos so it's relegated to the AUR which makes it a pain.
Sounds like Kinoite with extra steps.
Same steps, different base, no customisation, upgrades on day 1 of release. Probably a few more things. I also ❤️ Kinoite so nothing against them.
Ehh to snaps. That would 100% be the first thing of support to drop if I were them. That said it cool to see more immutable distros experimenting, I wonder how much overlap there is the Kalpa since it is btfs based.
Honestly there definitely still seems some good space for innovation in the immutable space before we "figure it out", so the more smart people experimenting the better!
I am not an expert but I don't think Snap support can be added to an immutable distro after installation, meaning there is going to be some software that simply cannot be easily installed. Snap support is basically a legacy support feature at this point but I think it's nice to cover their bases if they are trying to make something for widespread adoption.
Just curious because Distrowatch can be easily gamed; does anyone know how this might affect the linux consumer market? I'm using Mint and see no reason to switch to this. I used to nerd out about different distros but aside from the enterprise distros or Debian or Arch preferences I don't see why people are using smaller distros anymore. Hobbyist i guess?
Thanks for de-influencing me out of switching to KDE plasma, mint and ubuntu are the only distros I've tried and I've been thinking about trying something new
New users (like me) that aren't necessarily passionate about linux and just looking for a windows alternative can be easily persuaded early on
Looks like there's still something you can try, brother.
After bashing my face against the wall getting lutris to run StarCraft 2, I'm avoiding looking at my OS too hard
I feel like I should try arch just once so I understand the memes
Arch is a make it yourself distro. It comes barebones and you install what you need (which in my opinion gives better knowledge about your system). And the packages are up-to-date which is good if you are gaming.
If you don't like to tinker then Arch may not be for you. Something arch-based could be a better fit. Like Garuda or EndeavourOS.
When you say you can install what you need, what does that mean exactly? Does that mean things like lib C or vulkan or drivers so my USB ports work? Seems to me like I don't actually understand how a computer works at a fundamental level when I've never had to configure a sound card or manually install a driver and the explanations I get are too technical to practically apply
I'd like to understand my PC well enough to use Arch but I'm finding a hard time figuring out what I'm missing exactly. Practically speaking, what does direct X or vulkan do?
When it comes to Arch the wiki is your friend. It will tell you if additional configuration is required to get your packages working and what other dependencies can be installed. If something isn't working properly then the wiki probably knows why.
Arch comes with no drivers and additional packages by default. You need to install them manually. But you don't need to install every package for your system manually. If you need glibc it will most certainly get pulled down as a dependency.
You don't need to know every part of the system to use arch but you need to be interested enough to learn how your system works if something is not working or you want to configure your system in a certain way.
For starters I would recommend going with something Arch-based like Garuda or EndeavorOS if you want to learn Arch. I started off with my Steam Deck and later Garuda on my desktop. Once I was comfortable enough around Arch I decided to install vanilla Arch (manually, the wiki way) in a VM. When installing my system I wrote down every command I used and from that it snowballed in to my own install script for arch. That taught me a lot.
Alright I'll give it a try, can you recommend a VM other than virtual box? I was having issues with dependencies when installing it
There are better ways than using Lutris
Can I run an installer off a mounted iso in a bottle?
Yes
I too bashed my head with lutris on some games to the point that i gave up on Linux. Then i tried it again but this time using Bottles and it's working really fine for me, almost flawless.
Did you try lutris out of flatpak? I don't know why but this version has less issues. I compared lutris vs bottles and for me the performance of bottles was way worse. (Sadly). Because the bottles ui is much better
I didn't try that version, I just transitioned to Bottles. I didn't notice any performance loss though I might compare it just to see what it's like.
I still wonder what the difference made. I would image, it should be the same.
Yeah I think it's time to stop being lazy and actually learn how wine works, I can't get Warcraft 3 to work
Do you know what the issue was? Iam on kubuntu with the flatpak version (important) of lutris and battle.net + sc2 just runs out of the box. With a normal installation of lutris it didn't.
Kept telling me I was missing Vulkan and lib C (I think) and I kept installing it wrong somehow. Eventually I downloaded steam and ran one game (potion craft) and it installed everything I needed automatically, lutris worked just fine after that
My switch to Linux started 1,5 years ago with Manjaro KDE - and since then, I am still a fan of KDE, which is kind of "Windows UI done right" for me. Ergonomic, configurable, consistent. I also find Pantheon, Enlightenment, and Budgie to be cool concepts, but from a practical side, KDE is a no-brainer for me.
Mint comes with Cinnamon by default, and I guess that's what you're using. For me, Cinnamon is too old-fashioned, it's like you're back to at least Windows 7 timing. Some people like it, but for me it's just old and out of touch with the progress of UI's.
GNOME used in Ubuntu is good with app theming (yay for adwaita!), it is unique and minimalistic, but its overall design is just...not for everyone, and customization is heavily tied to unsafe practice of plugins which has been exploited many, many times.
With all that said, try everything out in a VM or something and see what's good for you. There are really no wrong choices!
I totally forgot about using a VM, can you recommend one besides virtualbox?
VMWare, GNOME Boxes, QEMU+virt-manager
Personally using the latter, appears to have the best support and more configuration options compared to alternatives, as well as advanced options like GPU passthrough etc, though it has a bit more of a learning curve, and each alternative option should be fine.
mainly hobbyists or some very specific feature. For example antiX for old hardware or Spiral Linux for the better installer, gaming specific distros for gaming etc. Also there are protest distros which advertise not having something - usually SystemD.
Hopefully the stable version will become a competitor to Linux Mint
I found out about this yesterday when searching for the KDE sources to make some alterations to the lock screen. I guess this distro is not for me.
I guess they are going the steamos route seeing as arch based.
Making a LFS distro already show you all the GNU mess! Why another distro?
There's KDE Neon already. The whole point of this distribution is the atomic immutable part.
Then just install KDE in your Arch install. Or use endeavorOS with KDE, or any other Arch based OS with KDE. Don't be dismissive of other people's interests.
It's just Arch with Plasma then...
I don't understand why people want immutable. I don't know all that much about Linux but on my Steamdeck it keeps getting in the way anytime I try to do anything
You certainly have to learn new ways of doing things when you want to tinker, but they are basically UNBREAKABLE, which is my main plus point. I'm busy, I need my PC to be reliable. I don't want to have to troubleshoot stuff just to keep it up and running.
If I had more time I would really enjoy the tinkering, but I don't so I need my distro just work.
I personally don’t tinker much with the OS. I want it to stay out of the way and let me do things. In the case of Bazzite, everything I need for gaming is just there and works without me lifting a finger.
I like the safety and simplicity immutables bring.
If I’m doing something out of the ordinary, a temporary container usually suffices.
It’s really made the switch from Windows as a daily driver much easier.
Immutable is fantastic in theory. Where it falls apart is having to basically rebuild the whole distro every time you want to make a change. It should be there your base distro is immutable, then any extra changes go on an additional mutable layer but that would be difficult to set up. (You'd need a package manager like Nixos or something.)
That is exactly how OsTree and other layering solutions work. Only Nix requires a whole distro rebuild.
And even then with
nixos-rebuild switchyou won't really notice that you're "rebuilding" anythingIt isn't, though. Package layering modifies the install itself. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-silverblue/getting-started/#_flatpak_command_line
The big problem with the way ostree works is that installing things has side effects. Every item you install with ostree makes all future items slower to install, including regular os updates. This is a significant flaw in the way they designed it and really makes immutable oses less attractive.
It's not a flaw. Ostree is a last resort, you should be using containerized software. Layering a package should only be done when strictly necessary and not as the regular way to manage packages. If you need an overtly customized system, you use Nix or universal blue to design your new system declaratively and create your custom image.
That is a flaw. Flatpak is great where it works but Flatpak doesn't solve all problems, neither does any one solution except os level modification. It can be a last resort by it should be a last resort that works. The layering system could be put together such that you don't get side effects of installing packages like that. It might be tough to fix but that doesn't make it not a flaw.
Please remember that no one is taking anything away from you. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it. Traditional package managing isn't going away any time soon. You are safe. Others can have their preferred tech, and you don't have to like it. It's ok to have different tastes.
Lame
No, Lame is for audio, this is a whole Linux distro