Linux

48315 readers

1240 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

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

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

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

Small Distro Concerns (feddit.uk)

submitted 5 days ago by ALiteralCabbage@feddit.uk to c/linux@lemmy.ml

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have an old notebook which I've been toying with a few smaller distros on (typically easy to install, liveCD types), and while I enjoy the tinkering aspects of this, I had a thought that I've been mulling.

In the past I've run distributions based on larger, better supported, systems (Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, etc.) and if or when they have folded, like crunchbang did, or PeppermintOS (however briefly), I just changed them out.

However, if I were to go back to peppermintOS, say, would it be feasible to 'convert' the system to the parent distribution? So, could I force peppermintOS to 'become' Debian, for example? Or is this overly simplistic? It's a level of engagement with my operating systems that I just haven't had!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Guenther_Amanita@slrpnk.net 7 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The problem with package based distros (everything non-immutable) is, that a distro is very complex.

Even if you manage to "swap out" the package repositories, you usually still have a lot of remaining stuff in the background and many things tweaked by the maintainers. It's a huge mess.

In theory, you could absolutely do that, but to be honest, why bother? You already always should have a backup of all your personal data, so why not reinstall it cleanly?

Speaking of image based distros ("immutable"), the cool thing about most is that that you can easily swap out the underlying OS with just one command.

For example, you can always rebase from Fedora Silverblue to Kinoite to Bazzite to something with Hyprland and then back to vanilla Silverblue, without any traces.

So, for example, if the guy who makes your custom image on Github stops maintaining it, you can simply switch to something else in just seconds.

Maybe this is something relevant for you :)

[–] lord_ryvan@ttrpg.network 4 points 4 days ago

Tiny vocab tip: “Non-immutable” is actually just called “mutable”.

[–] fatur0000new@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago

Package based distro doesn't has any relation with immutability. NixOS and GuixSD are package based distro and they are immutable.

Sorry if my english is bad