Chimera Linux
chimera-linux.org
Chimera Linux
1–10 of 224 posts
Re: Chimera Linux
#2[deleted]
Re: Chimera Linux
#3> Chimera is a general-purpose OS born from unhappiness with the state of Linux distributions. It's built around the core idea that a simple system does not have to require endless setup and customization to be practical.
This seems disingenuous at best.
Many distros already supply this feature. Debian is the most notable but there are many others. Install it, make any tweaks you want from the base install, sit on it for many years unchanged.
Considering the next paragraph goes on to describe OpenBSD userland, LLVM compiler, and musl libc, it appears the aim is actually to build a Linux distribution without GNU.
I usually steer away from projects which are defined by what they are not. It seems to build a community whose roots are based in hostility.
Re: Chimera Linux
#4> Chimera is a general-purpose OS born from unhappiness with the state of Linux distributions. It's built around the core idea that a simple system does not have to require endless setup and customization to be practical. This seems disingenuous at best. Many distros already supply this feature. Debian is the most notable but there are many others. Install it, make any tweaks you want from the base install, sit on it…
> If that's the aim then just state that.
At the top of the first page, under the Chimera Linux logo: "A modern, general-purpose non-GNU Linux distribution"
Re: Chimera Linux
#5> Chimera is a general-purpose OS born from unhappiness with the state of Linux distributions. It's built around the core idea that a simple system does not have to require endless setup and customization to be practical. This seems disingenuous at best. Many distros already supply this feature. Debian is the most notable but there are many others. Install it, make any tweaks you want from the base install, sit on it…
Came here to paste the same quote, just to highlight how disconnected from reality can be advertising "does not have to require endless setup" and then describe a rolling update distro, focused on power users and based on FreeBSD userland with a Linux kernel.
Re: Chimera Linux
#6> Chimera is a general-purpose OS born from unhappiness with the state of Linux distributions. It's built around the core idea that a simple system does not have to require endless setup and customization to be practical. This seems disingenuous at best. Many distros already supply this feature. Debian is the most notable but there are many others. Install it, make any tweaks you want from the base install, sit on it…
Not just not GNU: they also ditch systemd for dinit, syslog-ng and a bunch of homegrown plumbing:
> We are also putting a lot of effort into writing fresh low-level plumbing. For example, Chimera comes with first-class and built-in support for user services and other things dependent on session tracking (such as a shared session bus), implemented from scratch thanks to our Turnstile project, finally bringing functionality previously only available on distributions using systemd. This is being implemented in a vendor-independent manner so that other distributions can adopt it.
Re: Chimera Linux
#7It's really cool, but I get worried anytime I see something that seems to want to be a user friendly, mainstream distro, after seeing how hard Manjaro tried with the whole "Bring simplicity to the masses" stuff and how many issues they still have.
Is this an experimental or hobby distro or does it intend to be something grandma can use?
If I had to choose this or BSD, it looks like I'd very strongly considering this or something like it, but it definitely doesn't seem like an Ubuntu or Windows replacement. Simplicity is just not a factor end users consider.
As a dev who likes modern software and isn't really into lightweight hacker friendly stuff... the odds of me using anything that's not at least 1% or total desktop market share is pretty low. Anyone who's not an Arch/Kali/BSD/suckless enthusiast type has a finely tuned sense of "Oh no, that makes me feel the same way that thinking about a project car does, I'm outta here".
It could drill be a wonderful worthwhile project... but it's going to be an uphill battle to interest anyone but tinkerers and I always kind of worry about people, because this stuff takes a lot of time and without managed expectations it can really be a disappointment when it doesn't take off. I've tried several times to start new projects and it's been pretty hard realizing they're unlikely to go anywhere anytime soon.
I think getting any mainstream adoption would require changing the entire software ecosystem in general. I would imagine there would be some kind of issues trying to port current mega apps like Steam or Chrome to this.
Plus, dynamic linking seems like it's not that well suited to user friendly distros meant for end users.
Unless you have snap or Flatpak or something like that, I don't see how you can have cutting edge large complex third party packages without at least occasional compatibility issues.
My experience with dynamic distros generally hasn't been terrible, but it always seems like there's some issue or other.
Does this have any kind of AppArmor type sandboxing?
Re: Chimera Linux
#8[flagged]
Re: Chimera Linux
#9So they're basically saying "our system will be better because more things will just work" but then they decided to use nonstandard libc and coreutils so actually getting existing Linux scripts and software to work in this distro will be harder.
Re: Chimera Linux
#10i really like a lot of design choices in chimera linux (particularly around its packaging/build system), but as a current alpine linux (main pc, not docker) user, i find i still can't justify musl. i like small simple correct software, but musl, despite being all of those things, is, in my experience
- slower than glibc, and in occasionally difficult to predict spots;
- causes just a bit too much trouble porting software to it -- most upstreams are reluctant to accept patches, resulting in maintenance overhead for the distribution;
- occasionally subtly breaks things at runtime -- e.g. both alpine and chimera builds of firefox have the same two crashes which neither the official mozilla nor archlinux builds exhibit.
in the end i find i have to rely on my glibc chroot (e.g. for mozilla firefox build) too much for my liking.