Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The State of Immutable Linux

justingarrison.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: The State of Immutable Linux

#11

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

tmtvl wrote: post #10

Aw, no love for Arkane Linux ( https://www.arkanelinux.org/ >)? It seems a bit more 'properly immutable' than the 'distributinos' listed in TFA.

I once talked to someone on iirc Linux discord server about their project which was very similar to this (An Immutable arch/(maybe cachy?)) which they had built.

There is quite some innovation within this space of (atomic-arch?) which I am interested about because I wish to recommend arch's bleeding-edge/aur to people and the ability to have snapshots etc. is interesting, which is something that I might need myself as well... as I really get too lazy at times for snapshots.

With their talks, I used to think that it would become very bloated distribution/might not work fast but that's not really the case.

In future, I will take a look at arkane as well!

Re: The State of Immutable Linux

#12

Post by precompute »

madspindel wrote: post #3

> It’s 2026, if you’re not using something immutable (or at least reproducable) you’re doing more maintenance work than you should. I used to use MicroOS on Raspberry Pis and NUCs but the rolling release actually led to more maintenance work (fixing breaking changes like config changes). Eventually I moved to Ubuntu but kept the mindset that all installed applications should be podman containers. I don't miss MicroOS…

Yes! This is the way. https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian/

Re: The State of Immutable Linux

#14

Post by evanjrowley »

dizhn wrote: post #8
evanjrowley wrote: post #4

Glad to see Talos Linux there! Another interesting, though less radical take on an immutable container OS is IncusOS. Made by the same people behind LXC: https://github.com/lxc/incus-os I wish the article's NixOS section had mentioned impermanence features which can be used to make NixOS actually immutable: https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Impermanence

I am not really interested in an immutable desktop OS but that incus OS sounds interesting. I use Proxmox and if prox were to be immutable I wouldn't mind that.

I totally agree with the idea of replacing Proxmox with something more immutable.

IncusOS seems like a strong contender.

I've also considered installing Proxmox with ZFS Boot Menu to get a rollback capability. I'd need to figure out how to properly manage state when multiple storage providers are in use. Like for example, what would happen if the pool for VMs had newer data than the root snapshot I roll back to? Even with the answer, obviously the overall theme is Proxmox is not designed to operate this way.

Re: The State of Immutable Linux

#15

Post by evanjrowley »

JustinGarrison wrote: post #5
evanjrowley wrote: post #4

Glad to see Talos Linux there! Another interesting, though less radical take on an immutable container OS is IncusOS. Made by the same people behind LXC: https://github.com/lxc/incus-os I wish the article's NixOS section had mentioned impermanence features which can be used to make NixOS actually immutable: https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Impermanence

I work at Sidero, but I'm glad that wasn't obvious from the article because I'm trying to be fair. I heard about Impermanence right after I gave the talk so I'm looking into it.

Good luck! Talos Linux seems like an amazing project. I wish Sidero much success.

Re: The State of Immutable Linux

#16

Post by evanjrowley »

dindresto wrote: post #9
evanjrowley wrote: post #4

Glad to see Talos Linux there! Another interesting, though less radical take on an immutable container OS is IncusOS. Made by the same people behind LXC: https://github.com/lxc/incus-os I wish the article's NixOS section had mentioned impermanence features which can be used to make NixOS actually immutable: https://nixos.wiki/wiki/Impermanence

FYI that is the old unofficial wiki, the official NixOS wiki is at https://wiki.nixos.org/wiki/Impermanence (although this particular article is also outdated there)

Thanks. One of the things that confuses me about the wiki is the official one contains a disclaimer about the potential for the content to be out of date. The unofficial wiki has an easier to use domain name and no disclaimer, so unless someone find it beautiful the wiki home page, it can be easy for them to interpret the unofficial one as being the de-facto/preferred source of information.
Post reply on HN