Linux

48181 readers

1200 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

nooter692@lemmy.ml

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

Comparison between NixOS vs blendOS vs Vanilla OS: what to pick and why? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by tanja@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/linux@lemmy.ml

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So I've recently taken an interest in these three distros:

All of these offer something very interesting:
Access to (basically) all Linux-capable software, no matter from what repo.

Both NixOS and blendOS are based on config files, from which your system is basically derived from, and Vanilla OS uses a package manager apx to install from any given repo, regardless of distribution.

While I've looked into Fedora Silverblue, that distro is limited to only install Flatpaks (edit: no, not really), which is fine for "apps", but seems to be more of a problem with managing system- and CLI tools.

I haven't distro hopped yet, as I'm still on Manjaro GNOME on my devices.

What are your thoughts on the three distros mentioned above?
Which ones are the most interesting, and for what reasons?

Personally, I'm mostly interested in NixOS & blendOS, as I believe they may have more advantages compared to Arch;

What do you think?

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

[–] tanja@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks, that makes sense.

Do you think the use of OCI containers/images is a mistake/bad choice from blendOS?
How is NixOS different?

[–] lily33@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Do you think the use of OCI containers/images is a mistake/bad choice from blendOS?

No. It's probably the best way to run packages from Arch, Debian. Ubuntu, Fedora, and others, all on the same system.

How is NixOS different?

NixOS simply doesn't tackle that problem, so it doesn't come with containers out of the box. If you want to run packages from other distros on NixOS, you'd probably need to manually configure the containers.

I feel like you're under the impression that the three distros, NixSO, blendos, and Vanilla OS, have similar goals. I don't know about Vanilla OS, but the main similarity between the other two is that they're both non-standard in some way.

But they're actually solving completely different problems: BlendOS wants to be a blend of different OSes, NixOS wants to have a reproducible, declarative configuration (declarative here means, you don't list a bunch of steps to reach your system state, but instead declare what that state is).