Linux

48212 readers

710 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

[email protected]

Is anybody else a bit disappointed about the recent days with Fedora Atomic? (slrpnk.net)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Don't get me wrong. I absolutely love Fedora Atomic (Silverblue, Bazzite, Kinoite, Aurora, IOT, etc.), more than any other distro I used, and I plant to continue using it.

It never made any problems on any of my devices, and because it is pretty much indestructible and self-managing, I even planned to install it on my Mum's new laptop, in case her current one (basically a toaster with Mint on it) breaks.

But with the last days, my trust is damaged quite a bit.

First one, where I couldn't update anymore on uBlue, because of faulty key pairs. This is a huge thing for me because uBlue updates in the background, and if I wouldn't have read it here on Lemmy, I would have found out way too late, which is a security risk imo.

And now, my devices weren't able to boot anymore due to some secure boot stuff. Again, if I wouldn't have subscribed the Fedoramagazine, I would have noticed it way too late.
I was able to just boot into an older image and just paste a few commands from the magazine's post, and it was resolved in just seconds (download time not included).

Both instances were only a minor thing for ME.
But both would have been a headache if I wouldn't follow those blogs, which is a thing only nerds (like myself) do.
Nobody else cares about their OS, it is supposed to just work, hence why I use Atomic.

I don't wanna blame the devs (both j0rge/ uBlue and the Fedora team), they were very quick, transparent and offered very simple fixes.
And, being able to just boot into an older image, just in case, is something I am very thankful for, but nothing I want to depend on.

Having to be informed about stuff like this and then having to use the CLI is just a no-go for most people.

Am I over-reacting about this too much? What's your view on those things?

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I don't see atomic systems on desktop computers. They make sense on more embedded and stable systems that still need eventual updates like ATMs and industrial machinery control panels but not desktops. Atomic systems kill customization that is one of the core advantages of Linux. Probably it also has something to do with my not-so-enthusiastic opinion on Flatpak idk.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No Atomic systems make all sense.

They are literally the reason why an unstable distro like Fedora is robust.

Customization is all done on the mutable areas, home partition etc. A new user profile equals a new vanilla desktop.

Yes, you cannot mess with the core architecture of the OS. Things need to be centralized.

But you realize, similar to GNOME removing theming, that if you have one way that everyone can test, you have way less bugs.

As a KDE user I would be really fine having way less customizability and more stability. I am very fine with the default in most cases.

A well designed system does not require customization, and to be an OS used by the world, Linux needs good defaults.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I agree that this is a very valid reason but I don't think most of the people see their OS that way

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Which is still irrelevant for OPs thread. It is actually the opposite. The more you diverge from upstream, the more you need to vendor your changes.

That means if your mums PC breaks, you are responsible ;)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This is not relevant to the topic about issues with the stability of atomic desktops

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm always surprised by the toxicity of Lemmy. Anyways I think it was relevant to the topic because the OP asked for opinions on atomic systems. Are you arguing because you have a drastically different one?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

No, I understand your points. I may think you need to specify what you mean by "customizable". A lot of stuff users normally do, like theming, installing random stuff etc, works. You can layer, build your own image etc.

But this is not the point as OP was frustrated about having an OS that even though promising to be reliable still breaks.

And whining about "oh I cant tweak it" is just not at the correct place there.

But of course my answers were kinda harsh, sorry for that. But these issues are really nonissues if your priority is having a working system.