I would just like to preface this. This is the first blog post I’ve ever written, so please please please give me feedback if you can. I also didn’t intend on it being here on Lemmy, but Hugo is quite a complex tool that’ll take some time for me to understand. Webdev is not my cup of tea.

Introduction.

About a month ago, I switched from Endeavour OS to a spin of Fedora called Fedora Onyx (Now Fedora Atomic Budgie, from now on shortened to FAB). Why? I love Arch, it was even my first distro (I am sane I promise) thanks to a friend, but it’s infamous for breaking. Which it did. Time and time again.

Whether I was doing something wrong or not is irrelevant now, but on every Arch or Arch-based install I’ve done; overtime something has caused seemingly random parts of the system to begin to break down or slow down.

After 3 years of this behavior across countless installs, enough was enough. I’d played around with Atomic, otherwise known as Immutable, distros before in VMs but never used one on bare metal. I knew what I was getting into though, sandboxing and containerization left right and center, Flatpak for apps and restriction to the base directories. A routine backup later, and it was distro-shopping time.

What I looked for.

I initially didn’t plan on FAB nor an Atomic distro, I was actually going for NixOS (and if I were to switch from Atomic, NixOS would be my new home). But I’m of the mind of I want to use my computer more than building it, at least on the software side of things, and I know that if I had a NixOS system I’d never stop tweaking it. After trying NixOS in a VM a couple times, this constant tweaking ended up in the system breaking both times to the point where it was impossible to edit the .nix config file without chroot (and a lot of GRUB entries, a rather bit messy if you ask me).

I needed a system that:

  • Wouldn’t break without my active attempt to do so.
  • Was modern, had the latest versions of software available and the newest kernels (once an Arch user, always an Arch user).
  • Had a large community and buzz in-case I needed support.

After the events of NixOS, I turned to Fedora. I’ve used Fedora Workstation a couple times on my laptop & desktop, and Fedora Silverblue (technically Fedora Atomic Gnome) I’d tried in a VM. Fedora Workstation fits two of those three requirements, omitting only the reliability I craved. But Fedora’s Atomic spins were a perfect fit.

Budgie?

Desktop Environments are incredibly subjective and no one is better than another, I don’t like Gnome nor KDE simply due to the scale of them. Large enough to jokingly label those desktops as Gnome/Linux and KDE/Linux rather than GNU/Linux. This is a nightmare if you ask me, the system and the DE should be separate areas of an OS stack.

Gnome’s scale can be felt across the entire Linux-verse, more and more apps are being made with Libadwaita; essentially alienating anyone who doesn’t use Gnome if they value consistency in the appearance of their system. KDE uses the Qt framework for UI, which causes itself to be alienated from the majority of Linux apps.

So I need a small desktop that uses GTK, but has modern features and animations while being under active development. Out of the 2 remaining Fedora Atomic spins, Sway or Budgie, it has to be Budgie.

I. Love. Budgie. I’ve used it many times in my old Arch installs and I’m constantly on the lookout for the best Budgie experience. Budgie is everything I want out of a DE, it’s small, it’s fast, it’s modern, it’s GTK, and under active development. It was also the first FOSS project I donated to!

With everything backed up, the distro chosen and a USB flashed. It was time to switch.

Week 1 & 2.

FAB started out exactly like most distros, you have to use Flatpak to manage all your apps otherwise going Atomic is almost pointless. FAB shipped with Gnome Software installed but again, I love consistency in the appearance of my system and so opted to use Flatpak and Flathub straight from a terminal. Gnome Software also seems to take a good minute to finish the ‘Loading Software Catalogue’ step, whereas the CLI faces no such issue.

To install packages onto the base system, known as ‘layering’, you have to use a specialized package manager that supports layering on Atomic. Fedora Atomic ships with a tool called rpm-ostree that replaces dnf . I layered Xfce-Terminal, Flatseal*, Vim, Neofetch, and packages for virtualization onto my system. Your layered packages can be seen with the command:

rpm-ostree status

*The flatpak version of Flatseal didn’t seem to apply any of the overrides.

It started out quite nicely, I usually mount my secondary drives into /mnt/DRIVELABEL but due to the restrictions to the base directories I had to change this to /run/media/USERNAME/DRIVELABEL, not a big deal and should be expected.

Gaming was obviously fine as it was on Arch. Blender did everything perfectly too, after overrides to access my projects folder. It was almost easy to forget I was on an Atomic distro. So far, I’m loving it.

Week 3.

Week 3 is when things start to get interesting, Atomic distros such as VanillaOS advertise themselves as perfect for developers. I’m a hobbyist developer, I make odd projects here and there for my personal use and other automations. Week 3 is when I wanted to start a new project.

Week 3 is also when I almost gave up on ‘Immutable’ distros.

I introduced myself to Toolbox , a program that’s used to create containerized images of non-Atomic distros right under your host system; like a Docker container (It actually uses Podman as the backend so it is a Docker container of sorts). Running:

toolbox create

Defaults to creating a Fedora container (I’m guessing it’s Fedora server), so you have access to dnf and the total mutability of non-Atomic distros on your Atomic distro. I then proceeded to installing my editor of choice and packages for Python & Rust.

I learnt a lot about how to manage development on an Atomic distro in Week 3, Toolbox advertises that it enables ‘seamless’ integration of software from the container and host system. In my experience, it’s not quite that simple.

I won’t divulge into what went wrong because it’s completely my fault and nothing wrong with Fedora, Atomicity or Toolbox. But to summarize the containerization was almost too much, causing me to flash a NixOS USB and plan to switch. VSCodium wouldn’t see that I’ve installed the languages I did, nor find my font (Geist Mono Nerd Font). This put a very sour taste for Toolbox in my mouth.

But the weekend came and I left my computer for a good day.

I came back and wiped everything from my dev environment, even the Toolbox container. Toolbox allows you to specify what distro you want to install, so I came up with the brilliant idea of Arch. After that I proceeded to install Yay, VSCodium, Python and a couple other languages. Finally, peace at last. The trick was to install VSCodium from the Toolbox, I knew that prior to the wipe but VSCodium isn’t in the Fedora repos. So now, with everything all under the Toolbox container, programming is quite a nice experience.

Week 4 & Beyond.

So this is it, one month after installing and I can’t see myself ever going back to a non-Atomic distro. Even using NixOS doesn’t seem quite as likely now. I’ve grown to enjoy and embrace the sandboxing & containerization now that I’ve figured out what to do in order to achieve a task. The best part, my system is (mostly) identical to what it was at the start. So in theory, it’ll be the same even as the years go by. Not that I’m likely to keep this exact install for years, on my desktop at least I like to try new things and ultimately end up getting bored of an install after an amount of time.

So to answer the popular question right now, is Atomicity the future of the Linux desktop? I say yes, if we can make them easier for first-timers. Right now, I’d recommend everyone to use a normal distro for a while before trying Atomic distros. During setup, the two are quite distinct from each other, and doing the setup on a normal distro is required foundation for an Atomic setup. However…

Do I believe anyone who has some experience using Linux should try an Atomic distro? Absolutely! Even if you never encounter breakages on a normal distro, using something Atomic if you don’t have specific use-cases brings no downsides. Going Atomic definitely teaches you a lot about Sandboxing, Containerization, Linux and miscellaneous Security concepts. Plus, doesn’t it just sound cool? “Yeah, I use an Atomic system.”

It even has a psychological benefit, I feel a stronger sense of solidarity and security from this system. Maintenance is easier, as I know where and how each app has installed itself and what it can access or do. I’ve layered on all the packages I could want so my base system should almost never change now beyond updates. I could even re-base to a different Fedora Atomic spin if I wanted to.

So, if you’ve used Linux for some amount of time, I highly recommend giving Atomic a try. It’s quite a unique & interesting way to use your system. If you’ve never used Linux, I don’t recommend going straight to Atomic as there are certain new and developing concepts that are used heavily throughout the system. Do I think Atomicity is the future? Yes, I can definitely see them gaining a larger share of the Linux desktop given time. To make a reliable Linux desktop, I see almost no other solution than Atomicity that doesn’t require extensive Linux experience.

  • hackerwacker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    After trying NixOS in a VM a couple times, this constant tweaking ended up in the system breaking both times to the point where it was impossible to edit the .nix config file without chroot (and a lot of GRUB entries, a rather bit messy if you ask me).

    I don’t get it, doesn’t NixOS let you go to a previous configuration in the boot menu?

    To make a reliable Linux desktop, I see almost no other solution than Atomicity that doesn’t require extensive Linux experience.

    You have a very skewed perspective coming from your constantly broken Arch install.

    You don’t need immutability and containers to have a reliable Linux install. My Ubuntu installs are extremely reliable, both on desktops and servers.

    I have to say though that I ran Arch for a few years and it only broke once or twice. This is either astroturfing or PEBCAK.

    • timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve been running fedora with updates since 29 without issue. I don’t know what people are doing that they break shit constantly. Maybe I’m just old and don’t do extreme enough on my desktop.

      • Spectranox@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Learning. I want to know Linux thoroughly, so I explore as much as I can. This is why I keep breaking things, just sticking in a screwdriver and wiggling it around a bit to see what happens. I am slowly getting into the habit of using VMs for this.

    • j0rge@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      My Ubuntu installs are extremely reliable, both on desktops and servers.

      Probably because you’re an experienced user, not everyone has the same skillset.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        I mean, it’s not exactly rocket surgery.

        Learn how to boot single user, make backups.

        Sure, being able to undo package manager fuckery would be good, but you done need to be particularly skilled to unfuck a box, you just have to be bothered to put in the effort.

        • j0rge@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Been there and done that. It’s better to just not have the host OS break in the first place.

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              That’s a fucking lie. I’ve literally had debian fail to update because of Nvidia drivers, the ones from their official repos too.

    • Spectranox@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      NixOS does let you do that, but somehow I goofed it so hard I couldn’t even do that. Most of the time my issues arrived when tinkering with the bootloader, so outcomes like that are to be expected.

      100% I’m biased, you chuck a person who can’t swim into the deep end and they’ll be terrified of water for life. With Arch being my first distro, this sorta thing happened to me. I just skipped the usual debian-based stepping stones new Linux users traverse. You’re totally right though, you can have a reliable system with almost anything debian-based. But again, for me I can’t use debian due to the old packages. I have tried it, didn’t like it. I like Fedora, it’s not reliable enough for me. Fedora Atomic fixes that.

      This is not astroturfing though. Just me and my views based on past experiences.

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Just wanted to note that tinkering with the bootloader on Fedora Atomic is as error-prone as on any other distro.

        • Spectranox@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah of course, bootloaders are bootloaders. However I don’t need to tinker with it on Fedora Atomic as it ships with GRUB as the default, not systemd-boot. Additionally, it’s easier to tinker with it on NixOS as it’s just a couple lines in the config.

          I’m not saying NixOS is bad, I wish I had the time to use it. For my workload, Fedora Atomic is more appropriate.

    • Deckweiss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I agree, but want to add my personal experience.

      I used ubuntu since version 11 and it used to break on every major release upgrade for me. So I ended up reinstalling every half a year, because I wanted the new software features.

      Since I moved to arch a couple of years ago, I definitely had to learn a lot and find out what the most stable setup and set of tools is, but since then I have been running it without any hiccups for over 3 years on my gaming pc, my work laptop and recently on the production server of my personal business (yeah I know lol)

    • million@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Everyone seems shocked when Arch breaks but it’s been my experience with Arch as well. Literally on an old laptop I was basically using for web browsing I had Arch break several times randomly after updates. That was enough for me to give up on it.

      Accusing the poster of astroturfing is extremely toxic and warrants revision on your part.

    • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Arch Linux is known for its instability and it’s highly dependent on what you are doing. Linux stability in general is very dependent on what you are doing. I’ve even had issues on debian using their official Nvidia drivers.