 |
Here is an interesting opinion about the immutable desktop, a category of Linux distributions that have an immutable base system, with software packages largely managed as flatpaks or other non-native formats. Rénich Bon Ćirić, a Fedora package maintainer and a Linux consultant from Mexico, argues that these immutable setups have no place on desktop computers and gives several reasons against using them: "Lately, it seems the industry is aggressively pushing immutable, image-based operating systems for the desktop. Shipping a cryptographically sealed, read-only root filesystem sounds super fancy and elegant on paper, but in reality, it's a solution looking for a problem, unless you're running a smart fridge or a corporate kiosk. Let me be perfectly clear: immutable systems are the correct choice for single-purpose appliances, point-of-sale terminals, and sealed server nodes. If your hardware only needs to run a fixed set of remote directives without any user intervention, then yes, a mutable root filesystem is just begging for trouble. But trying to force this architecture onto a general-purpose desktop? That is a spectacular regression. It wraps the user in a straitjacket, offloads system complexity onto you, and strips away ownership, performance, and actual security in the process. Here is the engineering reality of why the immutable desktop fails the general user." As always, opinions about this topic will vary, but it's interesting to see this point of view from a developer of Fedora, a Linux distribution that has been at the forefront of providing immutable systems with its Silverblue and Kinoite projects. |
Спутники
РН
SpaceX
Роскосмос
NASA
