this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
508 points (97.7% liked)

linuxmemes

20688 readers
977 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fullstackhipster@awful.systems 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I find it hard to imagine a system that is not borkable by a superuser. Maybe it's helpful to think of immutable setups as harder to bork by accident during routine maintenance (e.g. through faulty updates) and more resilient to bad code (through containerization).

[–] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

good point, that's fair. The reason I think it bears mentioning is that editing configs under /etc/ is totally something we might expect a user to do. So you could follow a tutorial online that is wrong or outdated and with enough bad luck, tada, you bricked your "immutable" system. Or, less dramatic and more likely, something doesn't work as intended anymore and you don't know how to restore to the original config from when you installed.

[–] fullstackhipster@awful.systems 8 points 1 month ago

You're right that "immutable" is a bit of a misnomer in that regard, and it's been argued that "atomic" is a more fitting term.

And I agree that a lot of documentation and how-to-guides don't account for immutable setups (yet?), which can get novice users especially in a lot of trouble.

Personally, I prefer a declarative system (NixOS) that solves this problem rather cleanly and gives me most benefits of so-called immutable distros as well.