this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
39 points (95.3% liked)

Linux

7022 readers
299 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system

Also check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Look, I've only been a Linux user for a couple of years, but if there's one thing I've learned, it's that we're not afraid to tinker. Most of us came from Windows or macOS at some point, ditching the mainstream for better control, privacy, or just to escape the corporate BS. We're the people who choose the harder path when we think it's worth it.

Which is why I find it so damn interesting that atomic distros haven't caught on more. The landscape is incredibly diverse now - from gaming-focused Bazzite to the purely functional philosophy of Guix System. These distros couldn't be more different in their approaches, but they all share this core atomic DNA.

These systems offer some seriously compelling stuff - updates that either work 100% or roll back automatically, no more "oops I bricked my system" moments, better security through immutability, and way fewer update headaches.

So what gives? Why aren't more of us jumping on board? From my conversations and personal experience, I think it boils down to a few things:

Our current setups already work fine. Let's be honest - when you've spent years perfecting your Arch or Debian setup, the thought of learning a whole new paradigm feels exhausting. Why fix what isn't broken, right?

The learning curve seems steep. Yes, you can do pretty much everything on atomic distros that you can on traditional ones, but the how is different. Instead of apt install whatever and editing config files directly, you're suddenly dealing with containers, layering, or declarative configs. It's not necessarily harder, just... different.

The docs can be sparse. Traditional distros have decades of guides, forum posts, and StackExchange answers. Atomic systems? Not nearly as much. When something breaks at 2am, knowing there's a million Google results for your error message is comforting.

I've been thinking about this because Linux has overcome similar hurdles before. Remember when gaming on Linux was basically impossible? Now we have the Steam Deck running an immutable SteamOS (of all things!) and my non-Linux friends are buying them without even realizing they're using Linux. It just works.

So I'm genuinely curious - what's keeping YOU from switching to an atomic distro? Is it specific software you need? Concerns about customization? Just can't be bothered to learn new tricks?

Your answers might actually help developers focus on the right pain points. The atomic approach makes so much sense on paper that I'm convinced it's the future - we just need to figure out what's stopping people from making the jump today.

So what would it actually take to get you to switch? I'm all ears.

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mikina@programming.dev 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Snapshots and rollbacks already exist in other distros, so the (only?) advantage you are mentioning is kind of a weak point.

Everything is a bother, since you can't just easily dnf install what you need, without actually rebooting or dealing with containers. I wasn't able to get a Win11 VM and work VPN properly working for long enough that rebooting to windows and just doing the RDP there was easier for me. (Because getting TPM to work simply wasn't feasible on atomic, and no - FOSS rdps didn't work)

If an app doesn't have Snap or .App file, it will be a bother. Having to enter a container just so I can edit something in a properly set up nvim just sucks, adding bloat to something that could have been one easy command.

There's a learning curve that gets in your way a lot, and since there are no actually payoffs for going through it, why bother?

I currently have Bazzite on my desktop as a daily driver, and it has been way worse experience than I had with Nobara, debugging any issues with I.e audio or drivers is awfull because the resources about it are a lot sparser, and so far I simply don't see anything it does better. I did rollback my Nobara few times with brtfs and it never was an issue.

One thing that may be worth it, if it's the case - can you actually export your layers into a VCS that you can then simply clone, just like you can with NixOS? Because if not, then following your logic, there's really no point in choosing atomic distro over NixOS. Sure, it has a slight learning curve, but you get a system you can not only rollback, but also easily clone anywhere you need it. What are your reasons for not using NixOS?

That said - there is one use case where atomic distros are amazing - if you have a, well, atomic environment you don't need to change often. Bazzite on SteamDeck or LegionGo being the best example, I'm using it there and it's been amazing experience.

[–] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Atomic/immutable distros are just another tool in the tool box. It is great for systems with a limited use scenario like the SteamDeck or HTPCs. I also love to install immutable distributions on systems where the user (often IT-illiterate) and the administrator are different people.

On my desktop PC I will, for the foreseeable future, use a normal distro (ArchLinux in my case) but i am planing to look into changing my servers to immutable with docker. That could make updates/maintenance easier and reduce the risk for full server compromises

[–] bunny_funeral@lemmy.world 28 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

So what would it actually take to get you to switch? I'm all ears.

a compelling reason would get me to switch. you haven't presented any.

[–] wizzim@infosec.pub 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (3 children)

Wrong, some were mentioned:

These systems offer some seriously compelling stuff - updates that either work 100% or roll back automatically, no more "oops I bricked my system" moments, better security through immutability, and way fewer update headaches.

[–] Kissaki@programming.dev 1 points 43 minutes ago* (last edited 43 minutes ago)

is bricking systems really an issue/a common issue for common mutable Linux distros?

[–] albert180@piefed.social 8 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Just do Snapshots? In OpenSuse Tumbleweed this happens out of the box every time you update packages. And you can just select the last one from the boot menu then.

It's hardly an advantage of atomic Distros

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago

This is already a mitigated issue with btrfs and zfs though.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 20 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (3 children)

but if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that we’re not afraid to tinker.

^ that's the reason right there. You really can't tinker with atomic distributions. And if you try, its just another level of abstraction that's in your way.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 9 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

I use atomic for systems that I want to work, full stop, no matter what.

I use traditional for systems and VMs that I want to tinker with. These may be rendered into an atomic distro at some point, if desired or necessary. But I honestly haven’t felt the need to do that yet.

It’s just about picking the appropriate baseline os type for what you want to do on the machine in question. Much like one would pick debian or fedora or rhel or suse-based distros for various technical and esoteric reasons.

[–] Mikina@programming.dev 2 points 7 hours ago

This. The whole discussion about "tinkering with immutable distros" fells like it misses the point and literal meaning of atomic and immutable.

Rebuilding the whole OS to layer another immutable read-only part into it isn't tinkering. Of changing one OS file has you rebooting, then that's not tinker-friendly.

Atomic distributions are by definition something you don't tinker with, and it stays the way you need it.

And no, having bundled distrobox or rollbacks doesn't make it tinker friendly, you can do both on normal distribution.

But once you have done tinkering and want the system to stay the way it is - that's what atomic means and is for.

[–] harryprayiv@infosec.pub 4 points 16 hours ago

This is the way. Prototype in a regular distro then lock it in with an immutable distro.

I did exactly this with my XMonad/polybar/rofi/dunst/alacritty configs which I now run on NixOS.

[–] harryprayiv@infosec.pub 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You have to be trolling.

You actually CAN tinker with atomic distros even more.

Immutable distros offer penalty-free tinkering because of the aforementioned atomicity and rollbacks. If I screw something up, I can just rollback the entire OS or whichever parts I want.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 3 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

How do you tinker when everything but your home directory is in read-only mode?

[–] harryprayiv@infosec.pub 2 points 3 hours ago

Good question: the reply below is corrrct. Build time.

[–] russjr08@bitforged.space 2 points 7 hours ago

You'd basically have to do the modifications at build-time rather than at runtime, so you'd need to edit the image definition to do so (or effectively, create an "extension" of the image) - at least in the case of UBlue/Fedora Atomic based distributions. Each one has their own system for doing this (VanillaOS for example works similarly, IIRC).

(There is the rpm-ostree layering system, though from what I know the usage of it is discouraged)

This is pretty much why I don't use atomic/immutable distributions on my main system - they can still be tinkered with, but it ends up requiring a lot of setup in order to do so. The last time I checked, creating custom images based on the UBlue images was quite complex and the documentation left me pretty confused. In theory, I shouldn't have any issues with it, I work with containers all the time at both work and my own personal projects, but it just didn't "click" for me at the time.

It's been a bit though, so I'll need to revisit it at some point - I just don't really have the time currently to learn an entire system just to make tweaks to my system. That being said, I'm perfectly happy with Bazzite on my ROG Ally where I don't need to make any tweaks to the base system (same with my Steam Deck running SteamOS - atomic based distributions are great for these devices/use-cases).

I have also tried out NixOS a few times, but same issue - it requires a lot of time investment to get the hang of the Nix ecosystem. For what its worth, I find the idea of atomic distributions to be intriguing and I see their appeal, but it just isn't for me at the moment.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago

Immutables are absolutely viable for tinkering. The most customized system I've ever had was an immutable distro, and I could tinker with 100% confidence that I would never lose the system.

[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

I switched from Windows to Kinoite last year because it seemed to be the one distro that actually cared about stability. The first distro I used was Ubuntu 7.04 and until Kinoite I always viewed the Linux desktop as a bit of a joke because it always broke every other update. Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, it didn't matter which distro I tried, after a few months something broke. I don't tolerate this on my primary computer so I always switched back to Windows. This is the first time I have ever used a Linux distribution where I can run an major update without worrying if I still have a GUI after the next reboot. So I consider immutable distros a huge success. I don't think I would still be using Linux without them.

[–] Hellmo_Luciferrari@lemm.ee 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

My limited experience with Bazzite left a sour taste in my mouth. Couldn't install themes because the dir where themes installed for KDE was locked down.

Noe I'm sure this is fixable. But that goes back to lack of documentation. And admittedly, lack of me researching further. I stuck with my Arch install because it's comfortable and familiar.

[–] Eeyore_Syndrome@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

When asked if I read the Docs.

"...lack of documentation. And admittedly, lack of me researching further."

Clicking on the sidebar /scrolling to the bottom of main page for Docs is hard.

Also linkage in the terminal message. 🤔

[–] Hellmo_Luciferrari@lemm.ee 0 points 21 hours ago

This was a long time ago, this isn't something that was there when I had tried with KDE on an Atomic distro.

And I wasn't asking for anyone to solve it for me. Appreciate the screenshots.

[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 14 hours ago

I'm actually using an atomic distro now (Bazzite). But that's not why I chose it, and honestly I don't think the advantages are significant.

There are some downsides that affect me on a regular basis, though.

I need to reboot more since every update requires it. That feels like going back in time 25 years.

I need to deal with the complexity of multiple distros with DistroBox to get the functionality I am accustomed to. I think that alone is proof that atomic distros are not quite ready for prime time.

The advantages elude me. Snapper or timeshift handle rollbacks just fine, as long as you use a modern filesystem like btrfs. So I haven't worried about busted updates in years.

I'm quite happy with Bazzite, but I can't point to anything good about it that is specific to immutable distros. I just don't get it, really. I guess the advantages are more for the developers and maintainers than for end users.

[–] TwilightKiddy@programming.dev 3 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

I love my Gentoo, I'm a bit obsessed with optimizing everything I can. And I can't really do any of that with immutable distos. I'm contemplating very hard on using NixOS for my server, though.

[–] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 7 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

They just seem kinda hacky and overcomplicated rn.

I was on NixOS for a while, which is sort of in this camp since the system build is deterministic an immutable, and I've had to switch away bc it's just annoying. Apps aren't made for immutability in mind, and sometimes when you (read: your OS) try to force them to, the burden falls on you to maintain it, not just the package maintainer. VS Code is a prime example. Some extensions just don't work right. It's not Nix's fault ofc, but that doesn't make it less impractical to use, so after 2 years away from Arch now, I've had to return.

Other immutable distros face similar issues.

On top of that, specific distros have reasons I wouldn't want to use them. I wouldn't use Bazzite, for instance, bc it is based on Fedora, and I won't use Fedora again. I liked Fedora when I used it, and it has things about it I like, but it has a glaring issue: anywhere it can be non-standard it is non-standard. For apps to run on Fedora there always has to have some weird location for a config file or a different way to install a program or some bug that only occurs on Fedora. Fedora be fedorain. That rules out Bazzite, Silverblue, etc. I call it the "RedHat Tax."

I wouldn't say I'm against an immutable distro tho; I just haven't found one for me yet. For now, BTRFS and backups + Arch are enough

[–] epyon22@programming.dev 1 points 20 hours ago

I had the same experience. Long time kubuntu user and various other distros. Got on the nixos bandwagon used it on a couple computers. The breaking part for me was all well supported applications was great, but where it broke down hard were the fringe or unsupported applications I was spending a lot of time building the nix configs. After a while I just couldn't spend that much time making my computer work. Back to kubuntu lts, its so low maintenance.

[–] whelk@lemm.ee 1 points 15 hours ago

I'm in the first camp. Atomic distros sound really neat, but I'm already happy where I am. I wish I could convince the people I work for to stop wanting to jump to some new framework or environment just because it has some neat additional features they didn't know they wanted until someone tried to sell them on it. I don't want to keep rebuilding and converting the same project. (And putting any new feature development on hold while we do so. I wonder why it seems like new ideas never get followed through on.)

[–] muhyb@programming.dev 2 points 18 hours ago

My current motto is, I use whatever I want and install atomic on relatives' PCs and set auto-update. Atomic is great for non tech-savvy and I like to meddle around in the file system.

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

Honestly the thing I kinda care more about would be a fully developed sandboxed permission controlled system like Android, just with the storage permissions like GrapheneOS. I know there are some support for this, flatpak & flatseal etc. but it is not prominent enough. I want it to cover everything, like android.

[–] enemenemu@lemm.ee 5 points 23 hours ago

What is the benefit of fedora and its atomic version, if you use flatpak and distrobox on both installs? Add btrfs snapshots and you can't brick your system either, which is your point, I guess

[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 5 points 23 hours ago

What'd it take for me to switch? Short of the distro I use switching the infrastructure over to it, probably nothing. And even then if an atomic distro would be annoying I'd probably jump ship to a different distro

The reason is that.. well basically the points you mentioned: I have my setup how I like it, and I don't see anything particularly compelling feature wise that'd make me interested in switching

[–] darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 22 hours ago

The primary barrier for me: I'm not convinced that it's a good idea.

[–] peteyestee@feddit.org 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

Do you know of any guides for semi tech savvy people? I'd like to try. I'd probably go with the fedora gnome immutable.

[–] themadcodger@kbin.earth 3 points 20 hours ago

Alternative to Silverblue is Bluefin, which is Silverblue repackaged with QoL improvements. I've been using it for a while now and like it in a set it and forget it kind of way.

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.org 5 points 23 hours ago

On Fedoras website there is a dedicated sections regarding Atomic Desktops. So, https://fedoraproject.org/atomic-desktops/silverblue/ is your answer.

[–] bipedalsheep@programming.dev 1 points 18 hours ago

I just haven't bothered reading up on what atomic systems are yet. I get the gist of it, just not enought to really understand how it affects my current workflow if I were to switch.

[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 1 points 18 hours ago

I like Mint. It looks like Windows, runs the software I want (including a lot of what I use on Windows). To me, the best thing an OS can ever do is stay out of my way. If it has any learning curve between me and doing the things I need and want to do, it's a bad OS for my needs,

[–] albert180@piefed.social 0 points 22 hours ago

I don't see any advantage for me. Just things that make my 08/15 usage more complicated