M-% NixOS RET Guix RET !
But yes 80% of my comment applies to Nix as well, as of course Nix is older and Guix is (conceptually) based on Nix. Though I personally use/prefer Guix.
Metroidvanias of knowledge a la Outer Wilds
Thanks! I've changed quite a few things in my setup over the years, but gruvbox is one of the very few mainstays (that and mpv).
Yep! If you're applying and need a non-trivial number of locations checked/maps generated, you can check out the prgoram here.
Note that it says you can install it with guix, but it hasn't actually been merged into master yet, so for now you do need sbcl and the dependencies (etiher via quicklisp or however else you snag them).
You can mount any directory you want as the “home” directory of a given container with distrobox, it just defaults to using your home directory.
Yeah rollbacks are probably the best part of immutable OS's, but of almost equal importance is reproducible system configuration, which imo only Nix and Guix do well. Neither snapshots nor Silverblue really manage that yet.
I don't know too much about Vanilla OS, is it not possible to install your own DE or WM?
I'm less interested in Vanilla OS since it's based on Ubuntu and I'd rather not support / rely upon anything Canonical if I can help it.
Silverblue (+ spins) seems like the best option since it is the most mature, most popular, and is a community run distro. Of course Redhat pours a lot of resources into the Fedora project since it's upstream RHEL, and so does SUSE for MicroOS. But honestly if Redhat/SUSE were to disappear tomorrow, I think Fedora and OpenSUSE would be fine, whereas I can't say the same for Canonical+Ubuntu (and thus their descendants).
edit: After looking more into Vanilla OS, it looks very nice! Funnily apx addresses excatly the issues with distrobox pointed out in this thread by @mogoh@lemmy.ml. They also plan on moving from being Ubuntu based to Debian Sid based, which would be even better than Fedora as Debian is a true, 100% community backed and time tested distro (though still of course much corporate support).
I agree "cloud native" is not great, I won't be using that term.
Why are cli tools generally not available as flatpaks? There's nothing about how flatpak works afaik which distinguishes gui and cli. I get that the original motivation for flatpak was guis, but considering how long it's been touted as a "universal" package manager for linux, I don't understand how there could be so few clis.
I've heard people say the name for packages from flathub is awkward (which it is), and aliasing everything you install would be annoying (which it would), but that sounds like such a simple problem to solve.
I've also heard people say that flatpak clis would be useless because clis tend to be systadmin tools, and thus need to be not sandboxed. But this strikes me as a non sequitur. Gui tools can be used for sysadmin, and there are tons of cli tools which have nothing to do with sysadmin, they're just userspace programs.
What does your workflow look like with toolbox/distrobox?
Yeah Void is fantastic. I just switched back and I doubt I’ll be moving to anything else.
I only switched away in the first place because I had gotten so comfortable I wanted to try something new (Guix, also amazing!).
But there’s something so comfy about Void once you grok it, just lots of little good decisions which add up to a great experience.
I've never used Arch or Nix, but I switched from Void -> Guix and have been very happy with it. It's such a huge peace of mind to be able to have your whole system declaratively configured, package changes being atomic and generational (rollbacks so no worries about breakage), Guix shell for messing about, and being able to make your system do anything you can write in Scheme.
That's my daily driver. On servers so far I've gone with Debian Stable + Guix.
Also Void is still a fantastic distro, and is what I would use if not for Guix/Nix.
Emacs Orgmode