I’m not refering to any comment in particular, it’s just that it happens all the time that someone doesn’t know about that possibility.
I’m reading all the time stuff like “If you need this package, then the only option for you is Arch” or “I’m on Arch and can’t install this Fedora package, I have to compile it myself”, and so on.

Yeah, there are people mentioning it, but still, many many others have never heard about it, and I find that a bit sad.

With Nix you have to do everything the Nix way. If a package doesn’t work correctly or is missing you either have to dive deep into the Nix rabbit hole or wait till someone who knows stuff fixes your problem. With nix everything is all or nothing (even more so with NixOS).

Distrobox is the opposite, it embraces variety and gives you as many options/distro environments as it can. Once the missing container bugs are fixed you are dependent on no one to get your packages working.

Also, Nix is usually not the normal way devs package their software, so there always have to be people repackaging the stuff with nix (and updating when the source package changes).

Distrobox gives you access to the environment where the stuff is packaged already, a lot less work is needed to get working packages which should not be underestimated.

The more packages you install with nix the higher the probability you encounter packages no nix expert has cared for recently

lots of softwares are missing in nix. distrobox with AUR is the best and safest option

I’m leaning, tendentionally, more towards the tech enthusiastic normie side.

I don’t have experience in programming or professional working in IT in general. I just like Linux.

I used it for following stuff the last few months:

• Minor administrative tasks of my home server (ssh, etc.)
• Executing scripts
• Flashing CustomROMs onto my phones a few times
• Accessing/ modding the phone, e.g. debloating or ADB
• Exporting an application to desktop if the flatpak doesn’t work, e.g. Nextcloud client (Flatpak was unlegible due to Qt/GTK)
• Trying some nieche apps, especially from the AUR or in collaboration with a dev on GitHub
• and some more things

The only problems I encountered were probably due to my immutable host distro, for example because of missing folders. Many programs want to access/ change some binaries, which don’t exist, because they are behind /var/bin/…/ and not /bin/…/ for example.

When I used the normal Fedora on one device, and the Atomic on another, one program did work on the mutable (in a Debian container), while the one on Atomic (same container) gave me errors.

The “entire Linux distribution” is very small. It’s only like a few hundred MBs.
I have absolutely crappy internet, pretty much the worst in Europe to be precise, and it only took 30 seconds or so with 5 mb/s speed to download.

And you don’t install a new distro for every app, you do that for every task.

E.g., I have an Arch container for every CLI-related (installing custom ROMs on my phone, server administration, etc.) and one Ubuntu/ Fedora one for everything else if I need it.
The latter one is basically unused btw.

Yeah, I’m not sure what the hard-on is for containerization.

I think one main plus point is that it keeps your system less cluttered.

Even on a “traditional” distro (mutable, like Mint, Arch, etc.) I would try to install all my stuff as Flatpak or Distrobox container. Call me compulsive, but I like my stuff to be organized. In my apartment, I also use drawers and boxes, so why not digitally? Installing everything to the host is like cluttering my flat with spoons in my bed and the toothbrush in the kitchen. Sure, it’s not as easy as throwing everything on the floor, but at least I can find it again and it is less of a hassle to maintain it.

Thanks for the critique, it’s now edited.

I already put the link of BoxBuddy into my original post, but still thanks for the suggestion :)

link for the interested

I have to give a go to bedrock eventually, the concept sounds amazing 😄

Which is what distrobox does?

Yeah, I see it the same.
Both containers and native packages are a huge strength of Linux, compared to Windows for example.

I respect both types.
The one is more efficient (especially in terms of storage), the other one has other benefits. They have both their place.

As long as it’s Linux and gets you to your goal, they are all equally great.

@pl_woah @Guenther_Amanita I regard these all these things as nerd toys for exploring innovation …

I can make a post similar to this one here about image based distros if you want.

I think Fedora Atomic (Silverblue, Kinoite, Sericea, etc.) are the best choice atm.
It’s the oldest and most sophisticated one and gives you the most choice.
Take a look into universal-blue.org if you like ease of use, want more DEs/ WMs than the few official ones, or have special hardware (Nvidia, etc.).

NixOS isn’t immutable/ image based per definition, but even if it would, I personally would only recommend it to highly skilled people who have the time to work themselves into it. It has its benefits, but sounds like a lot of work and is very complicated due to lack of documentation.

OpenSuse Aeon is pretty new and doesn’t have a big dev team behind it, and therefore I wouldn’t trust it enough yet.

VanillaOS sounds also very promising, but is very immature atm and also has a small dev team.
It will be Debian-based very soon and wants to be a future-oriented Linux Mint alternative. Same philosophy (ease of use, stability, etc.), but different approach.
Sadly you are stuck to Gnome and can’t rebase to something else, which is a no-go for a DE-hopper like myself.
But I am very interested in its future and will try it some time.

About installing software:

• Choice #1 is Flatpak. It’s simple, usually just works and is for everything graphical. It covers 99,9% of everything you want and need.
• Choice #2: Distrobox and Nix, especially for CLI stuff. It’s a bit more complicated than just hitting the install-button in the software center, but if you need that stuff, you are already used to work in the console anyway.
• Choice #3: Direct install. I use Fedora Atomic as example here. You can still use your package manager (similar to dnf) and layer the packages. In practical use, it is the same as installing it traditionally, like with apt or dnf, but under the hood, you can imagine it like Gnome shell extensions. They can add, change or mask features the UI, but it’s still Gnome and one toggle away. OSTree-layered packages are still separated from the base, but work exactly as if they would be installed on bare metal.

So you never loose any functionality, only some things are a tiny bit more complicated and different. Once you got it, you don’t see it as impractical, but genius.

My solution is to create the distrobox with its home directory in a temporary subdirectory. Works pretty well!

I’m using Fedora Kinoite.

I mentioned most all of your points already in my post, but still, thanks!

what’s the best image for distrobox?

I’d say Arch (btw). I was never a fan of it and couldn’t imagine installing it as desktop distro, but as container, it couldn’t be better imo. It’s minimal and customizable. I use zsh with many plugins, including the Arch one. I didn’t like pacman’s syntax, and with the plugin, it’s easier (´pacin package´ instead of ´sudo pacman -Ss package´). Pacman is super fast too, and installing stuff takes just seconds.

It’s very up to date and most packages have worked pretty reliably actually!

I am reading about the nix package manager

I thought about it a while ago too, but I find it to be too complicated, outdated and just not relevant for me. For others, it might be wonderful, but I just didn’t have reasons to use it.