openSUSE MicroOS is based on btrfs snapshots, where you're booted into a readonly snapshot. Otherwise, it's quite close to Tumbleweed with btrfs. On Tumbleweed you can choose to keep the OS image clean and install apps and tools using flatpak and distrobox, and that gives you pretty much the identical experience to MicroOS.
I've been using read-only "system" for years. At first it was read-only root, but that got lots of pushback. Later, I found that most of the system could be mounted read-only, with exception of /etc and /var. (But the advent of /usr/etc is one thing that kinda breaks it.) VERY NICE to be able to swap out the "system" with an upgrade, much like what MicroOS sounds like.
I just submitted a provisioning request at my company for an LPAR on our IBM POWER 10 (MMA rich environment), where I intend to run Tumbleweed and Llama 3.1. However, this gets me thinking...
Opensuse Linux you could see as the community, that community then releases distros like opensuse leap, opensuse tumbleweed or opensuse micros for different purposes but sharing a common tooling and package base.
HD this installed and runningfor six months as plasma and gnome. Never showed any isues or failures. But reading the woke culture comments below, i may get rid for something that isnt so inclusive and woke... (If there is anything that isnt, that is!!!) Be safe, great channel....
While the word "transactional" is still technically correct, I feel like a certain US presidential candidate has made the word into something inherently dubious and misguided.
DJ. I've always loved your videos, but for some reason, since you grew the beard, we disagree more, lol. I used to wear one 50 years ago, so I'm not biased. Anyway, frivolity aside, let me ask you something. I am kind of radically progressive on some things (music, art, literature, politics), but very conservative on others (baseball, martinis, manners). When it comes to linux, which I've used since the mid nineties for reference, I am not happy whatsoever with the current trends. I do not like containers. I do not like immutable distros. I don't like martinis with names like "cotton candy" or "chocolate', but I digress. Seriously, I understand that linux (a nebulous term, since there is no overarching, no pun, academie de linux) is moving in those directions. Another thing I do not like is running little niche retro hanger-on distros. So my beloved OS is leaving me behind, at least according to trend lines. If it goes so far tits-up as to alienate me, is there any operating system to provide me succor and refuge. I won't use Windows or Mac on principle. But my computer must also work for my wife, a teacher, who is not as technically inclined as you, or even as I. I do not think Haiku is ripe enough in terms of applications and such. I think the BSD family may be too much "where linux was ten or fifteen years past". I am going to be the digital analogue to "the man without a country", from the old story we read in school half a century plus ago? Do you have any hints of prevailing winds bringing the scent of some OS which would capture the older precepts and concepts of linux, without the baggage (my opinion) of the improvements that are not improvements to me, like the aforementioned containers and immutables? Those things seem to be developer directed improvements. I suppose what I want is a consumer oriented linux, or other OS, that is not absorbed in the fascist malfeasances, misfeasances, and non-feasances of Windows or Apple Macintosh I see nothing that remotely resembles what I hope to retain, regain, or attain. I wonder with your expertise and breadth and depth of lore, have you any hope to offer me?
Both Debian and Arch Linux fit your description, as does opensuse leap, or Fedora workstation. I kinda come from the opposite direction, I have complained for years that Linux distributions have been too similar. Frankly most distributions have felt utterly pointless as they added little from their root distro besides some new wallpapers and maybe a configuration GUI for installing drivers. The immutables and container based distros are *finally* bringing some fresh ideas to Linux and offering choices that actually matter. Ofc they are not for everyone, they are different and serve a different purpose compared to what we had. But that’s fine, we can have both.
@@sebastianbauer4768 Thank you for this thoughtful and cogent reply. I have not found a majority of the linux "community", which I call the linux "cult", to be tremendously courtly, but I believe Mr. Ware's audience is an oasis of an exception. Kindly allow me to interact with some of your comments here. Thank you. You are indubitably correct to adduce debian and arch as distros fitting my preferences. In fact, I have run mostly debian for decades now, quite happily (I also run many distros in VM's, and find arch to be most interesting, with many admirable features, but equally, a bit to "brittle" for my personal wants and needs) I love your points about most distros being simply redecorated, or slightly rejiggered, versions of one another, with too little in depth differences. Your model of a world in which the plethora of distros we have reflect real and fascinating and useful differences is quite an excellent goal, and I second your thinking on this. There is however a bit of a spanner in the works, at least in potentia, to which I will address my worries below. I favour so-called community distros such as the aforementioned arch and debian over the corporate backed, based, or affiliated distros because of my mistrust of corporate decisions. Whether malign or benign, in fact. I feel at the mercy, so to say, of, randomly, Red Hat, Suse, Canonical, and etc. if using a corporate distro, even excellent ones which do quite exist. It is nearly redundant to cite the recent CentOS "debacle" as an example. Or Canonical's increasingly fascist (my word, original definition from the 1937-8 Italian encyclopedia, which definition was penned by none other than Benito Mussolini, amusingly) behaviours in regards to snaps, etc. So, what's my problem. Shut up and use arch or debian or lmde or etc. Well, if you project to the long term, as our wonderful host D.J. often does, my worries arise. Surely arch and debian can stay independent (and of course, even their boards could make decisions I misliked, though I'd have a chance to participate in those if I chose, one supposes), but I don't see that as the threat. Rather, I fear that the distros which pay, the corporate backed distros, will attract too many of the best developers, engineers, designers, and etc., leaving debian and arch and other independent distros with a reduced talent pool from which to select their creators. So if you projected a little matrix or tensor of factors, you might discover an alarming, if not acute, downward arc or trend. And this is not only about personnel. If all the major corporate distros choose one method to do a thing, it is much harder for the indy distros to develop and keep current with now requisite libraries, as we see in the increasing number of applications requiring the presence of systemd libraries, even if not using it (and kudos to MX Linux for shipping with the libraries active, but not the systemd itself, unless we want it to be-- full disclosure, I happen to like systemd, I only use it as a well known and slightly controversial example here). So this little "essay" is hardly meant to refute your comments. I associate myself with them, in fact. It is rather intended to demonstrate some of what worries me in terms of the hegemony of the capitalist corporations. I do not want what Robert E. Howard and Roy Thomas used to call "sheer weight of numbers" to allow the burgeoning immutables or containerized distros to marginalize the more traditional distros I favour to the point where they become deprecated, limited, or even obsolete. That is the crux of my concerns herein.
I like OpenSUSE Tumbleweed (modulo such things as SystemD). If you're looking for an alternative, FreeBSD is very strong, built for security, and nicely runs XFCE. I'm also hearing good things about OpenBSD and NetBSD, but no time to try those. Apple's OS is excellent, but I cannot go there because their ecosystem is highly captive. I've had a beard, but now only a gotee. Not fond of martinis, but a good Kentucky bourbon mixed with a quality ginger ale works great.
I no longer support opensuse since they went woke, Lars Marowsky-Breea high level opensuse employee said he's quite happy not to welcome anyone who is offended by rainbow colors, board member Atilla Pinter called those people toxic individuals, board member Gertjan Lettink called those people rotten flesh and that they should be banned, Richard Brown agreed that rotton flesh is a perfectly apt description, and apparently they've banned conservative individuals from participating in the opensuse project.
I don't contribute or finance projects that have been infiltrated and hijacked by the looney tunes. I will use stuff like nodeJS or Rust, but prefer the libre forks or alternatives to those projects with sane maintainers. But yes, if you have dependencies on code maintained by completely mad organizations, you're asking for trouble. Be ready to freeze those dependencies and maintain them yourself.
Sorry for the wind noise, its 104 F here today
@@CyberGizmo Audio is still very good. :)
Its covered by my own clicky keyboard, and room fans working on full blast. The audio is good. Cheers!
104, but still has the beard🙄 I thought you would shave it off once it got warmer?🤔
40C for the metric non-US world - just a bit warm LOL
openSUSE MicroOS is based on btrfs snapshots, where you're booted into a readonly snapshot. Otherwise, it's quite close to Tumbleweed with btrfs. On Tumbleweed you can choose to keep the OS image clean and install apps and tools using flatpak and distrobox, and that gives you pretty much the identical experience to MicroOS.
I've been using read-only "system" for years.
At first it was read-only root, but that got lots of pushback.
Later, I found that most of the system could be mounted read-only, with exception of /etc and /var.
(But the advent of /usr/etc is one thing that kinda breaks it.)
VERY NICE to be able to swap out the "system" with an upgrade, much like what MicroOS sounds like.
As always thanks DJ👍
what an amazing knowledge of software
Hello, my favorite RUclipsr!
You are too kind, Sir!
I was searching for reasons to try new distros, this helps me very much, I gotta try this now lol. Cheers!
Very good video! 🫡👍
Thank you, Santa 🎅
welcome
I just submitted a provisioning request at my company for an LPAR on our IBM POWER 10 (MMA rich environment), where I intend to run Tumbleweed and Llama 3.1. However, this gets me thinking...
Is Leap Micro 6/0 similar to Fedora CoreOS?.
I ask this because unlike MicroOS you cannot install a desktop environment like KDE or Gnome.
Sir Ware, since when are you on Xen?
Similar concept to CoreOS/Container Linux?
yeah I think so. I am going to delve into the combustion/ignition and see if its easier to build out a series of systems with
What's the difference between Open Suse Micro OS and Open Suse Linux?
@@jakobw135 micro os is immutable like atomic fedora vs normal fedora.
Opensuse Linux you could see as the community, that community then releases distros like opensuse leap, opensuse tumbleweed or opensuse micros for different purposes but sharing a common tooling and package base.
HD this installed and runningfor six months as plasma and gnome. Never showed any isues or failures. But reading the woke culture comments below, i may get rid for something that isnt so inclusive and woke...
(If there is anything that isnt, that is!!!)
Be safe, great channel....
While the word "transactional" is still technically correct, I feel like a certain US presidential candidate has made the word into something inherently dubious and misguided.
7:23
DJ. I've always loved your videos, but for some reason, since you grew the beard, we disagree more, lol. I used to wear one 50 years ago, so I'm not biased. Anyway, frivolity aside, let me ask you something. I am kind of radically progressive on some things (music, art, literature, politics), but very conservative on others (baseball, martinis, manners). When it comes to linux, which I've used since the mid nineties for reference, I am not happy whatsoever with the current trends. I do not like containers. I do not like immutable distros. I don't like martinis with names like "cotton candy" or "chocolate', but I digress. Seriously, I understand that linux (a nebulous term, since there is no overarching, no pun, academie de linux) is moving in those directions. Another thing I do not like is running little niche retro hanger-on distros. So my beloved OS is leaving me behind, at least according to trend lines. If it goes so far tits-up as to alienate me, is there any operating system to provide me succor and refuge. I won't use Windows or Mac on principle. But my computer must also work for my wife, a teacher, who is not as technically inclined as you, or even as I. I do not think Haiku is ripe enough in terms of applications and such. I think the BSD family may be too much "where linux was ten or fifteen years past". I am going to be the digital analogue to "the man without a country", from the old story we read in school half a century plus ago? Do you have any hints of prevailing winds bringing the scent of some OS which would capture the older precepts and concepts of linux, without the baggage (my opinion) of the improvements that are not improvements to me, like the aforementioned containers and immutables? Those things seem to be developer directed improvements. I suppose what I want is a consumer oriented linux, or other OS, that is not absorbed in the fascist malfeasances, misfeasances, and non-feasances of Windows or Apple Macintosh I see nothing that remotely resembles what I hope to retain, regain, or attain. I wonder with your expertise and breadth and depth of lore, have you any hope to offer me?
Just go with Slackware?
Yeah I have to do some digging into this...sounds like a good video to make too
Both Debian and Arch Linux fit your description, as does opensuse leap, or Fedora workstation. I kinda come from the opposite direction, I have complained for years that Linux distributions have been too similar. Frankly most distributions have felt utterly pointless as they added little from their root distro besides some new wallpapers and maybe a configuration GUI for installing drivers.
The immutables and container based distros are *finally* bringing some fresh ideas to Linux and offering choices that actually matter. Ofc they are not for everyone, they are different and serve a different purpose compared to what we had. But that’s fine, we can have both.
@@sebastianbauer4768 Thank you for this thoughtful and cogent reply. I have not found a majority of the linux "community", which I call the linux "cult", to be tremendously courtly, but I believe Mr. Ware's audience is an oasis of an exception. Kindly allow me to interact with some of your comments here. Thank you.
You are indubitably correct to adduce debian and arch as distros fitting my preferences. In fact, I have run mostly debian for decades now, quite happily (I also run many distros in VM's, and find arch to be most interesting, with many admirable features, but equally, a bit to "brittle" for my personal wants and needs)
I love your points about most distros being simply redecorated, or slightly rejiggered, versions of one another, with too little in depth differences. Your model of a world in which the plethora of distros we have reflect real and fascinating and useful differences is quite an excellent goal, and I second your thinking on this. There is however a bit of a spanner in the works, at least in potentia, to which I will address my worries below.
I favour so-called community distros such as the aforementioned arch and debian over the corporate backed, based, or affiliated distros because of my mistrust of corporate decisions. Whether malign or benign, in fact. I feel at the mercy, so to say, of, randomly, Red Hat, Suse, Canonical, and etc. if using a corporate distro, even excellent ones which do quite exist. It is nearly redundant to cite the recent CentOS "debacle" as an example. Or Canonical's increasingly fascist (my word, original definition from the 1937-8 Italian encyclopedia, which definition was penned by none other than Benito Mussolini, amusingly) behaviours in regards to snaps, etc.
So, what's my problem. Shut up and use arch or debian or lmde or etc. Well, if you project to the long term, as our wonderful host D.J. often does, my worries arise. Surely arch and debian can stay independent (and of course, even their boards could make decisions I misliked, though I'd have a chance to participate in those if I chose, one supposes), but I don't see that as the threat. Rather, I fear that the distros which pay, the corporate backed distros, will attract too many of the best developers, engineers, designers, and etc., leaving debian and arch and other independent distros with a reduced talent pool from which to select their creators. So if you projected a little matrix or tensor of factors, you might discover an alarming, if not acute, downward arc or trend. And this is not only about personnel. If all the major corporate distros choose one method to do a thing, it is much harder for the indy distros to develop and keep current with now requisite libraries, as we see in the increasing number of applications requiring the presence of systemd libraries, even if not using it (and kudos to MX Linux for shipping with the libraries active, but not the systemd itself, unless we want it to be--
full disclosure, I happen to like systemd, I only use it as a well known and slightly controversial example here).
So this little "essay" is hardly meant to refute your comments. I associate myself with them, in fact. It is rather intended to demonstrate some of what worries me in terms of the hegemony of the capitalist corporations. I do not want what Robert E. Howard and Roy Thomas used to call "sheer weight of numbers" to allow the burgeoning immutables or containerized distros to marginalize the more traditional distros I favour to the point where they become deprecated, limited, or even obsolete. That is the crux of my concerns herein.
I like OpenSUSE Tumbleweed (modulo such things as SystemD).
If you're looking for an alternative, FreeBSD is very strong, built for security, and nicely runs XFCE.
I'm also hearing good things about OpenBSD and NetBSD, but no time to try those.
Apple's OS is excellent, but I cannot go there because their ecosystem is highly captive.
I've had a beard, but now only a gotee.
Not fond of martinis, but a good Kentucky bourbon mixed with a quality ginger ale works great.
I no longer support opensuse since they went woke, Lars Marowsky-Breea high level opensuse employee said he's quite happy not to welcome anyone who is offended by rainbow colors, board member Atilla Pinter called those people toxic individuals, board member Gertjan Lettink called those people rotten flesh and that they should be banned, Richard Brown agreed that rotton flesh is a perfectly apt description, and apparently they've banned conservative individuals from participating in the opensuse project.
So sad, @benjy288.
@@CyberGizmo Unsubbed. Thanks.
I don't contribute or finance projects that have been infiltrated and hijacked by the looney tunes. I will use stuff like nodeJS or Rust, but prefer the libre forks or alternatives to those projects with sane maintainers.
But yes, if you have dependencies on code maintained by completely mad organizations, you're asking for trouble. Be ready to freeze those dependencies and maintain them yourself.
@@PaulSpades I recently switch from nixos to arch for the same reason.
Your poor conservative fee fees. Buck up butter cup!
Too many distros - yet another one, unneeded, unwanted, whocared.