I’ve heard of immutable OS’s like Fedora Silverblue. As far as I understand it, this means that “system files” are read-only, and that this is more secure.

What I struggle to understand is, what does that mean in practical terms? How does installing packages or configuring software work, if system files can’t be changed?

Another thing I don’t really understand is what the benefits as an end user? What kinds of things can I do (or can be done by malware or someone else) to my Arch system that couldn’t be done on an immutable system? I get that there’s a security benefit just in that malware can’t change system files – but that is achieved by proper permission management on traditional systems too.

And I understand the benefit of something declarative like NixOS or Guix, which are also immutable. But a lot of OS’s seem to be immutable but not purely declarative. I’m struggling to understand why that’s useful.

  • fruitywelsh
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Another argument for the each app has the library it needs model is that your system no longer is pinned to the least common denominator which means apps should be able update their packages faster without the concerns of other apps.

    You also have flatpak’s runtime concept which means you could force an app to try and run with a newer runtime.