Using Distrobox To Augment The Package Selection On Clear Linux, Other Distributions

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Using Distrobox To Augment The Package Selection On Clear Linux, Other Distributions

While our testing has consistently shown how Clear Linux can deliver leading performance on Intel/AMD x86_64 platforms, one of the user criticisms to that distribution has been around the limited selection of packaged software especially on the desktop side. But the rather interesting Distrobox can help address that by leveraging Podman or Docker to run other Linux distribution user-space software packages atop...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Distrobox-Clear-Linux

[Ribs]

This just feels like Flatpak/Snap/AppImage again.

I'm all for choice, but why exactly is the wheel be reinvented, yet again, here?

[89luca89]

This just feels like Flatpak/Snap/AppImage again.

I'm all for choice, but why exactly is the wheel be reinvented, yet again, here?

It's not really the same as Flatpak/Snap/AppImage
the initial intent of Distrobox (or Toolbox or pet containers in general) was to use docker/podman to create mutable environment on an immutable host (see Fedora Silverblue, Endless OS etc etc)
But that is not restricted only to immutable OSes, you can use it on whatever distro you like to run software from whatever other distro you like, including graphical applications.

For example mix and match stable release distrox with bleeding edge containers, like a Debian Stable host + Arch distrobox

Think of it similar to Bedrock Linux as a concept, but does not need a dedicated OS to work

[ssokolow]

This just feels like Flatpak/Snap/AppImage again.

I'm all for choice, but why exactly is the wheel be reinvented, yet again, here?

It's not wheel-reinvention. Flatpak, Snap, and Appimage are means for upstream to provide a single package that works anywhere.

Distrobox is a means for working around a lack of Flatpak, Snap, or Appimage releases by bringing package ecosystems from larger distros to smaller distros.

Basically, Flatpak is "We gave you two decades to fix this. Now we're solving it properly for you", while Distrobox is "That's nice, but solving it properly is still taking too long, so we're hacking together something to use in the mean time".

[Ribs]

I can't quite figure out if you've just rolled your face on your keyboard, or if it was your butt.

Thanks for reminding me why I very rarely bother to contribute to this toxic wasteland of a community.

I was just asking a question. I don't pretend to be an expert. I'm just a user, and I don't maintain a distro.

The other commenter was able to answer me in a mature and easy to understand way without resorting to insults. I learned something, he presumably enjoyed explaining it, and we went on our way. No harm done.

You, on the other hand, decide to throw out a childish insult, for seemingly no reason whatsoever. I have absolutely no idea why you felt the need to insult a stranger on the Internet today. I hope it increased your self esteem.

But in any case, congratulations: If your aim was to stop me posting here and to make this community a slightly smaller, you've succeeded. Bye.

[Ribs]

Nice try at pretending your message was aimed at asking a question

Nope. I was answering a question. I genuinely did not understand what problem this was solving and fel this was yet another "oh look, we'll have yet another way of installing software" and yet more fragmentation in the ecosystem.

The other commenter understood that. You (supposedly) did not.

Your immature and confrontational attitude was entirely unwarranted and is completely without any justification. As was your attempt at insulting me.

[birdie]

This just feels like Flatpak/Snap/AppImage again.

I'm all for choice, but why exactly is the wheel be reinvented, yet again, here?

This is what happens when you trample on and bury LSB and don't have anything resembling a platform in Linux. Each distro is basically a separate incompatible OS - not only that each version of each distro is a separate incompatible with everything else OS.

[Sonadow]

This is what happens when you trample on and bury LSB and don't have anything resembling a platform in Linux. Each distro is basically a separate incompatible OS - not only that each version of each distro is a separate incompatible with everything else OS.

They can't even agree on the filesystem hierarchy, you expect them to agree on anything else?

Gentoo still doesn't adopt the /usr merge by default.

Gentoo and Arch use /lib and lib32 to distinguish between 32bit and 64bit libraries on x64, RPM distributions use /lib and lib64 while Debian-based distributions use /lib/x86-64 and /lib/x86

[schmidtbag]

I kinda wonder why Distrobox hasn't been done years sooner. Things like Flatpak and Snap have their place, because they're a good way to guarantee results no matter what you use, but they also kinda defeat the purpose of using an optimized distro. I don't know exactly how tightly integrated Distrobox is, but at least it isn't causing more fragmentation in the Linux desktop, which has always been its #1 issue. Had Distrobox come out sooner, that may have been good enough to not need all these pre-packaged variants.

While forking and downstream changes aren't inherently bad, I would argue it's the one thing that holds back open source projects the most. I never saw open source as a code buffet, but rather, a way for people to collaborate toward a better project. Often, we're left with a slew of mediocre choices rather than just 1 or 2 especially refined ones. Case in point: the wide variety of ways to install software. It's such a basic feature and nobody gets it just right.

One of the things I like most about the BSDs is how almost every distro seems to have a distinct practical purpose/difference. It isn't just a bunch of variations saying "well here's what I think is the better way to go about X!" or "here's a flavor of <distro> that you could have easily put together using a script!". Granted, such BSD variations do exist, but there aren't a lot and it isn't really causing a problem.

[skeevy420]

They can't even agree on the filesystem hierarchy, you expect them to agree on anything else?

Gentoo still doesn't adopt the /usr merge by default.

Gentoo and Arch use /lib and lib32 to distinguish between 32bit and 64bit libraries on x64, RPM distributions use /lib and lib64 while Debian-based distributions use /lib/x86-64 and /lib/x86

/boot: LOL, they forgot to make /boot/efi

/srv: Why do I exist on desktops?

/tmp: Just shut up /srv. At least you're consistent. systemd likes to hide me at /var/tmp.

systemd:

/home: Yeah, sometimes I'm also at /var...

systemd: That's not on me, /home.

/opt: Couldn't I just be a symlink to /usr/local?

/usr: Piss off /opt, I have my own problems. Friggin tosser.

System32 and SysWOW64 have joined that chat.

System32: So are y'all on the C drive or the D drive?