Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
GNOME Operating Systems Ubuntu Linux

Vanilla OS: More Than Just Vanilla GNOME With Ubuntu (itsfoss.com) 39

Slashdot reader Soul_Predator writes: Vanilla OS is Ubuntu on stock GNOME, with on-demand immutability and package selection freedom. It is currently a beta project, with a stable release planned for the next month.
"The first-time setup process is a breeze to experience," writes It's FOSS News, applauding how it lets uses choose and enable Flatpak/Snap/AppImage.

Overall, a package manager that installs applications utilizing a container, getting the ability to choose your package managers, on-demand immutability, and vanilla GNOME make it seem like a good deal to keep an eye on... I'd say it is a project that I believe a lot of users will appreciate.

You can download the ISO by joining its Discord channel for now. The ISO is not yet publicly available to all. Take a look at its documentation if you are curious. However, as per the roadmap, they plan to have a release candidate soon enough.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Vanilla OS: More Than Just Vanilla GNOME With Ubuntu

Comments Filter:
  • by VeryFluffyBunny ( 5037285 ) on Saturday October 29, 2022 @04:50PM (#63009017)
    Seriously, how many do we need? What is there that one of the existing distros can't/doesn't do & that everyone needs & that this one does?
    • It seems not much:

      -To get a stock GNOME experience on top of Ubuntu. (Fedora is an excellent option too, but not for everyone!)
      -Allows you to choose and enable Flatpak/Snap/AppImage with its first-time setup after installation.
      -On-demand immutability, meaning you can make the system read-only to prevent critical changes from third-party applications and updates.
      -A new package manager (apx) allows you to install packages inside a managed container by default.

      That second point in particular illustrates

      • I'm trying to understand what this offers that Mint doesn't - really seems like "stock Gnome" is the only real difference. It does sound like this has a GUI that lets you enable Flatpak, Snap, and AppImage... but on Mint those only take a total of 1-2 simple commands typed in the terminal. I know it's 2022, but if you can't handle typing a few words at the command prompt, perhaps Linux isn't for you.

        • Exactly my question as well.

          The file system immutability sounds potentially useful/interesting, but besides that, what is there that would be a compelling reason for me to move away from Mint?

          I ask this question every time a new distro comes out but haven't really heard much that makes me think it'd be worthwhile to jump to a new distro.

          Mint has been working fine for me for years; I'd need something compelling or genuinely useful to make the decision to switch.

          And yes, enabling Flatpak, Snap, and AppImage s

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • I totally agree, it just seems like creating a new distro is the "nuclear option" for these features.
    • "Almost one thousand Linux distributions exist [references below]."
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      The LWN.net Linux Distribution List lists 278 (dead distributions are removed)
      "We do hope you will enjoy this celebration of Linux diversity, with distributions large and small, specialized and generalized, old and new."
      https://lwn.net/Distributions/ [lwn.net]

      DistroWatch lists 939
      https://distrowatch.com/search... [distrowatch.com]

    • by Anonymous Coward

      What we need is one distro that is flexible enough to handle this nonsense as a package, not as a new distribution. There is nothing wrong with having numerous different versions of Gnome or whatever, customize as you wish, what is wrong is having to exchange the whole rest of your distribution along with it. Most distribution just run into tons conflicts if you try to have two very similar, but different packages, like different flavors of Gnome. It's all just a colossal waste of everybody's time.

      For one t

    • Seriously, how many do we need? What is there that one of the existing distros can't/doesn't do & that everyone needs & that this one does?

      Ah, the nostalgia, it burns!

      "What do we need all these distros for? Aren't Slackware and Mandrake enough for anybody??"

    • Seriously, how many do we need?

      Apparently we don't have enough because people still get butthurt when they hear the words Gnome or Systemd acting as if different distros don't exist.

    • How many shoe companies do we need? How many flavors of ice cream? Why do you care?

      Someone has a hobby and wants to share their work with the world. I think it's great people can. You can easily ignore it, except when it appears on slashdot. Of course, this really is news for nerds so I guess there's always something to complain about here.
  • Yet another? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Saturday October 29, 2022 @04:51PM (#63009021) Homepage

    Eventually, it gets a bit silly.

    Ubuntu build on Debian, and provide such a stable basis that you get flavors like kubuntu and xubuntu. And now there are more and more distros that base themselves on Ubuntu.

    Honestly, it's a bit silly. If they actually have something useful and important to offer, more than "flavor if the day", they should go back to Debian, or even back to the kernel. X based on Y based on X? No thanks...

    • I mean, I use either the XFCE Fedora spin or Xubuntu, for all personal use. Some things are only available for Ubuntu, so Xubuntu is what I use. Others are built for Fedora, so Fedora is what I use (that is also my daily driver).

      But I totally get why people want thing X and thing Y. In this case, someone wants GNOME on Ubuntu. Why not just use Debian? Well, I am not sure, but whenever I want something built for Ubuntu (which is a ton of things), I know that .deb will work in my Xubuntu VM. I am totall

    • The great thing about being based on Ubuntu is that when they inevitably fold up shop, you just migrate to Ubuntu. Who still wants GNOME anyway?

    • they should go back to Debian

      Why stop there? If they do something important why shouldn't they go all the way back to Linux from scratch? I mean why arbitrarily draw the line at having someone else manage certain things? Either draw the line at the beginning and say you don't build on other people's work, or accept the fact that they get to choose whose work to build on.

      If they want to be more Ubuntu and less Debian why would you care?

    • They're building on the work of others (like libraries), which is what software developers do (if they're smart). Why would you prefer that they spend more time re-inventing the wheel?
  • by Computershack ( 1143409 ) on Saturday October 29, 2022 @05:14PM (#63009061)
    Chris Titus sums it up well in one of his recent videos....just how many more times do people think they need to re-invent the wheel? As he says in his video all these minor distros are just repackaging existing stuff and trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If you want to change your package manager you can, if you want vanilla Gnome you can install that.
    • ... all these minor distros are just repackaging existing stuff and trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

      Unless the problem is something like Ubuntu moving more toward *not* packaging things and using snaps (yuk) for more and more things and making it harder to use actual packages ...

  • by nagora ( 177841 ) on Saturday October 29, 2022 @05:17PM (#63009069)

    Security is hard enough without dozens of pre-packaged versions of every library lurking around in containers instead of using the system-wide versions.

    • Security is hard enough without dozens of pre-packaged versions of every library lurking around in containers instead of using the system-wide versions.

      Or in snaps, flatpaks, etc ...

    • Sadly, more and more software is set up to be this way, and the build process is irritating enough that you don't want to change it. I create a user account for each program which installs with Anaconda, and make it install to its own directory, e.g. Stable Diffusion. That way at least I have a way to remove it cleanly without it being a massive PITA, and can conveniently manage the permissions. Also, I sudo -su into it so I don't have to have the conda crap in my shell. Arguably you're even better off with

  • I find Gnome hostile. I stick with Mate - very usable.

    • Same here. Gnome 3 was a mistake. Mate is great.
    • All you have to know about Gnome to know that it is utter crap is that there is a key combination to modify the items on the panel that is completely undiscoverable.

      The idea that "UX designers" may know anything is undercut by the idea that I have to press "Meta" (or maybe "Super" plus "Alt") plus right mouse key to modify the panel [let's not even go to the question of where the "Super" key is on my keyboard] . Why? What's wrong with right mouse key alone? The fact that this is even a question is a massive

  • Yo, VIP
    Let's kick it
    Ice ice baby
    Ice ice baby
    All right stop
    Collaborate and listen
    Ice is back with a brand new invention
    Something grabs a hold of me tightly
    Flow like a harpoon daily and nightly
    Will it ever stop?
    Yo, I don't know
    Turn off the lights and I'll glow
    To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal
    Light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle

  • by big-giant-head ( 148077 ) on Saturday October 29, 2022 @05:38PM (#63009113)

    After going back to KDE I much prefer how it lets you customize the UI the way you want. With GNOME the options are limited and seem to get more limited with each new version. If I wanted a UI that someone shoved down my throat and told me to be happy with it or suck an egg then I would use Windows.

  • I had to learn what On-demand immutability is: you can make the system read-only to prevent critical changes from third-party applications and updates.
    Why would you want to do this? Is this in case you're installing some package you don't trust so you don't let it write to your filesystem?

    • "Why would you want to do this?"

      To stop windows users moving the contents of /usr/lib into the recycle-bin to save space.
  • What Windows feature doesn't it have that I can complain about?
    • What Windows feature doesn't it have that I can complain about?

      Forced updates, spying, logging into your own computer via Redmond, Edge for some things whether you want it or not - the list of these "deficiencies" goes on and on...

  • The UI on most Gnome apps is frustratingly wasteful. There is inevitably a ton of spacing between each element that chews up your screen real estate and gets in the way of your work or your page content. Every time I give it another try, I end up futzing with settings for hours just to get something usable but not quite as good as pretty much everything else.

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Working...