What’s the difference? No matter how hard I look, most of their websites just consist of them advertising that they are immutable.
What’s the difference? No matter how hard I look, most of their websites just consist of them advertising that they are immutable.
How would you fuck up your machine by installing packages? Hell, get a reasonable package manager and package installation frontend (and a reasonable brain between your ears if that’s the problem). I can’t see how anyone might get their machines into an useless or unbootable state considering that any useful package manager (even minimalist ones like aptitude or blank apt-get) will inform you what it’s going to install and unistall. If I see, that my choice is going to remove the complete DIE I am using plus X, or even GRUB, I lknow there’s something wrong with my selection and abort.
“Yes, do as I say”
A power outage during install.
Trying out experimental stuff.
Uninstalling critical packages.
Someone at $distribution fucked up packaging.
You could just as well ask why an immutable system must be immutable. The safeguards are not there for normal operation. They are supposed to help you with fatal irregularities.
…supposed you’re using a distro that isn’t broken, of course. You can’t drive a car that doesn’t start, either. You’re using an exception to prove the general case. That’s not a valid argument.
Why would you expect the general case to go wrong? Of course an error is the exception. Cars don’t have seatbelts and airbags for general driving operation. They are there for the exceptional case something goes wrong. Most people will never need them in theie life.
I don’t see how this contradicts my statement. You can’t make a general comparison between specimina of anything if one of your samples is broken.
What are you on about? You wanted to know what could go wrong during package install. I listed possibilities. You can’t just dismiss them as exceptional when the whole point of the snapshots is to guard against exceptional failures.