• PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I thought we all agreed that “immutable” is a confusing term and that we should call it “atomic”

    edit: I was wrong

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        It means a change either applied completely and successfully, or not at all (think “atomic transactions” in databases).

      • priapus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Atomic in software refers to an operation that cant be interrupted because it happens in one step. This one of the big selling points of atomic or immutable distros. Your system will not be left in a broken state by cancelling an update because updates do not take multiple steps, unlike traditional distros.

      • Deckweiss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        How could you install anything or change any setting if it was truly immutable?

        Immutable OS makes sense in certain scenarios, but not in home computing.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Do a little research, dude… Do you think you’re the first person to hang those questions/issues? That’s all been addressed.

          I’ve been on an atomic/immutable distro for a few months now (Bazzite), and the experience has been great.

    • moonpiedumplings@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I disagree, because they are not the same thing.

      Immutable means read only root.

      Atomic means that updates are done in a snapshotted manner somehow. It usually means that if an update fails, your system is not in a half working state, but instead will be reverted to the last working state, and that updates are all or nothing.

      I create a btrfs snapshot before updates on my Arch Linux system. This is atomic, but not immutable.*

      There is also “image based” which distros like ublue (immutable, atomic) are, but Nixos (also immutable and atomic) are not.

      *only really before big updates tbh, but I know some people do configure snapshits before all updates.

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not all. Red Hat started this by naming their immutable distributions with “atomic” (but then not consistently…). Some people agreed, but not everyone.

    • Virkkunen@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      How is atomic less confusing? Immutable means that something doesn’t change, atomic means that it’s the size of an atom or has nuclear energy

      EDIT: I’ve learned that some people are overly pedantic about the meaning and practical use of the word “immutable”, so much so that they decided to create a bigger confusion by giving another word a completely different and exclusive meaning

      • priapus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Atomic in software refers to an operation that cannot be interrupted, like the updates in these distros. Immutable is a more confusing term, as it leads users to believe that cannot control parts of the system, when in reality these distros still have tools to do so.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s not semantics, they are two different things.

        And to your edit… Are you upset that there are two different words that mean two different things? I don’t understand.

        they decided to create a bigger confusion by giving another word a completely different and exclusive meaning

        Isn’t this just how words work…?

      • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Immutable does not mean “not changing”, but rather that you don’t have the rights to change. If you take the immutable option away, then its changing again, like when you update your system. People who have a problem with the term say, “see its not immutable, the term is a lie!”. Which I kind of agree, but somewhat conflicted.

        Atomic is an attempt to create a new “meaning” with a word, that cannot be misunderstood. Its trying to avoid the situation of “Free” in example. But I don’t like the term Atomic either, because it just suggest to me that everything is split into many little parts and is not self explanatory like Immutable. I’m conflicted here too.

        I’m always conflicted.

      • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        atomic has had a meaning for a very long time in IT, don’t pretend that it’s something made up bullshit. with this thinking we could just throw out the word mutable/immutable too, what is it my computer is radioactive and I’ll get cancer from it? of course not, because it has a different meaning with computers, and people in the know (not even just professionals because I’m not one) know it.

        atomic means that if multiple things would change, they will either change at once, or if the task failed none of it will change.
        sometimes these are called transactions, suse calls it transactional updates. but is that any better? now the complaint will be that suse must have transacted away all the money from your bank account!

        and distros are obviously not immutable, that’s just plainly misleading. we update them, someone does that daily. updating requires it to be mutable, to be modifiable.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Settings live in user space. Software exist in containers like AppImage, Flatpak or Distrobox. If something need deep system integration, they can be layered on top of the system in the user layer. Immutable does NOT mean less control. Just exerting control over the system in a different, usually more systematic, automatic and deterministic way.

          • Deckweiss@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Ah yes, the immutable OS, except for all of the various mutable parts.

            We should totally not call it anything less confusing.

            • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              It’s not confusing at all… How is this any more confusing than:

              Flatpak - they’re not literally flat…

              Snap - I’ve never seen or heard any evidence of something snapping by any definition of the word I’m aware of.

              Dolphin - what the fuck is this, no sea life whatsoever!

              Kate - this is a text editor, not a person.

              Distrobox - not in an actual box.

              etc.

              • Deckweiss@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                The main difference to your examples is that an “immutable OS” is in fact mutable, while none of your examples describe themselves with an adjective that is contradicting with their function/inner workings.

                Flatpak is a pretty good name, because it makes software flat in the sence that it avoids having a tall dependency tree.