bsergay

I’ll be back the moment Wayland works better.

You mentioned in a comment that you used Arch, Debian and EndeavourOS. Though, historically, Wayland has been adopted first on Fedora. Therefore, I wonder if underutilizing Fedora (and/or derivatives like Bazzite/Nobara) might have been the main culprit in this case.

Been trying for days to install Private Internet Access’s client in a custom Bazzite image, but it’s slow-going to troubleshoot each failure to build, and I feel like I’m fighting GitHub more than the install script.

Have you contacted the Discord servers for Bazzite/uBlue and/or BlueBuild in hopes of resolving the issue?

They're cool and very much willing to help out. They solved my issues a bunch of times with my own custom image. Perhaps, they are even capable of offering a solution to resolve the problem without requiring a custom image.

Wish ya good luck!

Thank you so much for correcting me! I'll edit my earlier post to reflect this! Your work on Bazzite is much appreciated! Thank you!

Thanks for the clarification! We actually run very similar systems; I'm on the hardened Bluefin-dx image as per secureblue.

~~Regarding Steam, Bazzite -one of Bluefin's uBlue siblings- actually switched over to RPM Fusion's Steam due to issues with the Flatpak.~~ EDIT: The former is false. The Deck images have always been on RPM Steam. Only the Desktop images moved to RPM Steam (from Distrobox-Arch) for support consistency reasons. Appreciation goes out to quarterlife@lemmy.sdf.org for correcting me!

I don't know what exactly is the way to go for you. But I can suggest the following possibilities (from own experience):

• Install RPM Fusion's Steam through layering with rpm-ostree.
• Use Steam bundled with Bazzite- Arch; this is what Bazzite used to use in the past.
• Or (very unconventional) use the Steam bundled with Conty.

Is this on one of Fedora's images or on one of uBlue's images? Regardless, could you specify what exactly we're dealing with?

I don't know how old your father is or what they do on their systems. However, for elderly people, for which I just want to setup the system and forget, I tend to go with Endless OS. It's more limited and more mature than Vanilla OS. But, if that's exactly what you want, I'm simply unaware of anything better out there.

And yet they did so using the package manager.

So, Davinci Resolve's .run file used for installation definitely somehow interacted with the package manager. Otherwise, the system wouldn't break the way it did. While, technically the package manager was in use (at least at some point), the user -i.e. OP- did not intentionally invoke its use consciously. So, I wouldn't refer to this as "using the package manager".

They just installed a apt.source

What is an apt.source? Search engines and LLMs failed at resolving this. They did explain what apt source is or could refer to, though*. Regardless, what leads you to understand that they've installed an apt.source? Please be elaborate as I'm not a Debian/Ubuntu user; consider shedding light on it through the RPM world.

THAT I would say one should not do unless one really knows what they are doing.

How does one know which apt.source they should and should not install? Doesn't this imply "expert skills" (using my understanding of your logic)? On Windows, you can install software with almost no fear; as long as the source is trusted.

If they had just installed some .appimage

Assuming they've installed libfuse2. Which actually is not present in modern Ubuntu installations.

or compiled something from source they would have been fine.

So, in this case, you believe that compiling a gargantuan program like Davinci Resolve would not have caused a ton of issues related to dependencies even if it was supported on Ubuntu?

So... I'm not going to nuance your stance if it shouldn't be nuanced.

I thought that my writing was sufficiently easy to comprehend and would not lead to any misunderstandings. Therefore, within that context, nuance was not needed. However, your engagement in the conversation implies that some actually did misunderstand it. Thus, nuance was (seemingly) needed and I only became aware of it afterwards.

It's a bit up to you to be clear about your nuance. And in this case you're being very ambiguous about it.

My stance is pretty simple:

• Use whatever is provided, intended and supported by the 'distro'.
• For that which goes beyond this, you're on your own and should be prepared to face the consequences.

So, if one can't deal with the consequences, like how OP had to come here for help, then one should stick to the first point.

It just had its first Stable release (as Vanilla OS 2). Therefore, consider to wait it out a bit until it has been well-tested at large. Until then, please feel free to choose something else that is to your liking. Like, what is it that attracted you to this one in the first place?

Very curious. I didn't know this. I tried verifying this, but didn't manage to do so.

So, I got to ask; Was this just a joke? Or is there (some) truth to this claim?

I infact did not 100% know what I was doing obviously lol despite having complete confidence that I did

I know that feeling very well 🤣. I'm glad to hear that you were able to recover your system; at least this mistake only came at the cost of your time and not your system.

Have a good one 😉!

Lacking features

It's important to mention that the specific way by which 'immutability' and all of its associations are implemented, is key to determine what possible limitations are. Perhaps to gain a better grasp on this, consider reading this blog post. Note that due to the (very) active development 'immutable' distros enjoy, not everything found within that article is accurate.

and having to take weird extra steps to get what I want and tweak the system the way I want.

~~Does uninstalling snapd on Kubuntu fall under this?~~ Jokes aside, the way that 'immutable' distros want you to do stuff is simply unconventional compared to traditional distros. Heck, even the need to (soft-)reboot to apply changes to the base system is almost unheard of on traditional distros. However, unconventional does not necessarily imply weird. Care to elaborate when something goes from unconventional to weird?

I’m a bit of a power user and I’m wondering if a immutable distro could work for me over a regular one.

It depends on your priorities. There's a 'cost' that comes with going 'immutable'; mostly related to how it's still relatively immature and/or unpopular. However, even in this state, there are problems it solves and tackles that traditional distros don't.

Regarding 'being a power user', like what's even the wildest thing you'd want to do?

Thanks for the reply and thanks for sharing your experiences!