It's going to go poorly and probably break. That said, I don't enjoy these "lite distros" because as soon as you load YouTube in a browser, your system specs are cooked.
this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2024
24 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
1259 readers
93 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Point taken!
I don't think the lite distros are to blame for performance drops in that case, are they? Unless it's down to a lack of system optimisation.
No, they aren't to blame, but it makes "light" distros pointless.
Not really - there's plenty of use cases where running memory intensive stuff like that isn't an issue and running a small footprint distro makes more sense than, say, a maximalist, fully featured desktop distro.
I'm not trying to run a media centre or play games on my 11 year old MacBook!
The problem with package based distros (everything non-immutable) is, that a distro is very complex.
Even if you manage to "swap out" the package repositories, you usually still have a lot of remaining stuff in the background and many things tweaked by the maintainers. It's a huge mess.
In theory, you could absolutely do that, but to be honest, why bother? You already always should have a backup of all your personal data, so why not reinstall it cleanly?
Speaking of image based distros ("immutable"), the cool thing about most is that that you can easily swap out the underlying OS with just one command.
For example, you can always rebase from Fedora Silverblue to Kinoite to Bazzite to something with Hyprland and then back to vanilla Silverblue, without any traces.
So, for example, if the guy who makes your custom image on Github stops maintaining it, you can simply switch to something else in just seconds.
Maybe this is something relevant for you :)
Tiny vocab tip: “Non-immutable” is actually just called “mutable”.
Package based distro doesn't has any relation with immutability. NixOS and GuixSD are package based distro and they are immutable.
Sorry if my english is bad
Well, it's possible, but I don't think it's feasible... If you want another distro, it's easier if you format your pc with the distro you want
It may just be a pre-configured Debian in which case there will be nothing to convert or it may have several additional repositories in which case it will be easier to install the new one.
So if there's additional repositories does that mean that there is likely to be core functionality which would be broken if it stops being maintained?
Again it depends on what those repositories do.
EndeavourOS (Arch based) adds a repository which appears to be for their utilities, otherwise they use the Arch repositories. You could probably continue using it with minimal disruption although the utilities would be unmaintained.
Manjaro (also Arch based) uses its own mirrors of the Arch repositories and adds some of its own. If it vanished, it would quickly become out of date and full of security holes. A new install would be necessary.
In either case, I'd do a clean install of Arch because why give yourself the headache.
check the distro's changelist to find something like that since not all downstream distros are the same; some are more modified than others from their base.