TL;DR: It’s basically a WSL for Linux. Linux subsystem for Linux if you will.
It let’s you install and use pretty much any software ever written for Linux, including AUR packages and graphical apps, on any distro you want. You should all give it a try!

Distrobox is probably the best thing ever.
If bread existed in the Linux world, Distrobox would be the equivalent, or better than sliced bread.
It just solves many of the problems that plagued us in the past!

I’m just sick of answering so many comments or posts where people either

  • almost dislocate their joints in trying to get some software working on their distro, where it isn’t officially supported;
  • or choose/ leave a particular distro based on the amount of available packages, e.g. Arch.

**The answer is simple: use fucking containers. **

Before I turned into a weird “immutable distro”-user, I slapped every random install onto my host OS.
After all this shit building up over years, and cluttering my system, it turned against me. Repos not being available, packages conflicting, weird icons popping up, and more. It was a mess!

If one did that on a server, he would probably get slapped by the Selfhosted-community.
If there’s Docker, Podman and more, especially for servers, why don’t we use it for desktop too?

Some guy probably thought the same and made Distrobox.
You can just download BoxBuddy as Flatpak and/ or install it via package manager.
BoxBuddy is a graphical frontend, that helps you manage and use your containers. It’s pretty new tho and is still in heavy development.
Traditionally, Distrobox is CLI-only, but I can see that changing in the near future.

“Why not just use a VM?”

Those containers aren’t isolated and barely draw additional resources. Actually, they’re somewhat comparable to Flatpaks.
They provide themselves with their stuff they need, but aren’t virtualized. The main difference between Flatpaks and DB-containers for myself is that Flatpaks have permissions.

They can and will interact with your host. For example, if I plug in my phone, I can access it via ADB in my Arch container. Or my Nextcloud-client can open my browser and auto start on boot.

Who needs that?

Everyone. Well, maybe. Depends.

Image distros

Certainly users of image based (“immutable”) distros like Fedora Silverblue and other variants of this family, like uBlue (Bazzite, etc.).
While we actually could install every package from the Fedora repo traditionally on our host, this should be avoided.
Steam Deck users would benefit strongly too, since they can only use Flatpaks atm.

People who can’t get some packages with their distro

One of the main arguments, why so many users go or stay on Arch, is the AUR.

Often, they have a love-hate-relationship with it. It might break easily if you do something wrong, which is easily done for many users. At the same time, it gives them their niche software they need.

What if I told you, that you can enjoy this huge plus point for Arch on every other distro too, while benefiting from the comfort of your favourite distro?

You can even install an Ubuntu container and use Snaps there if you enjoy using them.

Developers

On the stock Fedora Silverblue, there’s Toolbx pre-installed, which does something very similar, but not as good. It’s a RedHead product.
On uBlue on the other hand, Distrobox is the default, which is better.

Toolbx’ main use case is programming. For devs working with different Python-versions for example and don’t wanna risk breaking their OS.

DB does the same, but more.

But why is it so powerful?

You can also export your software to your host.
E.g., the Flatpak version of Nextcloud didn’t work well for me. The Arch package on the other hand is less buggy and looks properly. It’s perfectly integrated in my system and I don’t notice it at all that it hasn’t been installed natively.

This even extends to DEs and TWMs! You could, for example, create an Arch container only for Hyprland, which you basically can’t install on other distros.
And then, you can use said example, or the beta-version of the new Plasma, on OpenSuse Leap.

On uBlue at least, all my containers update themselves too.

Another great thing is the modularity.
You can, for example, just delete the Arch container if it breaks randomly or due to user error, without worrying about losing access to your PC or having to troubleshoot for hours.

All in all, just try it. Trust me.

  • Display Name@lemmy.ml
    61·
    10 months ago
    • even if I’d go back to arch (or endeavouros) I’d install packages via distrobox. Just because I don’t want to mess with my base install anymore. If it is not important for the system, I don’t install it there.
    • atomic distro (the word immutable is outdated because it’s ambiguous)
    • on fedora silverblue you have to install distrobox manually because fedora wants to stick to their version of it (toolbox) although toolbox is not as feature rich for desktop usage than distrobox. Opensuse on the other hand uses distrobox (they also use the flatpak version of firefox)
    • you don’t need to distrohop anymore because of the package manager. You can use any prefered system and put a distrobox on top of it. This is amazing.
    • what’s the best image for distrobox? https://lemmy.ml/post/10368483 I’d say use whatever you want. If you’re on fedora, use fedora until you need a specific package that’s not available in their repo. If you are on opensuse, go for that, just for simplicity.
    • although I use distrobox and advocate for it. I am reading about the nix package manager. I’m not yet interested in nixos (maybe when snowflakeos is ready for prime time) but the pacmage manager is worth looking into. How does it compare to distrobox? What’s “better” for general packages?
    • Guenther_Amanita@feddit.deOP
      12·
      10 months ago

      I mentioned most all of your points already in my post, but still, thanks!

      what’s the best image for distrobox?

      I’d say Arch (btw). I was never a fan of it and couldn’t imagine installing it as desktop distro, but as container, it couldn’t be better imo. It’s minimal and customizable. I use zsh with many plugins, including the Arch one. I didn’t like pacman’s syntax, and with the plugin, it’s easier (´pacin package´ instead of ´sudo pacman -Ss package´). Pacman is super fast too, and installing stuff takes just seconds.

      It’s very up to date and most packages have worked pretty reliably actually!

      I am reading about the nix package manager

      I thought about it a while ago too, but I find it to be too complicated, outdated and just not relevant for me. For others, it might be wonderful, but I just didn’t have reasons to use it.