[myWindoonn]

It's pretty cool that this can host other distros, but is that the only advantage over NixOS? I don't know if I would enjoy crossing distro boundaries constantly just for a small handful of desired packages, and I'm not sure what other use cases this might have.

Does anybody have experience deploying Bedrock in production? What are some pros and cons?

[ParadigmComplex]

> It's pretty cool that this can host other distros, but is that the only advantage over NixOS?

The ability to transparently get features from other distros is Bedrock Linux's defining characteristic. It's not trying to do anything more than that.

Ideally the contrast wouldn't be Bedrock _or_ NixOS, but rather NixOS alone or Bedrock with NixOS. Bedrock's goal of getting features from other distros includes distros like NixOS. Sadly, there's still R&D work to be done there: while Bedrock supports a large number of distros, NixOS isn't yet one of them.

> I don't know if I would enjoy crossing distro boundaries constantly just for a small handful of desired packages, and I'm not sure what other use cases this might have.

I think trying to find use cases other than getting features from multiple distros is driving you in the wrong direction for modelling Bedrock. Most Linux users - quite likely including yourself - are happy with what one distro provides them. Others, however, find it limiting. Bedrock targets the latter group. Try thinking of scenarios where a user has competing pressures for different distros:

- A user may require RHEL for work, but miss the large package selection offered by Debian.

- A user may like Void Linux's init, but miss Arch's AUR.

- A user may like Gentoo's ability to customize packages, but only want to compile about half the system.

> Does anybody have experience deploying Bedrock in production? What are some pros and cons?

You might be looking for these FAQ entries [0] [1].

[0] https://bedrocklinux.org/faq.html#why-use-bedrock [1] https://bedrocklinux.org/faq.html#why-not-use-bedrock

[myWindoonn]

Sure. But if the choice is NixOS alone or NixOS hosted by Bedrock, then NixOS has a pile of advantages which Bedrock would nullify, chief among them being the ability to atomically upgrade and rollback the entire userland, service configuration, and kernel. These are non-trivial goals of NixOS.

[ParadigmComplex]

It is not clear to me why you feel this way. Everyone I've spoken with who has put effort toward making Bedrock play nicely NixOS has done so with the aim of retaining that list of NixOS's strengths in the NixOS slice of the system. Let Bedrock proper fade to the background: for a user who is NixOS-oriented, such a system could be NixOS, with all of NixOS's strengths, with the ability to add or swap out (non-atomic upgrade/rollback) parts from other distros.

[myWindoonn]

I feel this way chiefly because I actually do use the features of NixOS to atomically rollback entire machines in production, and to atomically upgrade my development workstation. Having to manage an additional piece which is beyond Nix, whether that's EFI configuration or virtualization or Bedrock, is acceptable but very irritating.

[ParadigmComplex]

Apologies, I misinterpreted your concern to be a matter of losing the entirety of Nix's atomic features entirely rather than concern over even limited escapes from its Nix's scope. In this case it does sound like Bedrock's trade-offs won't be worthwhile for you even in the hypothetical future where it plays nicely with NixOS but retains the non-atomic nature of components from other distros.

[karlmdavis]

I’m considering proposing this just to watch my security friends’ heads explode.