9 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 30.5 ms ] thread
For those that like the LLVM/musl/mimalloc choices of chimera, but also want signed commits, signed reviews, container-native design, full source bootstrapping, 100% deterministic builds, and multi-party-signed artifacts check out https://stagex.tools
Speaking of OpenZFS encryption, has there ever been any third party review of the source code? Or any testing of any kind of its effectiveness?
This seems interesting, but I've been using Alpine as a desktop distro wth ZFS for years now, it has native support and ZBM is available in the community repo. Not sure what advantages Chimera would add.
I've switched to Chimera from Alpine a few months ago. It's much nicer for desktop use. The service supervision is great, and many things that require some setup on Alpine just work out of the box. The packaging system is nicer too, though it does have less stuff already packaged.
Now this is WHY I love UNIX and UNIX-likes, the fact you can chop and change core components like the Kernel, Userspace, Init, etc. and (within compatibility limits i.e. MUSL/GLIBC) run a hybrid system like Chimera.

Would I run Chimera as a daily-drive? Probably not. Is it cool that someone can? Absolutely!

When I last looked a few years ago, there were some efforts and successes in the far East doing "chimera Windows", mostly based on running an older userland (like XP) on a newer kernel (10).
Very cool and interesting.. Just found out it was started by a previous Void Linux maintainer, Void linux is great as well!
I don't need politics on my desktop, so no to Chimera Linux.
if you want a stable chimera linux as a daily driver, go to voidlinux.org. chimera linux started as a void linux fork until it became it's own thing. they share the same dna. cbuild started as a xbps-src fork.