I don't really understand the exact problem that immutable distros solve. Seems like it's some vague "instability" in normal distros?
> An immutable Linux distribution has its core system locked as read-only. This ensures the base operating system remains untouched during normal use, protecting it from accidental changes, unauthorized modifications and corruption.
So, in other words, I'm using an immutable system already! (Windows 11)
The places where immutability is a benefit for most people are protecting against cases where the package manager gets confused and screws things up (as famously happened to Linus of LTT years ago when installing Steam on Mint rendered the system unbootable) and for the ability to cleanly roll back the system when an update does something like break video or networking drivers (surprisingly common with some hardware).
> as famously happened to Linus of LTT years ago when installing Steam on Mint rendered the system unbootable
The system booted fine! It just didn't have a graphical desktop environment installed anymore. But it was up and running, not crashing or anything like that! It was no more 'unbootable' for lacking a GUI than the server hosting this website is. :)
But yeah rollbacks are a great way to handle situations like that, so it's a great feature for a package manager to have.
> An immutable Linux distribution has its core system locked as read-only. This ensures the base operating system remains untouched during normal use, protecting it from accidental changes, unauthorized modifications and corruption.
So, in other words, I'm using an immutable system already! (Windows 11)