timeshift VS distribution-spec

Timeshift in linux mint doesn't have the requested features yet, but they are requested: https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift/issues/230 https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift/issues/199

In case you weren't aware:

Timeshift

> System restore tool for Linux. Creates filesystem snapshots using rsync+hardlinks, or BTRFS snapshots. Supports scheduled snapshots, multiple backup levels, and exclude filters. Snapshots can be restored while system is running or from Live CD/USB.

https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift

Timeshift

Timeshift is one example of a management utility with a GUI that allows you to do that. It comes preinstalled with Manjaro GNOME, at least when installed with btrfs, and saved me many times over the years.

Have you considered usibg something like timeshift?

that looks like it might be the same problem described here: https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift/issues/152

📷 NOTE 📷 Timeshift is now maintained by the Linux Mint project. Any feature requests, pull requests, or issues should be submitted to the Linux Mint repository.

use this todo backups https://github.com/linuxmint/timeshift

I don't mean "the flatpak package" (which, btw, I would not guarantee will remain and be well-maintained in the official repo as opposed to a PPA), I mean "flatpak builds of the flavor's internal packages" like settings and tweak tools. Imagine, for example, if Mint decided to follow suit and said that the only official way to install Timeshift was via snap. Sure, there would be unofficial builds--I myself have it installed from the AUR--but that comes with a certain expectation of additional jank.

Back in 2013, a little company called Docker made it really easy to start using containers to package up applications. A big key to their success was the OCI (you can learn about that here), an industry wide initiative to have standards around how we package up our applications. Because of OCI standards, we have hundreds (maybe thousands?) of tools that can be combined to manage and deploy applications. So why aren’t we using this for packaging up Notebooks and AI models as well? It would make deploying, sharing, and managing our models easier for everyone involved.

Kubernetes on the backend used to utilize docker for much of its container runtime solutions. One of the modular features of Kubernetes is the ability to utilize a Container Runtime Interface or CRI. The problem was that Docker didn't really meet the spec properly and they had to maintain a shim to translate properly. Instead users could utilize the popular containerd or cri-o runtimes. These follow the Open Container Initiative or OCI's guidelines on container formats.

OCI stands for Open Container Initiative, and its goal as an organization is to define a specification for container formats and runtime.

https://opencontainers.org/

Here is Containerfile from the repo: https://github.com/ublue-os/bazzite/blob/main/Containerfile

apko allows us to build OCI container images from .apk packages.

Flagger's load testing service can be installed via a Kustomization resource based on manifests packaged as an artifact in an Open Container Initiative (OCI) registry

CRI-O is a lightweight container runtime for Kubernetes. It is an implementation of Kubernetes CRI to use Open Container Initiative (OCI) compatible runtimes for running pods. It supports runc and Kata Containers as the container runtimes, but any OCI-compatible runtime can be integrated.

So somebody else created runj (runj is an experimental, proof-of-concept OCI-compatible runtime for FreeBSD jails.) https://github.com/samuelkarp/runj