"Odyssey holds a balance that's unique in the GNU/Linux landscape. It carries the essence of Void's purist Unix philosophy — its stable rolling-release model — and refines it into a ready-to-use experience, a verifiable chain of trust, and a coherent aesthetic. The first polished no-systemd distribution: optimized, customized, simple yet powerful, privacy- and security-oriented."

> Odyssey is Void with three extra packages

> This distribution is maintained by one person.

I'm sorry if this is too negative, but I give it less than 12 months before it's abandoned.

Maintaining a linux distro gets very boring after a while.

I understand what it is. I'm just wondering why.

The code is also not immediately available, which makes claims towards any chain of trust somewhat dubious.

And I'm not sure what purist really means in this context, and how a rolling release is - or even implies - inherently "pure" Unix. If systemd is the hill to die on, Void is active and supported.

Usually I default to encouragement; I don't mean to put any water on OP's fire, yet there's a whole lot of grand words in these essays. And really not a lot of explaining why any of this would make me switch from, for example, Arch, or that explain which problems are being solved.

high-volume, highly detailed writing with a confusing sense of grandiosity for something people haven't yet heard of. i'm sure it's great, but a lot of this smells like LLM.

Don't you want to make the letters even smaller? I almost get crossed eyes trying to read the features.

It's unlikely that someone who understands this well enough to see its value wouldn't be completely comfortable with a terminal interface.