The Myth of Linux Distribution differences

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by vasa1, Apr 2, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    http://lggagnon.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/the-myth-of-linux-distribution-differences/

     
  2. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,697
    Those differences are huge. It's nothing laughable.
    Good luck changing apt for zypper or such like.
    Or deb-based to rpm-based system.

    Right ...

    Mrk
     
  3. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Well... it's all the same kernel (though various distros package it with different things) and generally the same layout/ file system. And like 90% of the distros I've seen are basically Debian/ essentially Ubuntu + a new UI/ setup.

    So yeah I'd say they're all basically the same under the hood - the thing is that they have wildly different UIs, package management, driver support, and generally just methods of use.
     
  4. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,331
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Just trying dropping a Kernel of the exact same version number from another distro onto you linux machine and see how "the same" things are.
     
  5. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    You can use the vanilla Linux kernel on any distro, you just might have to patch it up with relevant drivers.

    What are the big differences between distros besides package management and patching the kernel?
     
  6. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,331
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    By the time that vanilla kernel has been patched up, its not longer vanilla, no longer the same anymore.

    Off the top of my head, there are many subtle differences are: different init systems, run levels, default hardening flags, security frameworks such as selinux are on by default. Naming conventions (e.g. location of things such as logs files, networking interfaces), configuration tools and system management tools (e.g debian way of managing system deamons, adding and configuring them is very different to redhats), usage of root accounts, extended attributes on file systems and more ....

    They all lead to binary and packaging incompatibility.

    Thats ignoring all the management and policy side of things of how distros are configured, released, maintained such are release, patching, security policies.

    Cheers, Nick
     
  7. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    Gentoo is far different from Debian and so is Arch, they all are different. Debian maybe popular base due to its inherent packing design but now others like Slackware, Arch based Archbang and Chakra are catching up as well. All good for us as we the consumer get to enjoy the various flavors.
     
  8. Technical

    Technical Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Posts:
    471
    Location:
    Brazil
    I have "learned" some Linux when I've dived into Ubuntu.
    So I've got pretty used to .deb and not .rpm packaging and commands.
    I don't know if I'll "learn" another Linux will worth :)

    All the new distros that I've test now are Debian based.
     
  9. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    Give Chakra a try.
     
  10. x942

    x942 Guest

    +1 to that. Great distro!
     
  11. Technical

    Technical Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Posts:
    471
    Location:
    Brazil
    Well... I've started with KDE... But then I've got used to Gnome and newer desktops of Ubuntu.
    I'll give Chakra a try in Virtualbox.
     
  12. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    Please do and you will be pleasantly surprised.
     
  13. mack_guy911

    mack_guy911 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Posts:
    2,677
    whats problem with open suse and pclinux os althoe both are rpm base
     
  14. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,697
    Completely different systems. Just try. Grab any binary from /usr/bin from pclinuxos and try to copy it to opensuse and see what gives. To say nothing of different location of files, libs, dependencies, etc. Completely and totally unportable.
    Mrk
     
  15. mack_guy911

    mack_guy911 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Posts:
    2,677
    sorry i agree mrk LOOL

    i mean replay to @Technical :D

    my mistake ;)

    i mean to say that why not try open suse or pclinux os as distro they not bad to use


    not interchanging rpm or doing freakstein experiment :argh:
     
  16. Technical

    Technical Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2003
    Posts:
    471
    Location:
    Brazil
    I've tested Open Suse at least three times.
    The full DVD downloads of tons of Gb all finishes at the same... I cannot get used to the commands. As I use Linux very often, I'm used to Ubuntu commands. I already learned KDE and Gnome, now Unity... It's too much time just for fun. I won't test Open Suse for the 4th time :cool:
     
  17. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,785
    These are my 2 favorites at the moment, especially pclinuxos.
     
  18. Santos_L_Halper

    Santos_L_Halper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Posts:
    13
    My favorite right now is Calculate Linux (based on Gentoo). Far different from the Debian distributions I've used in the past.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.