The Myth of Linux Distribution differences

http://lggagnon.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/the-myth-of-linux-distribution-differences/

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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?

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

Give Chakra a try.

 

+1 to that. Great distro!

 

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.

 

Please do and you will be pleasantly surprised.

 

whats problem with open suse and pclinux os althoe both are rpm base

 

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

 

sorry i agree mrk LOOL

i mean replay to @Technical

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

 

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

 

These are my 2 favorites at the moment, especially pclinuxos.

 

My favorite right now is Calculate Linux (based on Gentoo). Far different from the Debian distributions I've used in the past.