5 ms·

Maybe this needs a separate thread but for a long time now, there have only really been 5 (or 6 depending on who you ask) upstream distros, Debian, Fedora/RH, G

by hd4 10y ago

Maybe this needs a separate thread but for a long time now, there have only really been 5 (or 6 depending on who you ask) upstream distros, Debian, Fedora/RH, Gentoo, Opensuse, Slackware, Ubuntu. I get the reason for offshoot distros to exist but I can't help thinking that a lot of the time it would just make more sense to publish a script to add packages/modify the default configuration, rather than Just-Another-New-And-Soon-To-Be-Discontinued Distro, it would probably be easier to maintain in the long run.

pttrsmrt 10y ago
This so much. The only time i see it making sense to release a full-blown distro is for marketing reasons or making a more unified aesthetic experience like for example Elementary (which certainly has its own issues, but that is another story) or for a very specific purpose like Kali or Tails. There are, however, a jungle of different software and solutions out there so sometimes I appreaciate a "curated" list of de facto software to test. Having to install a whole distro for that, virtually or otherwise, might be the definition of overkill. As always the problem is in the possibilities: The different systems (both distros and user installs) are so differently configured, that a script most certainly will mess it all up. The best solution I can see (at least for my use) is to expand the dotfile-approach to encompass applications and more advanced settings too. But I guess it has certain security a related issues?
- hd4 10y ago
  Even a distro-specific script would do the job in many cases. Elementary is a good example of where some kind of advanced script/package setup could possibly replicate what the developers have done. What you mention regarding extending the idea of dotfiles to encompass applications/settings is exactly what I'm hoping will start happening rather than this saturation of distros that don't necessarily bring a lot to the table. As for security issues, yes that's always going to be a concern when you add new packages, but no reason why there couldn't be some improved process in place to let users know when they are straying off the path.
pawadu 10y ago
So you want a standard way of creating packages for ALL linux distributions? No problem, we have that. In fact, we have 3 :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snappy_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snappy_(package_manager) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppImage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppImage
aargh_aargh 10y ago
And there's already a solution available for that: https://www.debian.org/blends/ https://www.debian.org/blends/ In essence: upload package/packages with what you need to your upstream distro and make a metapackage that includes them along with anything you need from the upstream distro. It's a win-win: Users can install anything from the usptream distro, not just what you can offer them in your tiny distro. Maintainers don't have to waste effort on maintaining a full-blown distro, they only maintain packages that customize the upstream distro towards the niche they care about.
vesak 10y ago
Arch Linux is a major one these days.

by hd4 10y ago

pttrsmrt 10y ago

This so much. The only time i see it making sense to release a full-blown distro is for marketing reasons or making a more unified aesthetic experience like for example Elementary (which certainly has its own issues, but that is another story) or for a very specific purpose like Kali or Tails. There are, however, a jungle of different software and solutions out there so sometimes I appreaciate a "curated" list of de facto software to test. Having to install a whole distro for that, virtually or otherwise, might be the definition of overkill. As always the problem is in the possibilities: The different systems (both distros and user installs) are so differently configured, that a script most certainly will mess it all up. The best solution I can see (at least for my use) is to expand the dotfile-approach to encompass applications and more advanced settings too. But I guess it has certain security a related issues?

hd4 10y ago
Even a distro-specific script would do the job in many cases. Elementary is a good example of where some kind of advanced script/package setup could possibly replicate what the developers have done. What you mention regarding extending the idea of dotfiles to encompass applications/settings is exactly what I'm hoping will start happening rather than this saturation of distros that don't necessarily bring a lot to the table. As for security issues, yes that's always going to be a concern when you add new packages, but no reason why there couldn't be some improved process in place to let users know when they are straying off the path.

pawadu 10y ago

So you want a standard way of creating packages for ALL linux distributions? No problem, we have that. In fact, we have 3 :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snappy_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snappy_(package_manager) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppImage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppImage

aargh_aargh 10y ago

And there's already a solution available for that: https://www.debian.org/blends/ https://www.debian.org/blends/ In essence: upload package/packages with what you need to your upstream distro and make a metapackage that includes them along with anything you need from the upstream distro. It's a win-win: Users can install anything from the usptream distro, not just what you can offer them in your tiny distro. Maintainers don't have to waste effort on maintaining a full-blown distro, they only maintain packages that customize the upstream distro towards the niche they care about.

vesak 10y ago

Arch Linux is a major one these days.