5 ms·

Are you claiming that there is not enough evidence of Debian being a major Linux distribution, whose developers should be informed of major security bugs before

• kbenson 8y ago
  > Are you claiming that there is not enough evidence of Debian being a major Linux distribution, whose developers should be informed of major security bugs before they become public? I'm claiming that Debian's wording was somewhat weird, and that they aren't necessarily as large as it makes them sound. Additionally I'l claiming that the nature of Debian itself may make it harder to get them vetted for access (I suspect the kernel developers that got access are employed to work on the kernel by large companies, a fairly common scenario for Google and Redhat for example, which is another point for including them). Also, I'm stating that public numbers got operating system by website is a very poor metric, which I'll cover below. > There is no other way to measure and compare the popularity of open-source operating systems. Any search for "operating systems market share" shows Debian only seriously behind Ubuntu, and close to CentOS[1][2]. Just because only some numbers are available does not mean they are worth using. For example, in the SimilarTech link you provided[1], you might notice that the operating systems usage percentages shown for the top 1k sites add up to less than 5%. For the "entire internet" statistics it's just over 1.5%. I interpret this as the vast majority of sites having no discernible data as to what operating system they run (for their testing criteria, at least). I suspect it's really a measure of servers started that have the default HTTP server running with a landing page saying "Thanks for installing CentOS" or has some poorly configured protocol with an OS identifier in it (which has been deemed poor security for quite a while, which might explain ancient Unix systems having a large showing...). For the Datanyze stats[2], the total websites shown add up to just over 2.1 million. What we don't know, since I can't find any info on their methodology, is whether they suffer from the same problem I suspect SimilarTech does, in that they are reporting vastly biased data because they can only determine the OS of a small subset of the total sample. Additionally, this doesn't count desktop installs. Google alone likely has over 20k developers[3], and the default desktop for them is Goobuntu (a Google variant of Ubuntu). While I expect Windows and OS X to have a large share of that market overall, the relative number of desktops compared to servers means that it may affect the numbers greatly. There is actually a way to semi-accurately measure operating system usage, at least for operating systems that use default update mirror-lists and auto-update (most linux distros, to my knowledge) randomly (or using some specific leveling algorithm) spread requests along the mirrors, if you could get stats on actual downloads of a core package that had a security update within the last 6 months to a year (preferably daily or months stats) for a few mirrors, you could statistically derive a lot of information are active installs. You'll miss people that auto-install with special configurations that point to internal mirrors (common in some business settings), but you might get within 10% of a real number for a distribution. > Do you also question the popularity of Ubuntu and CentOS? I question any number presented by these sites. I have plenty of anecdotal evidence to suspect they are popular. If I did not have even that anecdotal evidence, I wouldn't assume to know much from the data we have seen so far. 1: https://www.similartech.com/categories/operating-system https://www.similartech.com/categories/operating-system 2: https://www.datanyze.com/market-share/operating-systems https://www.datanyze.com/market-share/operating-systems 3: https://www.quora.com/How-many-software-engineers-does-Google-have https://www.quora.com/How-many-software-engineers-does-Googl...
  • krn 8y ago
    > I'm claiming that Debian's wording was somewhat weird, and that they aren't necessarily as large as it makes them sound. In fact, it was not Debian's wording, but Greg Kroah-Hartman's, who is currently responsible for the Linux kernel -stable branch, and who has previously worked for SUSE, where he initiated the development of openSUSE Tumbleweed[1]. So, he is in no way associated with Debian, and is one the most important employees of the Linux Foundation. > Additionally, this doesn't count desktop installs. Google alone likely has over 20k developers[3], and the default desktop for them is Goobuntu (a Google variant of Ubuntu). Interestingly, Google ditched Ubuntu for Debian in January 2018[2], which means, that the entire Google internal engineering environment is now based on Debian. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Kroah-Hartman [2] https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3024623/google-ditches-ubuntu-for-debian-from-internal-engineering-environment https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/3024623/google-dit...
    • kbenson 8y ago
      > In fact, it was not Debian's wording, but Greg Kroah-Hartman's Ah, thanks for the correction. I was under the impression it was Debian speaking. I still think it's an odd way to describe the group in question (those running vanilla kernels), but there's less negative connotation since the obvious benefactor of that wording wasn't responsible for the statement. That said, it's clear that some of my prior statements were erroneous. > Interestingly, Google ditched Ubuntu for Debian in January 2018[2], which means, that the entire Google internal engineering environment is now based on Debian. Interesting. I wonder if they did an easy-upgrade for the Goobuntu installs, or if it's just for new installs. To my knowledge, Google has a recommended Linux distro, and developers can choose it or choose another supported distro if they have reason (i.e. There are devs running windows and OS X). In that type of situation, I would think some portion of developers might have switched quickly, others as they had problems and needed a reinstall, and finally new hires. There's probably a good mix of the two distros, which will shift towards the new one consistently over time. It will undoubtedly increase install numbers though, as it's not a small amount of people. I still wish we had some better numbers on this. :/