10 ms·
That will be too much work. Why not use well maintained existing distros?
by thewhitetulip 7y ago
That will be too much work. Why not use well maintained existing distros?
- zzzcpan 7y agoWhy would that be too much work? I expect total cost of ownership for the government distro to be way less, than using those "well maintained" ones.
- thewhitetulip 7y agoIf I understand correctly, we are talking about taking a well maintained distro and continuously updating it? Why? If the idea is to save money why would the govt build its own version? And I don't mean a Korean theme, I mean a full version Building a one time theme or anything of that sort is okay, I think. But it'll be costly to maintain a distro
- sonnyblarney 7y agoWhy would a government maintain their own distro in the first place? Other than some minor modifications, what is it about S. Korea gov. officials that's fundamentally different from Office workers that they need specific Linux functionality? Surely at the level of app/drivers or something, but probably not core functionality. The whole point of the process was to save money, and one of the ways they can do that is by standardization. Any deviation for de-facto standards can be costly in many ways, especially in terms of risk.
- zzzcpan 7y agoFundamentally different are at least timeframes and security. Think decades of operations and advanced persistent threats.
- sonnyblarney 7y agoEveryone faces advanced threats, large companies etc. The rational thing to do would be to pool talent and make sure there's a product that's well suited to them. By 'pooling' I mean paying some smart people to do that. Like Rad Hat. Or --> Micrsoft! Or whoever. Software is like anything else: it has to be made and maintained, it takes work, and someone has to pay for it. The fundamentally different issue is 'platform monopolies' which we have to watch out for. But other than that it's just a product. S. Korean gov. probably spends a zillion dollars making and maintaining roads. Do they design and build their own construction equipment? No way. Because it makes more sense for all of us if they pay some specialized people to do that, i.e. 'just buy it'. More specifically to your point, it might make sense for a 'state version' of some linux distro, that really wasn't a functional variation, but more or less a 'bundle'. Maybe RedHat could do this ...
- techntoke 7y agoI say they use Arch Linux, automate the install and management using some DevOps and call it a day. it already supports pretty much every piece of modern software under the sun.
- lasagnaphil 7y agoMaybe Arch Linux is a bit too bleeding edge, but perhaps it could be done (I'm currently using Manjaro and it's as solid as the other distros out there)
- kijin 7y agoBecause this is Korea, and there's always someone trying to milk the taxpayers' money by offering to develop a "Koreanized" product that is "specialized" for government tasks. Even if it's just Ubuntu with a custom theme and slightly different Wine defaults. I'd bet 5,000 won that they won't even contribute their translation fixes (i.e. their only positive contribution to the world) upstream. They will also rather go out of business than to follow the LTS cycle and keep their distro up to date. It has happened before. It will happen again.
- thewhitetulip 7y agoOkay. Maybe a theme would be good. A full blown distro would be costly
- innocenat 7y agoBetting 5,000 won is kinda...
- petepete 7y agoI've never understood the clamour for rolling a new distro. Maintaining an apt/yum repository and creating a meta-package or package group should be more than enough.
- detaro 7y agoTo be fair, "a new distro" often isn't that much different: You take the package repository of an existing distro, tweak some packages and add your own packages on top. I'd say the main difference is that just an additional repository on existing system might break if that base distro updates, while you control that if you go entirely through your own repo.
- babakandishmand 7y agoVery true, I actually envisioned something like a shell or a chromeOS-like shell to avoid having government workers learn command line and such.
- thewhitetulip 7y agoExactly. Maybe they'll be like OxygenOS to Android.
- techntoke 7y agoThe fact that you think of Linux distros as apt/yum tells a lot about the bias in our statements.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y agoWhy do the 600 existing distributions not do that? The way Linux systems are constructed is by gluing together a giant pile of disparately developed software, usually with fragile scripts, and trying to pretend that it is a robust and integrated system. Consequently, they require huge amounts of effort to alter, which will all be undone or in conflict with the next update. So what do you do when you get a Linux system working the way you want? You make your own distro, because it's the only way to keep it like that.
- thewhitetulip 7y agoI get your point, but parent was trying to say that there will be some security concerns when Linux is to be used for Defense computers. That's why they need some hardening of the kernel/OS
- codedokode 7y agoBecause "well maintained distro" won't fix issues as soon as possible and won't make necessary changes. For example, Linux is not friendly to proprietary third-patry software, but the government might need it. Or there could be bugs.Or they might need to support local encryption standards in browsers and document editors. Or support a specific hardware device. So the working scenario is that a Korean company creates its own distribution, adapts it to the needs of government, sells it and then maintains it for the fee. This could also have a benefit of supporting a local vendor instead of sending public funds to US.
- thewhitetulip 7y agoGot it. I had limited understanding. I stand corrected.