5 ms·

Many things happen in the Linux kernel. It doesn't matter which distro you use as long as the kernel supports your hardware. Lots of distros have taken credit f

Many things happen in the Linux kernel. It doesn't matter which distro you use as long as the kernel supports your hardware. Lots of distros have taken credit for things that happen outside of what they do.

bardworx 7y ago
Can you expand on your answer, please. I haven’t been following Linux kernel updates and wondering if you’re implying that they did a better job at supporting hardware or was there an organized push to support more hardware? Also, just out of curiosity, did additional hardware support take away from other areas of development or was this just natural since more Linux kernel devs just use different hardware and saw direct benefit?
- passthejoe 7y ago
  A distribution like Ubuntu, Debian, Pop!_OS, Fedora, etc., is a collection of programs from many, many other projects and places. Almost every distribution configures things a slightly different way, but almost any other distribution can be configured that same way. Distros include a unique set of packages, but after installation you can remove what you don't want and add what you do. The single biggest factor in terms of sheer compatibility with your hardware is the Linux kernel, and every distribution has one. Some are older than others. Some projects remove things from the kernel and recompile. Others add things. But by and large, the Linux kernel is the same from distro to distro. Some ship newer kernels, to be sure, and some ship older ones. The Linux kernel developers maintain a few different kernels at the same time, some older with security patches, some newer with the latest features and drivers. Fedora ships new kernels all the time. If you have new hardware and have parts that are not working so great, new kernels will often solve your problems. It's not the distributions doing this, it's the kernel team. If you have old, stable hardware that works great with an old kernel, you might want to run something like Debian or CentOS -- if you like that sort of thing. Fedora or Arch are both great ways to get new hardware working its best, but that's because the Linux kernel developers are doing this work at the kernel level, and these distributions pick up new kernels very soon after they are released. If distro developers contribute back to the Linux kernel -- and many do, from Ubuntu and Fedora for sure, but for others, too -- everybody benefits from those improvements when a new kernel is released for the use of all distributions that want to package it.
  - jammygit 7y ago
    So why is it so many programs support/recommend Ubuntu rather than generic Linux? Is it primarily the testing environment that the devs use and the packaging formats the different distros use? I ask because I’m deciding between fedora and some Ubuntu flavour for my next OS and have used Ubuntu for the last 2 years
    - bardworx 7y ago
      Linux is just a shell [0], all the distos add their own GUI + specific mods. I’m guessing Ubuntu is recommended because it’s most widely available or has the least amount of “under the hood” mods that make others more challenging. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux
    - grawprog 7y ago
      Testing environment does play a part. Different distros do sometimes use different paths for shared libraries and configs and such. They also sometimes have different versions of libraries in their repos. The programs may be written in a way that don't take this into account and may use an incompatible library or try and look for things in the wrong places.
    - passthejoe 7y ago
      It all comes down to preference, including what works for your hardware and your use case(s). Before GNOME 3, Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora all used GNOME 2, and they were more alike than different. I'd say the same is true today with these three and GNOME 3, though Ubuntu skins it somewhat differently. They really are more alike than you'd think.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- Elv13 7y ago
  Most hardware these day is designed for Linux first, then ported to Windows. Linux has a dominant market share in servers, IoT and mobile. While the Android kernel (and it's "drivers") isn't really Linux anymore, it usually doesn't matter much. The driver will exist and they will be implemented by the manufacturer (most of the time) or RedHat/IBM. If a chip (like wireless) has any use outside of laptops, then it's going to have some kind of support. Lenovo, Dell, Huawei and HP sell laptops with Linux pre-installed and supported.
  - pjmlp 7y ago
    On servers yes. IoT, we have plenty of embedded OS to chose from, with the FOSS alternatives going with MIT derived licenses. Android since Treble, classical Linux drivers hardly count. And anything graphics related is hardly Linux first, if ever.
marmaduke 7y ago
Maybe but CentOS is still on 3.10

bardworx 7y ago

Can you expand on your answer, please. I haven’t been following Linux kernel updates and wondering if you’re implying that they did a better job at supporting hardware or was there an organized push to support more hardware? Also, just out of curiosity, did additional hardware support take away from other areas of development or was this just natural since more Linux kernel devs just use different hardware and saw direct benefit?

passthejoe 7y ago
A distribution like Ubuntu, Debian, Pop!_OS, Fedora, etc., is a collection of programs from many, many other projects and places. Almost every distribution configures things a slightly different way, but almost any other distribution can be configured that same way. Distros include a unique set of packages, but after installation you can remove what you don't want and add what you do. The single biggest factor in terms of sheer compatibility with your hardware is the Linux kernel, and every distribution has one. Some are older than others. Some projects remove things from the kernel and recompile. Others add things. But by and large, the Linux kernel is the same from distro to distro. Some ship newer kernels, to be sure, and some ship older ones. The Linux kernel developers maintain a few different kernels at the same time, some older with security patches, some newer with the latest features and drivers. Fedora ships new kernels all the time. If you have new hardware and have parts that are not working so great, new kernels will often solve your problems. It's not the distributions doing this, it's the kernel team. If you have old, stable hardware that works great with an old kernel, you might want to run something like Debian or CentOS -- if you like that sort of thing. Fedora or Arch are both great ways to get new hardware working its best, but that's because the Linux kernel developers are doing this work at the kernel level, and these distributions pick up new kernels very soon after they are released. If distro developers contribute back to the Linux kernel -- and many do, from Ubuntu and Fedora for sure, but for others, too -- everybody benefits from those improvements when a new kernel is released for the use of all distributions that want to package it.
- jammygit 7y ago
  So why is it so many programs support/recommend Ubuntu rather than generic Linux? Is it primarily the testing environment that the devs use and the packaging formats the different distros use? I ask because I’m deciding between fedora and some Ubuntu flavour for my next OS and have used Ubuntu for the last 2 years
  - bardworx 7y ago
    Linux is just a shell [0], all the distos add their own GUI + specific mods. I’m guessing Ubuntu is recommended because it’s most widely available or has the least amount of “under the hood” mods that make others more challenging. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux
  - grawprog 7y ago
    Testing environment does play a part. Different distros do sometimes use different paths for shared libraries and configs and such. They also sometimes have different versions of libraries in their repos. The programs may be written in a way that don't take this into account and may use an incompatible library or try and look for things in the wrong places.
  - passthejoe 7y ago
    It all comes down to preference, including what works for your hardware and your use case(s). Before GNOME 3, Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora all used GNOME 2, and they were more alike than different. I'd say the same is true today with these three and GNOME 3, though Ubuntu skins it somewhat differently. They really are more alike than you'd think.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
Elv13 7y ago
Most hardware these day is designed for Linux first, then ported to Windows. Linux has a dominant market share in servers, IoT and mobile. While the Android kernel (and it's "drivers") isn't really Linux anymore, it usually doesn't matter much. The driver will exist and they will be implemented by the manufacturer (most of the time) or RedHat/IBM. If a chip (like wireless) has any use outside of laptops, then it's going to have some kind of support. Lenovo, Dell, Huawei and HP sell laptops with Linux pre-installed and supported.
- pjmlp 7y ago
  On servers yes. IoT, we have plenty of embedded OS to chose from, with the FOSS alternatives going with MIT derived licenses. Android since Treble, classical Linux drivers hardly count. And anything graphics related is hardly Linux first, if ever.

marmaduke 7y ago

Maybe but CentOS is still on 3.10