OT question for Linuxers

[Tenaja]

I recently started playing with Linux, tried a few out on an old PC. And an rpi. But not with pb though. Anyway, I have not found a decent article on distros... Can one of the experts clear some things up for me?
From what I understand, most distros are just collections of things other coders put together (mostly), these being the things:

A kernel
A gui
A script language for command line (bash or alternative)
A package manager (optional)
A list of preinstalled bloatware (optional)
And typically access to a repositor,y for more s/w

Is that about it? (Obviously, a gui might be the one thing that separates the distro from others...)

Don't most use the same kernal? I read a news update recently that Linus updated "the kernal," which implies that's the case.

And most of the rest of the list, aren't those all replaceable after the fact? So, you could start with one Ubuntu fork, and swap out enough to end up with a completely different one?

And repositories, if you can use any one (or make a new one) I'm presuming you just need to make sure it's compatible with the GUI? (Or does code made for one work on the other? Gtk vs qt?)

Oh yeah, is there a good forum that's not specific to a single distro?

Thanks!

[W4GNS]

Oh yeah, is there a good forum that's not specific to a single distro?
Thanks!

https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/

[Marc56us]

A kernel

Yes,
but you don't have to worry about it. The kernels are now modular and no longer need to recompile when changing hardware.

A gui

Yes an No.
Original un*x GUI is only a window manager (don't confuse with Windows). There ar now big GUI (KDE, Gnome etc). The best compromise is XFCE.
You can change your graphical interface at any time.

A script language for command line (bash or alternative)

No.
bash (and sh, tcsh, etc) is only a command shell (like cmd.exe or command.com for windows)
Most commands (like cp, mv etc) are externals tools programs (GNU Tools)
Most distributions will install by default script languages such as Perl and Python because they are often used by the system itself.
This avoids the silly system under Windows where a lot of programs using for example Python install each their version in a subdirectory with several thousand files

A package manager (optional)

Yes,
as you say, it's optional. Base package are called tarball. This is an archive (concatenate + compress). If you really want to understand how your system works, it is better to use a distribution that allows "standard" installation (without a package manager that handles dependencies). But it's a lot of work.

A list of preinstalled bloatware (optional)

Yes,
unfortunately. Try to install a distro without OpenOffice... is not easy

And typically access to a repositor,y for more s/w

Yes.
Best of all, there are many repository

Have a good time with Linux

[NicTheQuick]

There is a nice graph of linux distributions on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_L ... tributions
You can see there what the base distributions are and what was derived from them.

There is for example Debian with its "apt" package manager. Ubuntu is a well known distribution which is based on debian and in many cases very similar.
Then there is slackware with a totally different package manager and OpenSuSE which is based on it.
And of course there is RedHat and Arch and also Android on that list.

I prefer Ubuntu with Gnome on the X server because Wayland still has a way to go before I would use it. But maybe I will try KDE in the future because recently saw some nice features of the GUI where Gnome still is in its infancy.

[Tenaja]

Thanks, Marc, that helps.

Nic, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Unfortunately, your reply is just like dozens of reviews I've already read. It might as well say "Methuselah begat Lamech, and Lamech begat..." Etc., But no context of what makes one special other than "you" use it. Very few comparisons I've read actually have any useful information, and the few that say "this distro is better because it's easier" never say what aspect makes it easier.

Anyway, why do I care about the lineage? (Yes, I've seen that wiki page, and found nothing particularly useful in the chart, except at least some of the comments indicate one purpose of the distro.) If I can swap a desktop gui and Ubuntu becomes Debian, then isn't it just renamed debian with a different gui? And if the desktop can be swapped so easily, isn't the desktop more important than the distro? Especially if that's the component that makes a distro intuitive or not?

[Marc56us]

As you indicated that you use Raspberry, I recommend Debian. You will have the same system everywhere and if you want to practice on the text part without having to change machines, Debian is now in the WSL system so it can be integrated into Windows 10 (who would have said this was possible a few years ago? ) (GNU Linux Debian on Windows)

It is no longer a complicated distribution as it was in the beginning (the horrible dselect package manager). She settles in nicely and is now well documented.

Update a Debian (action like a "windows update") is done in one line like this:
sudo apt-get update ; sudo apt-get upgrade

In addition, of the 300 existing distributions, half are based on Debian, so you might as well use the original.

And if you really want to learn how to configure a system "by hand" then you need the venerable Slackware

[NicTheQuick]

Basically, it's all a matter of getting used to. No matter who you ask, everyone will have their favorite distribution or GUI. If one of them would be so much better than the others, then why would you choose any other?

I use Ubuntu since 2008. In between I switched to Linux Mint for one year, but in the end I am on Ubuntu again. I tested several GUIs like Gnome 2, LXDE, XFCE, Cinnamon, KDE, Mate and Gnome Shell. In the past I missed many features which where available in Gnome. That's the reason why I still use Gnome shell.

Maybe you also want to read about Rolling releases. If you always need the latest features but maybe also a few bugs more here and there, a rolling release is quiet nice. If you prefer more stable releases and frequent security updates, you may should use a "normal" release cycle.

[infratec]

In 1994 I build an embedded device with an Intel 386EX CPU.
We decided to use linux cause of the well done tcp/ip stack.

Ok.

I wrote a BIOS only with the necessary functions to load the linux kernel via LiLo (before GRUB).
If the kernel is started it searches for a start file at several places. (e.g. /sbin/init)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_startup_process

We wrote an on program which is named init
Ready to work

If you want a bit more 'Linux' you can use BusyBox which is also one file with several symbolic links to it.
It detects the name how it is called and execute this stuff.
If you place a link /sbin/init to it, you have a full working Linux
https://busybox.net/about.html

If you search deep enough in the files you will find my name for some contributions to it

If you write a PB console program it is/was not working with pure console linux
Because out of a reasons which I don't know it needs some stuff from the X system if you do something with picture files.
(no GUI)
So you need also to install at least xvfb and start your program via xvfb-run.

[Bitblazer]

If you write a PB console program it is/was not working with pure console linux
Because out of a reasons which I don't know it needs some stuff from the X system if you do something with picture files.
(no GUI)

Which graphics format creates the GUI dependancy? In general you can write pure console linux programs which work without any GUI (see for example the linux textmode component)

[the.weavster]

Don't most use the same kernal? I read a news update recently that Linus updated "the kernal," which implies that's the case.

Linux is the Kernel: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html

[Tenaja]

Thanks everyone for the info!

As you indicated that you use Raspberry, I recommend Debian. You will have the same system everywhere and if you want to practice on the text part without having to change machines,

That's a good tip that makes sense...so how "precise" is this recommendation? I mean, with Ubuntu based on Debian, does that count? (And Mint & Zorin based on Ubuntu...) How far do you have to stray to lose the benefit? What is the "key" to checking compatibility? Wouldn't it be bash, it whatever Debian uses instead?

Thanks again!

[Bitblazer]

This site might help a lot too: Distrowatch

[Marc56us]

That's a good tip that makes sense...so how "precise" is this recommendation? I mean, with Ubuntu based on Debian, does that count? (And Mint & Zorin based on Ubuntu...) How far do you have to stray to lose the benefit? What is the "key" to checking compatibility? Wouldn't it be bash, it whatever Debian uses instead?

There was a time when Debian was (very) difficult to install (painful), especially because of its package manager (dpkg) and was also not easy to use because of its intransigence with regard to non-free licenses.
Now it has improved a lot, it has a graphical installer, it supports all languages.
And it can even be installed in WSL under Windows 10!

Mint is based on Ubuntu which itself is based on Debian, so unless you like stacked sandwiches on top of each other, you might as well take the manufacturer's directly.

Finally, if you ever have to work with companies using Linux as a server distribution, most of those not running RedHat (or CentOS) are running Debian

All distributions can use all graphical user interfaces and shells (bash, sh, tcsh, sh, sh, zhs) even after installation.
Debian documentation is also now very well done and up to date.

Update a Debian is also simple now:

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get update ; sudo apt-get upgrade

[Tenaja]

Mint is based on Ubuntu which itself is based on Debian, so unless you like stacked sandwiches on top of each other, you might as well take the manufacturer's directly.

I understand this sentiment, in general, but not for Linux. Can you explain to me why there are so many distros?

How do I tell if there are any technical differences? Something other than the gui and included software?

Thanks again!

[Marc56us]

...Can you explain to me why there are so many distros?

Every time a Linuxian disagrees with the others, he leaves to make his own distribution.
This is also why it is not possible to standardize the installations.

How do I tell if there are any technical differences? Something other than the gui and included software

There is no technical difference between the different distributions, just software choices.
Linux is only the Kernel, the rest is called Tools (Kernel + Tools = Distribution)

And if you really want to understand how a distribution (and unix) works then install the Slackware