Slashdot Mirror
What are the Real Differences Between Distributions?
toblak asks: "Everybody seems to say the Mandrake is a good distro for newbies and Gentoo, Debian, SUSE, etc, are for the Power Users.
Other than different updating schemes, when you get 'under the hood' of the distribution isn't it basically the same? If I compile some source code on a Debian system don't I get the same functionality as I would if I compiled the same code on a Mandrake system? I've been using Mandrake for about a year and while I don't consider myself a newbie, I'm not a Power User either. Have I been 'missing out' on something by staying with Mandrake?"
It is called apt-get.
You will weep with joy when you discover it.
Let the Flames begin.
When you get down to it, most distros are using the same things under the hook. No one is busting out with special kernels, or what not. People who try to say that they are superiour because they use __ distro are basically just being elitist idiots who feel proud because they use it. This is akin to being pompous and proud about being able to code in assembly while making fun of perl programmers. While there is a difference, actually feeling superior since you use ___ is like being a blind zealot. Its a piece of software, not you; you are not the software, so unless you programmed the software, feeling superior because you use it is rather stupid. If you made the software, be proud of your abilities, but don't go mouthing off other people because they think differently. A knowledgable linux user will be able to secure a Redhat box as well as a Debian box. The paths to get to those goals may be different, but the end result is the same.
"What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
A lot of the distinction seems to be in how the install goes. With a Debian install, it tends to be a bit more crude, low-level, but still pretty simple and straightforward. Gentoo even more so, but with long periods of waiting while stuff compiles.
/opt? or /usr/local? things of that nature, but they're not a huge deal.
Newbie-oriented distros like Mandrake and Xandros (neé Corel) on the other hand try to make things very approachable in the install- everything is laid out like in an Windows app. You usually have an X11 GUI to guide you through the process. Another thing a lot of newbie-oriented distros tend to do is install a lot of stuff that you don't neccesarily need. I guess they're working on the assumption that a lot of Linux newbies would rather have almost everything they could ever need already installed and configured, rather than hoping they have the abilities to do it later.
There's nothing you really can't accomplish on one distro that you can on another, provided you have the source and the abilities to compile libraries and applications. Some commercial apps may be tailored to a specific distro to the point that it doesn't work on another, but usually it works out fine.
Aside from ease of installation, distros have fairly minor differences like a what binaries go where,
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
This is by no means an exhaustive list, but it gives a pretty good idea.
Really, every distro is a compromise between flexibility and user-friendliness. A distro that is very flexible and can be used on a wide range of systems probably is much more difficult to use, configure and is most likely a source distro with little or no package management. On the other hand, a distro that is very user-friendly will have a GUI interface for everything that the maintainers see as important, and it will have a package management system that requires as little input from the user as possible, meaning that it is a lot less flexible. Every distro is somewhere between complete flexibility and complete user-friendliness and each of us chooses which one we want to use based on that criteria.
They are all linux, which means that they are all the same. Just like both c++, java and scheme are Turing complete and therefor the same, and an IBM compatible computer and an Apple both can do computations and therefor is exactly the same. Next Question, please.
There is really no difference between the difference Linux distros, its all what you choose to use. If you feel comfortable with one distro, then use it AND you know how to secure it use it.
On the other hand, some distros are easier to secure such as Gentoo, because they don't install everything and the kitchen sink. Also the fact that you can update your whole system in one command, by keeping up-to-date your more secure. Also, there no pre-compiled distro specific binarys.
Redhat is an idea of a distro that installs so much uneeded stuff it's not even funny.
Free means no restrictions, ironic the FSF's GPL forces restrictions, isn't it? What's your definition of free?
The solution for me: Linux From Scratch. Build exactly what you need into your system, nothing more!
How much of an advantage do you see just from compiling for a specific CPU (especially an Athlon...), as opposed to say upping the -O level in gcc or passing certain options to the ./configure scripts? Does the performance gain from having everything at the highest possible optimization outweigh the time spent compiling?
It would seem to me that comparatively few pieces of software would benefit from being custom compiled in the Gentoo style. First of all, gcc does a fairly poor job of optimizing for AMD K7 or recent Intel CPUs (post i586), which reduces any potential advantages. Further, how much does even total, perfect optimization for one CPU get you. For something like the kernel, glibc, or X, you would probably see a difference. Possibly KDE/Gnome would benefit. Crypto apps and libs would see a speedup. The GIMP: definitely, as well as perhaps the various image and video libraries. Mozilla, OpenOffice, maybe even XMMS, though, don't tend to benefit that much from being custom compiled, and to be honest, probably aren't even worth the compile times. With something as huge as KDE, which can take hours to compile, is the slight speedup worth it?
Gentoo is a nice concept, and everybody should probably play around with it (or even better, do Linux from Scratch...), but it's not necessarily one to build around.
I'm pretty late to the discussion but I don't see anyone mentioned the most important (to me) difference between Debian and other distros, so here it is:
Debian Social Contract
root@aio:~# nmap -sX -iR -p1- # Ho, ho, ho! Merry Xmas, everyone!