Unusual, Obscure, and Useful Linux Distros
angry tapir writes "Most people will be familiar with some of the big names when it comes to Linux — distributions like Ubuntu, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Debian, and Mandriva. Most of the well-known Linux distros are designed to be used as general-purpose desktop operating systems or installed on servers. But beyond these distros are hundreds of others either designed to appeal to very specific audiences or to fulfill the somewhat niche needs of some users. We rounded up some of the most interesting Linux distributions that you might not have heard of."
... the live CD you have with you.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
These distros should become meta-packages for larger distros. You should not need to install a specialized OS because you need specialized applications or specialized configurations. The application developer would be better served working with the larger Linux community, to ensure that the usefulness of the given applications is compatible and availible across all distros and platforms. Linux should always have a diverse ecosystem, but Linux should also have a universality about it, that a given meta-configuration can be established to a given Linux with automatic dependency resolution.
Curse you, mod point allocation bot! I need to mod parent 'eye-opening if, like me, you never considered how much work goes into a distro'.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
hehe. Thanks. :)
Really, I hadn't thought it was so hard until I tried. I'm glad I did. It's something every really serious senior Linux admin should try at least once. Besides a very interesting understanding of how things work beyond "type this command, watch this happen", it taught me to respect my elders, and watch for mistakes that are made (like the patching chaos that is the Redhat/Debian/derivatives world).
After that dive in, I pray to the Slackware god, since he does things pretty damned close to the way I like. There are several finer points that I could probably argue with Patrick about over beers sometime (assuming we're ever in the same place at the same time, and he'd accept a free drink or three). Not that the argument would get anywhere, but it would be a nice discussion, and a fun excuse to drink. Bah. Who needs excuses for that? :)
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
I think the implication about the "Wannabe-Windows clones" was that there are a lot of "1337" Ubuntu users who go around preaching about how awesome Linux is even though they lack any in-depth knowledge of it, they just popped in a Live-CD and installed it using the GUI installer (which is pretty much just a matter of hitting Next until it's done).
Now, I'll admit that back in the 90s I was a bit of a Open Source evangelist but at least I had some basic knowledge of *nix, these days I keep ending up in conversations with friends of mine who have never used a terminal emulator where they try to convince me of how awesome Ubuntu is (because it's Linux!) and even when I point out that my day job involves keeping a load-balanced Linux cluster running and that I have no Windows machines at home they will keep badgering me with teh awezoomnes of Ubuntu and telling me how I should move from FreeBSD, OS X, Debian and other distros to Ubuntu. Without trying to brag about my own skills it does feel a bit like a random recently converted christian of the protestant kind trying to convert a catholic bishop to his brand of christianity even though he himself knows little of the bible beyond "jesus and god good, satan bad"...
These are the kind of users who almost exclusively run "Wannabe-Windows clones" and apply cargo-cult solutions to any problem they may have. I can understand the frustration with them.
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4