Storm Linux

Stormix, a Vancouver-based start-up, has announced the release of Stormix Linux v0.99 Alpha r1, their first public release. The new distro is based on Debian, and uses dpkg as its package management system. It seems they have some new ways of going about things, and even an interesting project called SAS. SAS allows developers to write a program once and have a text-based and a GUI interface. Thankfully, they have stated they will release all of their software under the GPL (or a "related" license).

Comments

No, no... it's a good thing.

[Erich]

You have some distributions that are geared towards making sure stuff is stable before making architectural changes, like Slackware.

You have some distributions that are geared towards making small systems, like the Linux Router Project.

You have some distributions that are based off of one another, like the 158 RedHat based distributions... but each one has its own merit. Each one is different. And since most / all of the software is open, new changes can be incorporated back into RedHat if they are good and they are what RedHat is interested in. RedHat might not be interested in having to support a MkLinux port -- but having MkLinux have a RedHat base allows the MkLinux people to get a great headstart on having a nice distribution.

And are these distributions incompatable? If a distribution is libc5, then maybe they can't run libc6 binaries. (But then again, there are incompatabilities between glibc 2.07 and 2.1... but I digress)... But things tend to compile out-of-the-tarball on most distributions I have seen.

If the Debian people love their package manager, then they will do everything to make it the best. Likewise, RedHat folks try to make the unbeatable RPM. Slackware folks just stick to a tarball with a script. Does this mean that if everyone used Slackware that tar would would have features like rpm or dpkg? Of course not. Different distributions foster growth and new ideas. Different distributions appeal to different groups of users with different tastes or hardware platforms.

And having their own distribution probably helps Stormix keep tabs on the systems that they have to support. They can make sure that the packages they want to support are in their distribution and that packages they don't want to deal with aren't. This is an amazing feature of Linux, one that will make it (in my opinion) great for companies doing support. They don't lose anything (compatability with debian means most things work really easy) and they gain immensely (they control what they have to support). And after they've modified the distro how they want, why not offer it to everyone else? It costs them little. If three random users have it fill a need, great. And if no one uses it besides their customers, well that is fine, too.

Linux's problem is you

[Falrick]

Yes, whoever you are reading this right now. What is it that you have done to further the Linux community. Have you helped to add anything to the LSB? Have you provided any useful feedback or positive criticism for any product available for Linux?

Perhaps some of you have. Possibly many of you. But to those of you who haven't (and I am one of them), stop complaining about everything that you see straying from the norm. This seems like Europe in the 15th century! Luther "recently" started the reformation with his ninety-five theses and suddenly people are beginning to wonder about what they had accepted up until that point. (not to say the repercussions have even close to the same significance here as they did for Luther and the world in general) We have the OS equivalent of the inquisition running here.

"Do you believe in the one true distribution as the one true church has seen fit for you to believe?"

"Yes... well mostly, except that I'd like this feature added"

"Well, then you shall be flamed for your beliefs and audacity to feel differently than the church has ordained for you!"

Do we really need a force like Catholicism running our operating systems? If you see a true problem with the way that these distributions are dealing with things, then talk to one of the standards groups out there. Ask them what you can do to help develop standards for whatever it is that you feel needs standardization. At the vary least, read the Linux Advocacy How-To. But don't cry "Foul" every time something happens that you don't like.

That's the last name I'd choose

[hawk]

to suggest a usable interface . . .

The interface, documentation, and particularly the on-line help are so bad in SAS that it tends to be easier to start from scratch and write in Fortran. That stupid program is still emulating a card reader in its handling of data sets. Once I figured this out, I coudl predict its eccentricities and limitations.

SAS...

[Per Abrahamsen]

> SAS allows developers to write a program once
> and have a text-based and a GUI interface.

...not to mention its strong build-in support for statistical analysis.

Chill out, Read, Think, THEN Say something!!!

[sflory]

Okay, folks lets do a little research here.

A minute of research

Contentions:

They are swiping Debian. They have stated that "We will be using the GPL or a related license for all of our products." So if Debian want's their install then nothing is stopping them. The Debian developers as a whole need to figure out if they wish to be a main stream distro, or a custom distro for Debian developers and power users. There isn't a right or wrong choice in this.

This is a KDE distro? It includes both GNOME, and KDE. Is there something wrong with choice? There are no rational people who content that GNOME is currently more stable than KDE. Given the relative ages of the 2 projects this isn't an attempt to slander GNOME. Stabity is relative to what you use the desktop for, however.

As far as KDE looking like windows. This is a good thing. (IMHO) I want people using linux, and KDE gets former windows users up and productive quickly. Once they are using linux they may find GNOME more to their liking. Personally I prefer E without gnome, but I really only use a WM for holding up xterms/Eterms/kvts, and netscape.

Another sign of Linux fragmentation. Ok folks repeat after me "Linux is not Unix". There is this little thing called the GPL. This means that anything produced under it can be used or adapted by anyone. This means that we can take the best of any distro and use it in another distro. In addition many of the so called distro are simply value added version of another distro. Mandrake Linux is a good example of this.

It's not in Stormix's best interest to get too far away from Debian. Once Stromix breaks with Debian they need to start doing all the heavy lifting themselves. By same token it's in their best interest to see Debian impliment many of their changes so they don't need to reimpliment everything every new release.



Note: My views should not be take to reflect the views of VALinux. They have been known to incite internal flame wars. This of course is sometimes part of the fun;-)
--
Don't look at me I'm just a mushroom.

Not really a fragmentation

[stu]

It may look as though Linux is going through the same fragmentation as UNIX went through, but this is not really true.

When UNIX fragmented, it was due to the competing vendors adding proprietary extras, closing up the code and introducing deliberate incompatibilities in order to lock in customers.

The various Linux distros, on the other hand, are all rooted in the same code base, are largely compatible with each other (bar a few different directory placings & choice of package management, etc) and by & large are not trying to lock out their competition.

Also,of the vast number of distros, a large number are specialist installs or micro distributions for narrow purposes (such as rescue disks, routers, simple IP masquerading for windows networks, etc) and do not need to be 100% code compatible with their mainstream counterparts.

Just chill out, there is room for everybody, it is going to be ok.

depends...

[Lazy Jones]

There are 2 kinds of distributions:

• those with a particular target audience, area of application etc., like Trinux
• the "generic" distributions, which differ mostly in their licensing and other political considerations and try to cater for all users

While the first kind of distributions is extremely useful and I'd like to see more of them (e.g. Linux specifically for laptops, with a mostly ramdisk-based installation and very few disk accesses), the generic kind results in too much duplication of efforts and too little diversity to have a good reason to exist in such large numbers. Newcomers to the market like Stormix will have to realize that they need to offer more than just yet another distro for Joe User in order to take market share away from the established distributors like RH, SuSE (and to some extent, Debian and Corel).

Re:sad...

[blkwolf]

There is a major difference here though. AIX, BSD's, Solaris, HP-UX etc all use their own proprietory kernels, file systems, and programs. The very core of these OS's are different and in alot of cases closed off so that competitors cannot duplicate them.

On the other hand the "difference" between Debbian, RedHat, Suse, Caldera etc generally relate to approx 3 minor things.

1. Install routine - and thats basically just what type of menu or graphical interface they present with the user and to check of their files in either /mnt/cdrom/COL or /mnt/cdrom/Redhat etc.

2. File locations - some distro's put config files in /etc and others /usr/etc or /bin vs /usr/local/bin

3. System configuration - does the distro use Lisa, COAS, LinuxConf being user level programs this simply means what does the distro install as it's default. I've used Linuxconf with Caldera and COAS with Mandrake without any problems.

4. Package managment do they use RPM or Debian Package tool again user level and the inclusion of alien with most distro's lets you use files packaged with the non compatible package tool. Also note that all distro's are capable of compiling the original source code

Other than that the core of the system is the same kernel, filesystem, etc and the differences only show the versatility of Linux to manipulated the way the user wants it. You can take a Debian distro and make it look, act, and feel exactly like RedHat if you chose too. Doing so doesn't make a different Linux, it just makes Linux work the way you want it to. On the other hand you will never install IBM AIX's journaling filesystem onto Solaris as the two are completely different systems.

Re:Worse than UNIX fragmentation

[Tom Christiansen]

That's what you get with an OS that has no central design and no vision.

This reminds me of a passage I once read by Waldo with regard to C++:

What seems to have been lost over the years [...] is the common understanding of what the design center of the language is. While it is clear that the original design center as enunciated by [its creator] is no longer sufficient to guide the development of the language, there has been no discussion of a replacement for that design center. Indeed, it is not at all clear that the current community of users is even in agreement about what the language ought to be capable of doing and, perhaps more important, what it should not attempt to do.

The lack of a clearly articulated, generally accepted design center for the language has resulted in a lack of a set of principles that can be used to judge the direction of language change. The danger is that the language will attempt to become something that does everything, with the result that it will do nothing well.

In his book Wonderful Life, Stephen Gould argues that one should not confuse biological evolution with progress. The forces that shape the survival of one species over another, Gould points out, are far more random than what is required to allow one to claim that species for recently evolved are in any way more advanced or superior to those from which they evolved.

Without a clear design center than can be used to determine a notion of progress in the evolution of a language, the changes that have been made [...] take on many of the aspects of biological evolution. The language has been used able to adapt itself to the changing environment of the increasing number of users. But with no goal for the language, the evolution of the language can only be seen as change, not progress towards that goal.

It seems applicable to what your querulous remark was speaking of.

Re:No hacker uses vi

[Tom Christiansen]

Here's one: me.

Here are some others: Chris Torek, Larry Wall, Eric Allman, Keith Bostic, Rob Kolstad, Margo Seltzer, Kirk McKusick.

Happy now? We are. :-)