Slashdot Mirror
New Commercial Linux Distro Based on Debian
We got a press release in the middle of the night touting Linux by Libranet, which is "based on the world acclaimed Linux release by
Debian." They go on to say "Up
to now the Debian distribution was a viable choice mostly for software developers and technical people. The Libranet release now brings Debian to
the desktop, making it available to users with little or no Linux experience." Wouldn't it be just as easy to get an experienced friend help you install "pure" Debian and go from there? This robably won't be the last one of these we see, though.
This is not so much fragmentation of the community, but experimentation by the community to provide better software and services to users. In the end, the user will win.
Note: I put emphasis on services to users because as all Linux software becomes free, it will be services that distinguish one distribution/vendor from another.
It looks like the Corel, Storm, and other such variations on Debian largely involve taking Debian, Replacing the initial installation tools with cool new ones, which doesn't disturb the rest of the distribution, and Adding some special packages, which again doesn't forcibly disturb the rest of the distribution.
I tried Storm and nothing impressed me.
However, I'm going to have to jump in and defend Corel.
I'm a Corel Linux beta tester and as a result, I've been able to see a lot of interesting stuff. I can't say much in detail, but let me tell you that Corel is *making damn sure* that Linux gets hardware support for everything.
One of my reports involved Aureal sound support...
It's a good thing if changes that come in from Corel et al head upstream so that they as much as possible become part of Debian proper.
Yes, their enhancements appear to be for public consumption.
Most of their work has been on adding/fixing functionality to/in KDE. Their current base of work is on KDE 1. They tried to send all of those enhancements back to the KDE project, who refused them because they are concentrating on KDE 2.
That's why their enhancements haven't been seen yet.
A little more direct than my last hint...
For years, Debian has maintained that it would be better for a developer to fork the distribution if you don't agree with them in a key political area (for example, the DFSG). However, it seems Corel was the only one who forked for this reason (Debian wouldn't have accepted wordperfect .debs into non-free without written permission that anyone -- like, oh, our mirror administrators -- can redistribute them).
Perhaps:
If it's #1, the best case would be to have the changes from their modifications put back into Debian itself, then everyone profits.
If it's #2, more power to ya.
If it's #3, sorry, you're going to be another also-ran.
If it's #4, then communication with an aspect of the Debian project has quite possibly failed. Typically these things can be worked out and a concensus reached, unless it's one of those things that just isn't open for discussion (like the DFSG). And there are a LOT of things you can do without being a developer (for example, take a look at http://master.debian.org/~wakkerma/bugs/, nail a few of them, and email patches to nnnnn@bugs.debian.org)
I'm sure there's lots of other reasons too. Whatever they are, more discussion about them couldn't hurt.
As easy as things are getting, they could be better. I was taught fortran at school, and I've taught myself C/C++ and some miserable Windoze programing with a Watcomm compiler (nice compiler!), and I've used Sun products. Still, it took me a long time to put Red Hat on my machine. Drivers for my cheap hardware killed me. Mostly what I got, I got from self help books on Linux and man pages. There is still no substitute for someone who simply knows.
It would be nice if a company could package the help I could not find for free. From what I've read here, service is supposed to be one of the open source business models. Education is worth money. I'll be looking here for ratings.
It is hard to install. The latest version asks you which IDE interface, which device your CD rom is plugged into. How many people know that off the top of their heads. It also does almost no hardware detection. Definately not for newbies. Having installed all of the popular Linux and a few *BSD distributions many times I'd say that debian is the hardest for the average user (if not impossible).
Having said all that I think it's also the most logical install procedure (install just enough to dselect the rest). Dselect of course rocks and the whole debian project is very well conceived and executed. I am looking forward to the corel distro.
War is necrophilia.
I will not be so excited about any hardware support that winds up being "Corel Only."
(Of course, there's some components of Buy Canadian! in both Corel and StormLinux, at which point may enter certain aspects of nationalistic fervor :-) )
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
In that case, no offence intended, but I would wonder at the geek credentials of your friends... When I decided it was time to do the deed and install Linux on my home PC (a Toshiba laptop) I asked all my geek friends (that's probably redundant, I'm not sure I have any friends who aren't geeks, but anyway) which distro I should install. The answer was unanimously Debian.
Now I've been playing with computers since I was 12 (Commodore 64), and using Unix for 5 years, but my degree is in Film, not CompSci, and the most technical thing I had done up to that point was install & configure Apache for HP-UX. You do not need to be an ubergeek to install Debian, but you do need to RTMF, and read the FAQs, and ask questions about stuff you don't understand, and keep looking for the answers until you find them. It isn't hard; it just isn't self-explanatory...
Here's my experience with installing Debian as a geek who's not a software engineer:
Tuesday evening
---------------
Right, I'm ready to try to install Linux (Debian) on my Laptop (Toshiba 440 CDX with Windoze95 on it); I've got:
- the CD I burned with the Debian distribution
- Linux rescue floppies (regular & tecra) made with rawrite
- a dos boot floppy with fips on it
- a ream of documentation, including:
- the Debian installation guide
- the dselect manual
- the cfdisk docs
- the fips instructions
- the manual for my Toshiba
- a faq about how to install linux on my model of laptop
19:50* Backup all the files I care about from the HD; since these consist of a couple of dozen flat text files, they all fit on a floppy.
* Go though the BIOS settings and try to disable all the stuff the debian guide recommends. Find out I can't disable the Shadow RAM. Wonder if this is important. Find out that all the BIOS settings I _do_ have access to are useless.
* Realize that the manual for my Toshiba is useless. The index doesn't even have an entry for BIOS. There's a good chapter on how to use the mouse though... grrr...
20:20
* Run Scandisk. Read the cfdisk documentation again while Scandisk is running. Realize that I still don't understand it. Hope that all will become clear when I get there.
20:30
* Run Defrag. From Windows as instructed. Says my disk is 2% fragmented.
20:40
* Run fips. Create a second DOS partition
* fips exits with the message "memory allocation error". Uh Oh.
* Reboot Win95. It boots successfully. I now have a D: partition!
* Double-check that I have all the necessary files for the debian installation loaded into c:\linux
20:55
/dev/hda1 primary DOS FAT 16 500MG
/dev/hda2 primary Linux 860MG
/dev/hda5 logical LinuxSwap 15.75 MG
... because it seems the right thing to do. I still don't understand the cfdisk documentation.
* Boot to DOS
* Run Install.bat
* Stuff happens in black & white on the monitor.
* The debian install screen comes up and asks me if I would like the display to be in colour. I tell it yes. Next it wants to set my keyboard. I scroll all the way down to the bottom of the screen to select the UK keyboard configuration.
* cfdisk comes up. It finds the second DOS partition created by fips. After a little fumbling around, I realize that I have to delete the DOS partition and re-create it as a Linux partition.
* I create
21:05
/dev/hd2a.
* "Writing partition table to disk".
* cfdisk quits. Linux installation continues. Initialize the swap partition. Initialize
* Installation bombs out at the kernel install. The install can't find the files on c:\debian. I can't get it to mount the CDROM drive to read the files from there.
* Try to reboot from the rescue floppy. Doesn't work. Neither does the tecra rescue floppy. Try to boot win95 "invalid partition table". Uh Oh.
* I'm an idiot. It couldn't find the files in c:\debian, because I put them in c:\linux
21:45
...that is to say LILO goes into a reboot loop... The rescue floppies do the same thing (both the regular and the tecra)... I'm beginning to suspect a BIOS setting or other hardware problem...
* Reboot to DOS. restart the install.
* Go though the previous stages of the install a second time. Choose drivers, configure the (nonexistant) network, call my machine 'ibid'.
* Tell it to make a boot floppy. write fails. 3 times.
* Tell it to boot from the HD.
* Reboot. LILO starts, and fails.
*
22:30
* Can boot to DOS from the system floppy, but that's all. Otherwise I am now the proud owner of a bunch of expensive chips in a grey plastic case. I give up and go to bed.
Wednesday Evening
-----------------
Having spent some time on comp.os.linux.setup reading about everyone else's disk partitioning woes, I'm going to give it another shot before yelling for help.
20:00
/dev/hda1 primary bootable DOS FAT 16 500MG
/dev/hda2 primary bootable Linux 860MG
/dev/hda3 logical LinuxSwap 15.75 MG
* Run cfdisk again. make the Linux Swap partition physical rather than logical.
I now have
* Re-arrange my Toshiba's hardware so that the floppy drive is in the on-board bay rather than the peripheral one.
* Go through the debian install from scratch.
* Creating a boot floppy succeeds!
* Try to boot linux from the boot floppy. Same problem as before; a re-boot loop.
* Boot win95 successfully. That's something, anyway.
* Boot DOS. Run the DOS BIOS setup. Shoulda done this before. Disable everything in sight, including the CPU cache.
* Boot linux from the floppy. Success!!!
* Give root a password. I have a root password. I am logged in as root! I feel omnipotent! I can install software. I can run a webserver without resorting to a > 100 port number. Bwahahaha! (sorry - I've been using Unix for 5 years, but this is the first time I've ever been root...)
20:45
* Fumble blindly through dselect for a while. my friends were right, it's a royal pain. I _think_ I've got everything I need installed, but I'm sure I also have with a bunch of stuff I don't need taking up hard drive space.
* Log out. Reboot. Log in as user. vi works. Perl is where it should be. Wayhey, I've got Linux!
Cheers,
ai731
--
"I use the words you taught me. If they don't mean anything any more, teach me others. Or let me be silent"
That's right! I wish more companies would take that advice, especially car manufacturs. I mean, really, a sub-compact car is a sub-compact car, right? Why should we have 3 dozen different models of sub-compact cars, each with their dozen different options.
As I read somewhere "linux will kill linux".Having so many model is killing the sub-compact car market. People are going back to horse and buggy, for heavens sake.
With this many distributions, there are really no standards, and will cause many problems in the future.With every sub-compact car having its own peculiareties, its no wonder buyers are becoming disillusioned. Every engine is different, every dashboard is decided customized in placement, even the door locks are different. It's a real shame. Don't you think that buyers would be much more receptive if they had the choice of perhaps 2 or 3 models of a sub-compact car, and that even those models agreed on placement and engine type?
There's my two cents.Mine too.
-Brent--
Not the same -- Debian _requires_ you to start up dselect. For a new user, dselect is certainly intimidating -- I'm experienced, and I always am hitting the wrong keys.
:-), and call it by its correct name -- Debian. Good thing they don't keep the real name secret, even though they did choose a new name.
The advantage for this choice is simply tech support; everyone starts out with the same config. And the tech support and advertizing that this company is already doing is an advantage to all of Debian, doubly so since they use essentially the same software that we do.
That's their value-add -- service. It's the right thing for them to do.
Unlike Corel, they're not ever going to have problems falling behind Debian because they have so many changes.
But hey. I use the real thing
-Billy
..than seeing people try to make money off of the work of other people. Thankfully, the Linux community has proven that they are just as resourceful as the rest of us at that too.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
If debian is difficult to use/install (I don't know, I'm a computer guy, so the fact that I think it is easy to use doesn't count)... why not just help the debian developers add on to that distro?
I wonder if we'll see cooperation between companies, at some point? That's how the Open Source venues become of such quality right now: many people pool their resources and code away. Businesses still see Linux as a product they can sell without paying for development; they add a little package, and off it goes making money.
And: how many more "dumb Linuxes" will we get yet? I can just see it coming: "Linux for Dummies: so amazingly easy even a moron with an IQ of 40 can install it!" What about new features, better applications and specialisations, people?
"Knowledge = Power = Energy = Mass"
I wonder if the companies making money off of Debian plan on allocating resources and development to Debian, other than their particular distribution. It's only fair, but they aren't obligated to.
With all these distributions coming out, particularly of note is LinuxOne (Red Hat: s/Red Hat/LinuxOne/g) which seems to offer no valid improvements over existing distributions, what will be the turn-over for new technology to keep a distribution competitively ahead of another? If distributions constantly have derivatives of equivalent merit, what keeps a company developing?
Would the eventual money-oriented incentive be to use closed-software (so their distro can't be copied), or to focus on marketing? I don't know, but it'll be an interesting thing to watch.
But, so long as all the distros get along, I'm happy. :)
The standard is that it is still linux. ;)
All these different distributions are really just different programs included with linux. There are a few differences such as where programs are installed, etc, but it is still linux. The problem with standards more exists on the desktop level (X, Window managers, KDE, Gnome, etc.). Any ways, my point is that all these seperate distributions don't really hurt linux.
It's all fine and dandy that a company is trying to make money off of Linux. Free enterprise and all that good stuff. But I don't quite get the point of this 'distribution.'
I really don't see anything that comes with the package that doesn't already come with a free distribution. It says you can download WP for StarOffice, big deal. I can do that with RedHat.
Our system includes window managers, word processing, spreadsheets, image processing/viewing, video and sound software and a selection of games, utilities and productivity tools. Also included is a variety of internet tools including browsers, mail, html editors, and streaming video and audio.
Isn't all of this stuff included on a RedHat CD that you can get for next to nothing from some online vendors? Mayber their installation process is somewhat easier (though a RH 6.1 ftp install was pretty simple for even me) than other distribtuions. Everything listed in the overview section of the site is avaliable free elsewhere, with the exception of the tech support (but that's what the HOWTO's and IRC channels are there for).
I don't see anything new with this company's distribution. They just see a way to make money off of the booming Linux marketplace.
Or maybe I'm just way off base here and am totally missing the point. . .
For the most part I've given up complaining or even commenting on any new distributions, although new ones based on Debian interest me (vaguely). There are simply too many distros these days (hundreds?). I see no point in supporting a fork off of Debian (I don't see Debian getting ``outpaced'' very easily), and anything that tries to keep pace with Debian and add ``just a few new features'' to make it easier to install or configure or whatever would die for (hopefully) obvious reasons, due to being sucked back into the ``main'' distribution.
What makes Debian the most attractive (to me) is all of the architectures they plan to support. They already support 4 (1 more than RH), and the others they have the ball rolling toward look interesting as well (Debian on PPC could be a major win). I would much rather Debian become ``the'' standard than Red Hat. Being able to use whatever hardware you please is a definite bonus (not that Red Hat support for Intel, Alpha, and SPARC isn't cool.. it's just that I haven't heard any mention of them trying to expand this.. maybe I'm a nut who wants to buy an iMac for no apparent reason?)
Anyway, from the FAQ, here's how Libranet aims to entice:
Sort of vague. Anyone want to get a copy and tell us what's so neat about their desktop?
That's in reference to the difficulty of the installation. Interesting, but installation on Red Hat 5.1 (to give a reference on why I don't see installation as being ``insurmountable'', although configuration can be a pain.. yes I know RH != Debian, but come on) really wasn't all that difficult (for me). The main annoyance with GNU/Linux is having to fool around with PnP (which is easily solved.. get an external modem and use the almighty serial port).
Most of the rest of it is stuff you would find relavent in describing practically any other Linux. I'm not too excited so far.
After glancing at the ``desktop'' section and reading a little more, it seems like the only other real feature here is that they've somehow cleaned up the configuration process and automated much of it during installation saving you ``many hours''. I think they could have been more vague (maybe). Am I missing something here I should have caught onto by now? Hmm.
~ Kish
1) You make it easier to install so that people will be able to use it in the first place, so they can find out on their own how powerful it is.
2) Not everyone is, or should be, a computer whiz. To expect this is ludicrous. Not everyone knows how to set the time on their VCR, but that shouldn't deny them the right to rent a movie.
3) Real accesibility issues should not be ignored. I have a friend who is very computer literate, and is entirely capable of installing Debian, Slack or BSD. Problem is, he is unable to type, and needs a mouse and/or voice based interface.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Debian is arguably the best engineered distro. The Debian project encourages others to base their distribution on Debian GNU/Linux, and I think they'll succeed. Storm, Corel and now this one are gonna be based on Debian. This is probably going to be the really the same distribution, except that they might make installation a bit more (l)user friendly + add some documentation + tech support. This way Debian can make into corporate IT deparments IMHO.
Wouldn't it be just as easy to get an experienced friend help you install "pure" Debian and go from there?
Just as easy? Maybe, if you're a 19 year old CS major. I doubt if the majority of people out there, or even of people likely to become new Linux users, have such a friend. I mean, I'm a scientist and have lots of geek friends and I don't know a single experienced Debian user.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
First, I don't think that all that much attention should be paid to the ease of installation. Generally, a person who is not able to install software on a machine will not be able to use it properly. Besides, you install once an OS once, and then use it for years. Ease of use (as in updating, tweaking, etc.) counts for much more in my book than polished and chrome-laden install scripts.
Second, Debian was my first Linux (and, generally, the first Unix) that I installed and I didn't meet any insurmountable difficulties. As far as I can recall, the only problem I had was in configuring X (X-based tool got confused, but a terminal-based config program worked perfectly well). I have no clue why Debian is considered to be "for-geeks only" distribution.
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
That has some (arguable) merits in and of itself; see Clueless users are bad for Debian.
On the other hand, the fact that Debian provides a public Bug Tracking System, and provides some published Distribution Construction Policy that includes Packaging methods/policies means that there is considerably more useful structure than RPM provides.
In particular, since these policies have been designed with a view to being amenable to automation, this means that Debian makes a very good base on which to construct customized distributions where much of the maintenance can be automated. This is why there are so many ports, both to diverse architectures (ARM, MIPS, SPARC) as well as to build on some particular infrastructures ( Beowulf ) and even other operating systems ( Hurd ).
The other effect of all this is that creating a variation on Debian doesn't mandate creating a whole huge amount of testing infrastructure, as is necessary to "fork" variations on distributions like Red Hat, where there is not a clear path to get patches back upstream; a Debian "fork" can more reasonably use the existing infrastructure.
It looks like the Corel, Storm, and other such variations on Debian largely involve taking Debian,
Due to its ability to multiplex together package sources using apt-get, Debian looks to be a better candidate for this sort of "customization" than just about any other.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
I asked Libranet what this distro was about, and they said that the main thing they changed was to take dselect out of the install and instead give apt-get a list of things to install.
IMO, this is WONDERFUL. These people are adding a lot of value to Debian in general by putting up a first-rate website with responsive service and nice general Linux propaganda.
Add to that the fact that they don't seem to want to create their own code fork, so they'll always be able to keep up with Debian (and vice versa).
I appreciate all that Corel's doing, but in a very real sense they _have_ to do it to make their proprietary system work. Libranet is in a sense much more in line with what Debian needs, because every minute of service they provide is a direct service to Debian itself, rather than some being a service to Debian and some to WordPerfect.
Of course, again, I like what Corel's doing. I just wanted to point out that these guys have their heads screwed on straight as well, and they're actually MORE useful to Debian.
-Billy
If a goal of Linux is getting more support, then gaining more users is a step towards that goal. Corporations don't care if the users are tech-oriented or idiots; they care about how big the market is in Linux. A bigger market equals more companies doing Linux, be it hardware or software.
And if you're a hardcore user that likes to install Debian raw, go ahead! There's enough support from techs to fuel Debian beyond the lifespan of any commercial Linux. Just try and be nice to the companies that are building on the shoulders of the Debian giant, trying to bring Linux to "everyone else". Meanwhile, you can gloat on how you installed Debian by using direct disk and memory writes to your tech friends, because they're the only ones who care.
As for the proliferation of distros based on Debian (Corel, Storm, etc) .... may the best installer win and go OSS or GPL. ;) Eventually all the stupider distros will disappear and we'll be left with a superior distribution. Perhaps one who's installation programs will make it into core Debian.
They have screen shots of the deskto pafter it is installed, but any linux system can be made to look like those.
I looked for screenshots of the installation and did not find any does anyone have any references to this?
Something to note, is that once a Linux distribution is installed they are all pretty much the same now. Slackware 7.0 is now glibc2, as are SuSE, Redhat, Caldera, Mandrake, etc.
They failed to mention which kernel it ran or I missed that too. I remeber a few months ago reading about EasyLinux which was supposed to be a distribution that is easy to install. Last I saw on there web site they had released a final version, but no mention was made on /. of this.
It seem all distro are moving towards easier installations. In wonder how many of them are dealing with security issues that arrise form having Linux installed on a system? Issues like if you install apache it is world viewable, and if you configure it in such a way anyone can browse your system. Also by defaul many of these system come wiht ftp and telnet already installed. Als inetd is usually configured to run and the default run level is usually 3 for multi user. I only mention this cause I found out that RH6.0 by default had many serveices configured thru inetd like finger who and ftp talk, etc. I shut them off except telnet and ftp. I also found out that apache by being installed and not in inetd (not that that has anythign to do with it) was browseable by others. Yes I have configured my hosts.allow and hosts.deny files. My point here is how many of these companies are considering security for a 'newbie' Linux users? Security upon installation? They should be coming up with 'easy firewall', and do you want to secure your system during the installation process. Also informing the user during the install inetd is configured to start durning boot and all.
I also wonder how secure kde and gnome are since both use ports that are not configured thru inetd. After running netstat it shows many ports in use, how secure is this (questino here).
Don't get me wrong I think it is great taht people are trying to make Linux more user friendly, but I hope they take into consideration how 'newbie' users can be dumb. Hey even in windows I have seen users edit there registries so that they could not boot there sytem or start word.
send flames > /dev/null
Only 'flamers' flame!