Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Something I dont get with all these different versions of Linux
Bazoukas:
Correct me if am wrong with any of these:
a) Kernel is writen by Linus and his team. So the kernel is the same in all *Xes. What may be different is the version
b) Apps like Apache, Samba, Galeon, Konqueror are not writen by a Linux company. Each of these apps are writen by different comapnies (Apache team does the Apache and so on).
c) The shell commands are the same with some small differences.
d) One Linux Flavor (Debian) may come with some apps and some features that another RedHat doesnt have and vise versa. But again the difference isnt DRAMATIC.
e) Some Linux flavors are more easy than others.
So my question is this. Whats all the noise about, prefering RedHat for example over Debian, or Mandrake over Suse, or Slackware over gentoo and so on and so on.
I realy cant understand it.
choasforages:
versions of software, support, unofficial patchs to the kernel/*ChoasNETOS runs a getoo kernel, it was a bitch*/ price, ethics/*FUCK LINDOWS*/ and someother stuff
sporkme:
it is like religion
all the same with subtle differences
.
.
here's the thing: if all the different linux organizations got together, it would be like typical operating systems (ms/mac). creativity would be stifled. figuratively speaking, the cogs in the machine would be so much larger and more complicated that simple maintainence would be the biggest challenge.
it is difficult to organize several scattered small groups, but it is even more difficult to corrupt them. it is fundamental to the gpl philosophy.
i feel that if there was one big distribution, you would see competition eliminating activities. red hat is the closest to this.
it would no longer be free
i have to think about this some more... what do you all think?
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by bazoukas:
Correct me if am wrong with any of these:
a) Kernel is writen by Linus and his team. So the kernel is the same in all *Xes. What may be different is the version
b) Apps like Apache, Samba, Galeon, Konqueror are not writen by a Linux company. Each of these apps are writen by different comapnies (Apache team does the Apache and so on).
c) The shell commands are the same with some small differences.
d) One Linux Flavor (Debian) may come with some apps and some features that another RedHat doesnt have and vise versa. But again the difference isnt DRAMATIC.
e) Some Linux flavors are more easy than others.
So my question is this. Whats all the noise about, prefering RedHat for example over Debian, or Mandrake over Suse, or Slackware over gentoo and so on and so on.
I realy cant understand it.
--- End quote ---
a) All GNU/Linuxes run the Linux kernel that was initially started by Linus Torvalds. Today thousands of individual people (and companies) make contributions to the kernel. There is another kernel for GNU software called HURD but you really couldn't call it Linux without the Linux kernel. However, a kernel does not an operating system make. Most of the rest of the base operating system in all Linux operating systems come from GNU.
Then of course you have other "projects" that contribute software for Linux distributions as well as for other operating systems like KDE, GNOME, Apache, Open Office, Samba, etc. And most GNU software is also available for many operating systems other than Linux. Many of these are licensed under the GNU Public License (GPL) or similar open source license.
b) Mostly right, some are backed by companies, some are just open source projects or foundations.
c) depends on the shell used. Most linux distros use "bash" as the default shell so the internal commands would be the same. External commands would mostly be comprised of GNU file utilities, etc, along with some distro specific commands. So most commands would be identical, there would be some distro specific commands but they would not be POSIX standard. Now bash can also run on nearly every version of UNIX out there (and on Windows). It is the default shell on most Linux distros. Other shells: sh, csh, tcsh, ksh, ash, etc.
d) pretty much right on the mark. I would say that a majority of open source software included in each of the major distros is the same. Now each distro may have different versions of that software and may not have the same default configurations of that software. But if you are good with one distro you should basically not have a hard time in any of them.
One major difference between some distros is the package management systems. Debian uses *.deb packages and "apt" utilities to manage the software. RedHat, Mandrake, SuSe, and others use the RPM package management system. RPM used to stand for "RedHat Package Manager", that has since been changed to "RPM Package Manager" so other distros don't have to use RedHat's name even though RedHat developed it. It was their contribution to the rest of the Linux world.
http://www.gnu.org/
http://www.kde.org/
http://www.redhat.org/
http://www.debian.org/
http://www.kernel.org/
http://www.apache.org/
Don't know if that helps any...
Bazoukas:
I see.
So in other words the difference is on the small details.
All these Linux companies are like, having the same engine and cage, but each company does its own tweaking to its engine, cage and interior. But overall they core is the same more or less. It depends on what kind of "car settings" you want.
And if you know one Linux you know all Linux.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version