PDA

View Full Version : When a 'remix' becomes a distro



HomoGleek
October 1st, 2009, 01:06 PM
Im interested in learning abit more about Linux in general.

When does a edited version of a distro become a distro of its own?

Why isn't Ubuntu called Ubuntu Debian etc

Giant Speck
October 1st, 2009, 01:10 PM
Im interested in learning abit more about Linux in general.

When does a edited version of a distro become a distro of its own?

Why isn't Ubuntu called Ubuntu Debian etc

Because Ubuntu isn't a remix of Debian; it's a fork.

snowpine
October 1st, 2009, 01:19 PM
In my opinion, a remix becomes a separate distro when it hosts its own repository of packages. (Ubuntu obviously uses its own repo, not Debian's.)

keplerspeed
October 1st, 2009, 01:21 PM
That makes sense. So once a spin-off is 'self sustaining' it becomes a distro. So any spin of that uses ubuntu repos is not a distro ie Mint, crunch etc.

HomoGleek
October 1st, 2009, 01:23 PM
Because Ubuntu isn't a remix of Debian; it's a fork.

I don't know what the difference is, I will wiki :)

Giant Speck
October 1st, 2009, 01:27 PM
I don't know what the difference is, I will wiki :)

A fork occurs when a group of developers split from the original group of developers and take their version of the project in a new direction.

A remix is simply the same project, only highly customized for a specific target user group.

BrokenKingpin
October 1st, 2009, 02:42 PM
In my opinion, a remix becomes a separate distro when it hosts its own repository of packages. (Ubuntu obviously uses its own repo, not Debian's.)
I generally agree with this. I do think there can be instances where a distro is still using itís parents repos, but there has to be a large amount of change else ware.

Simian Man
October 1st, 2009, 02:47 PM
Because Ubuntu isn't a remix of Debian; it's a fork.

Well, not really. It's somewhere between the two because it actually forks Debian every six months.

But I agree that hosting your own packages is probably the biggest discrimination of what is and isn't a distro.

Xbehave
October 1st, 2009, 03:01 PM
But I agree that hosting your own packages is probably the biggest discrimination of what is and isn't a distro. What about mint? that uses ubuntu repos with its own stuff over the top
Yet xorg-oncrack-testers, user ubuntu repos with their own stuff but would not be considered a distro
sidux (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidux) uses only debians repos (they just package thier CD) but but is still considered a distro? ( i think knoppix does the same)
slax don't have any repos!

Just making life hard!

handy
October 1st, 2009, 03:49 PM
I thought that if it is listed at DistoWatch.com it must be a distro? :)

snowpine
October 1st, 2009, 04:42 PM
What about mint? that uses ubuntu repos with its own stuff over the top
Yet xorg-oncrack-testers, user ubuntu repos with their own stuff but would not be considered a distro
sidux (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidux) uses only debians repos (they just package thier CD) but but is still considered a distro? ( i think knoppix does the same)
slax don't have any repos!

Just making life hard!

That is a good point, and I agree it is a gray area... however, Mint and Sidux both have separate repositories that host packages not found in the "parent" distro.