Ubuntu damaging Debian?

[soul_rebel]

I had the feeling that Ubuntu's great popularity could someway harm Debian the rock on which Ubuntu and many other distros are built and the incarnation of the true spirit of free software.
I don't have a definitive opinion about this, BUT...
today I have read this
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20050418#3
and this
http://internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3496541

I wanted to share this with you.

I hope in a better cohesistance between Debian and Ubuntu.
bye

[KiwiNZ]

I do not believe that Ubuntu harms Debian in any way . I believe the opposite , It will enhance Debian.

[YourSurrogateGod]

Imo, distros will come and go (there are bad ones that will simply fade and more popular ones that will emerge), but the overall Open-source community/project will survive and that's what is important.

[Glanz]

I believe the only thing that can harm Debian is Debian itself, and that the only thing that can harm Ubuntu is Ubuntu itself. Neither of these things are likely to happen, albeit Debian seems to have gone through a period of autodestruction of lates.

Debian and Ubuntu are mutually complimentary, no matter what Murdock might think. Being the founder doesn't make him any more "god" than Stallman.

[totalshredder]

Ubuntu isn't harming\damaging debian, but it is definitely killing it's poplularity. Debian is now trying to get back the popularity it lost by starting a quicker release cycle etc. I think it's good for debian, because it's causing them to work harder. We will see though.

[TravisNewman]

Ubuntu is healthy cooperation and competition with Debian. It'll cause Debian to create a better product, which will then in turn cause Ubuntu to be a better product.

[jdong]

Ubuntu and Debian have excellent, fair code flow. It's not an issue of Ubuntu sapping Debian's work and calling it their own.


The issue is that Debian users are making a shift towards Ubuntu. This can be interpreted positively or negatively.


I personally see many positives of this. Not only does it bring out the best in Linux (the power to choose) ,but it also gives Debian a little hint that maybe users want slightly more frequent releases ;)

[Leif]

OK, this stuff is all over /. etc., and the debian side of it seems to be a worry that ubuntu will lead to a fork and incompatible packages. The ubuntu side says that ubuntu is contributing, and the current work done will be used for the next debian release. Can someone familiar with the development process please comment on this ? Will ubuntu packages really be useful to debian ?

[jdong]

Ubuntu got a lot of dirty work out-of-the-way for Debian --- udev, hal, KDE 3.4.x (which compiles fine on Sid), GNOME 2.10.x, etc.

The problem is in binary compatibility, and that's not a first: Just because it has a .deb extension doesn't mean it works on every Debian-derivative. Do Fedora Core 4 test 2 GCC-4.0 compiled KDE install onto SuSE 6.4? No. So what's wrong with Hoary packages not running on Sarge?


Warty was very similar to Debian, but now the two are starting to diverge, so binary incompatibility is expected.

[bigzak]

This is healthy competition, and to be honest it sounds like sour grapes from Debian. Expecting the entire Linux world to backtrack to pre-Ubuntu just because it does Debian better than Debian did is rather childish, to be honest. It should just be a cue to the Debian management team that, just maybe, relying on the Debian project continuing _just because_ it's the Debian project, and for no other reason, just ain't gonna cut it any more.

[Leif]

The problem is in binary compatibility, and that's not a first: Just because it has a .deb extension doesn't mean it works on every Debian-derivative. Do Fedora Core 4 test 2 GCC-4.0 compiled KDE install onto SuSE 6.4? No. So what's wrong with Hoary packages not running on Sarge?

I'm asking this out of ignorance : is Fedora/Suse/Mandrake comparable to Ubuntu/Debian ? Fedora/Suse/Mandrake are incompatible, true, but do they build on the same packages ? Ubuntu relies on Debian packages to start its next release cycle. Isn't this different from the rpm distros ? Don't these all replicate the same work for each distro ?

Given debian's licensing, they can't complain when someone builds on their work, true. But you can also see why the debian developers would be a little upset - a ratio (how much I don't know) of the work that goes into ubuntu still comes from them, and they don't really get the credit for it, all everybody hears is ubuntu.

On the other hand, if they will continue to get a steady stream of work back from ubuntu, they definitely shouldn't complain.

[sonny]

Ubuntu is healthy cooperation and competition with Debian. It'll cause Debian to create a better product, which will then in turn cause Ubuntu to be a better product.

I completely agree with you panickedthumb, competition has always been good for both consumers and suppliers, and it will make both distros greater at each step they take.

Although I can see some counterpart for this, if Ubuntu has code compatibility problems with Debian, then they'll remain in their next release, and I don't (personal opinion) think Ubuntu people (or Debian's) will deal with those issues every six months; and if they do they won't do ALL of them, and with time the probems will be bigger. If we add, that realeses lead to more cutting edge software and if Debian take his time (a big time, like the one their taking now) to take out a new release, soon Ubuntu will be in the necessity to diverge from Debian, and be something new. I now this will depend in a numerous factors that might not happen at all, but the possibility is there, everything depends on both distros' way of doing software, and the way they manage their projects.

And that will not be harmfull for Debian (or the users)... it will be in line with the open source philosophy...

[jdong]

I'm asking this out of ignorance : is Fedora/Suse/Mandrake comparable to Ubuntu/Debian ? Fedora/Suse/Mandrake are incompatible, true, but do they build on the same packages ? Ubuntu relies on Debian packages to start its next release cycle. Isn't this different from the rpm distros ? Don't these all replicate the same work for each distro ?

1. Sort of comparable: Mandrake and SuSE are both forks off RedHat back in the old days.

2. They don't build on the same "packages", and Ubuntu is starting to behave that way, too. Many packages -- most desktop packages -- have many Ubuntu-specific patches that Debian doesn't have. True, they may share some code, but that's the same from RPM distro to distro (Dag building RPM's for SuSE? Yes. Apt4rpm doing both SuSE and Mandrake? yes)

[az]

This is healthy competition, and to be honest it sounds like sour grapes from Debian. Expecting the entire Linux world to backtrack to pre-Ubuntu just because it does Debian better than Debian did is rather childish, to be honest. It should just be a cue to the Debian management team that, just maybe, relying on the Debian project continuing _just because_ it's the Debian project, and for no other reason, just ain't gonna cut it any more.


People often get the wrong inpression when it comes to debian.

Ian Murdock is not representative of debian. The current Project leader is Branden Robinson. Debian includes many many people. Most of them are incredibly talented and have their own opinions. Debian has always been a leader in protecting the values of free software. You have to be more or less an extremist group to achieve this. This is good for free software.
The many developers hold varying opinions of many topics. Just because one of them opens his mouth does not mean that he represents to views of the entire project.

Read planet.debian.net regularly to get a feel for the different debian developers blogs.

[az]

I'm asking this out of ignorance : is Fedora/Suse/Mandrake comparable to Ubuntu/Debian ? Fedora/Suse/Mandrake are incompatible, true, but do they build on the same packages ? Ubuntu relies on Debian packages to start its next release cycle. Isn't this different from the rpm distros ? Don't these all replicate the same work for each distro ?

Given debian's licensing, they can't complain when someone builds on their work, true. But you can also see why the debian developers would be a little upset - a ratio (how much I don't know) of the work that goes into ubuntu still comes from them, and they don't really get the credit for it, all everybody hears is ubuntu.

On the other hand, if they will continue to get a steady stream of work back from ubuntu, they definitely shouldn't complain.


The complaints are from people who make debian their business (or rather, their product) They have a lot to gain from Debian releasing. Is Ubuntu to blame for debian not releasing? No.

[mendicant]

This is healthy competition, and to be honest it sounds like sour grapes from Debian.

Well, I don't think it's competition, really--Ubuntu is based off of Debian, after all. Ubuntu serves a need that some in the Debian community may want, however, and as long as Ubuntu pushes their changes back to Debian, I think there's no problem. I think Ubuntu shows what a great foundation Debian can be for a distribution your mother could love.

[XDevHald]

Ubuntu got a lot of dirty work out-of-the-way for Debian --- udev, hal, KDE 3.4.x (which compiles fine on Sid), GNOME 2.10.x, etc.

The problem is in binary compatibility, and that's not a first: Just because it has a .deb extension doesn't mean it works on every Debian-derivative. Do Fedora Core 4 test 2 GCC-4.0 compiled KDE install onto SuSE 6.4? No. So what's wrong with Hoary packages not running on Sarge?


Warty was very similar to Debian, but now the two are starting to diverge, so binary incompatibility is expected.

I do have to say, this is a very healthy post here to a lot of Ubuntu users and also making them feel proud to what they're running on their box.

To me, it makes me see a huge side of Ubuntu that will cause HUGE amounts of growth and also productivity in it's devs and also releases to the users to enjoy.

Debian is a great distro, runs smooth, but does not give productivity like Ubuntu, and to most/some people they find that to be disturbing based on what Ubuntu is now presenting as a Debian Core Distro.

Very well said in that quoted post there!

[miklov]

Having only recently switched from Sarge to Hoary on my desktop, and feel that Ubuntu offers a better desktop experience straight out of the box. I had to spend a fair bit of time to get everything on Sarge up and running in Ubuntu it just works.

I don't think that Ubuntu usage will have a negative affect on Debian as long as any code is passed back, as it is effectively just an extension of Sid. I hope that the Debian stable realease schedule continues as it is, it offers a fantastically robust server environment. This is the primary difference between the two, Ubuntu is meant for use on the desktop whereas Debian stable is mainly for server usage.

This discussion highlights some of the problems in the open source community where it always has to be a competition (Gnome vs KDE, emacs vs vi), they seem to crop up all over the place. One of the best parts about open source software is that as long as there is one person using the software delvelopment will continue.

[dataw0lf]

Having only recently switched from Sarge to Hoary on my desktop, and feel that Ubuntu offers a better desktop experience straight out of the box. I had to spend a fair bit of time to get everything on Sarge up and running in Ubuntu it just works.

I don't think that Ubuntu usage will have a negative affect on Debian as long as any code is passed back, as it is effectively just an extension of Sid. I hope that the Debian stable realease schedule continues as it is, it offers a fantastically robust server environment. This is the primary difference between the two, Ubuntu is meant for use on the desktop whereas Debian stable is mainly for server usage.

This discussion highlights some of the problems in the open source community where it always has to be a competition (Gnome vs KDE, emacs vs vi), they seem to crop up all over the place. One of the best parts about open source software is that as long as there is one person using the software delvelopment will continue.


Agreed. Some of us who've been working with Linux for years don't want to configure everything yet again. It just becomes a nuisance; you stop learning and start retreading everything you've done. I still love Debian; however, Ubuntu is much better suited for a desktop / workstation evironment, for newbies and pros alike.

[mark]

I think I can appreciate how some of the Debian folks have become concerned about Ubuntu's popularity - after all, it's their "baby" that's the basis for an environment that's suddenly stealing the limelight.

However, Ubuntu is not the first distro based on Debian - it simply happens to the best (IMHO). Perhaps I've missed it - have there been any such alarums about any of the 113 other Debian-based distros (as listed by DistroWatch)?

If Canonical continues to feed their code back to Debian, I don't see how it could do anything but help everyone invloved.

[fishbone]

I heard a while ago that Debian were looking at only tracking 3 architectures instead of the current 11 - mainly to speed up release times & cut down on packages. I'm a brand new Ubuntu user & my first impressions are that I love it - great philosophy of the whole project.

That said I run 2 production boxes on Debian Woody @ work - 1 on HPPA & 1 i386 - I'm definately thinking of switching the Dell box over to Ubuntu for later versions of packages I use - Smaba etc. With Ubuntu from my understanding I get newer packages plus security updates - which is obviously a big factor for corporate boxes !

[TravisNewman]

I heard a while ago that Debian were looking at only tracking 3 architectures instead of the current 11 - mainly to speed up release times & cut down on packages.
Yeah that's one bad thing-- I mean, I don't own a sparc or anything, but that was one of the big claims to fame for them.

[asimon]

1. Sort of comparable: Mandrake and SuSE are both forks off RedHat back in the old days.

SuSE was based on Slackware.

[ghost]

Source: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20050418#3

It should be noted that Ubuntu is released completely under the GPL, so all the goodness from the Ubuntu developers can flow freely back to Debian. And vice versa. Unfortunately, Debian developers (nearly 1000 of them) are almost entirely unpaid volunteers, whereas Ubuntu has some money behind it thanks to the generosity of philanthropist geek Mark Shuttleworth who is funding Canonical. Thanks to a combination of cash, Mark's focus, and Debian's insistence on supporting 11 architectures, Ubuntu is developing faster than Debian. Whereas Debian releases "when it's ready", Ubuntu is committed to one release every six months. Which is why it isn't possible to simply take the Ubuntu package repositories and just load them into Debian Unstable.


Interesting, so Ubuntu got Mark Shuttleworth who is funding Canonical.


source: http://www.debian.org/partners/ Debian got these behind them.
HP, Sun Microsystems, Progeny, Trustsec, Credativ GMBH, Skol Linux, Genesi, MGE UPS Systems, Brainfood, Freenode, Linux Central, Black Cat Network, The Oregon State University Open Source Lab, Telegraaf Media ICT BV.


So what is Ian Murdock talking about?!

I love Ubuntu, I would have loved Debian if it was easy to install and release their distro more frequently.

Keep up the good work people in Ubuntu Development Team. =D>

[ghost]

SuSE was based on Slackware.


jdong was right, SuSE was based on Red Hat. If it was based in Slackware, wouldn't it use tgz packages, instead of RPM (Which is what it's using right now?) ?

[TravisNewman]

yeah, maybe it was once based on Slackware, but it's definitely a redhat base now.

[Preacher]

This is healthy competition, and to be honest it sounds like sour grapes from Debian. Expecting the entire Linux world to backtrack to pre-Ubuntu just because it does Debian better than Debian did is rather childish, to be honest. It should just be a cue to the Debian management team that, just maybe, relying on the Debian project continuing _just because_ it's the Debian project, and for no other reason, just ain't gonna cut it any more.
Maybe this will lead Debian (and others) to (as someone on this forum said) to bring out quicker updates. This will be a vicious cycle but in the end the people that will benefit are us the users

[Sabator]

Debian: "WAAH WAAH GO AWAY UBUNTU YOUR QUICK RELEASES AND DIFFERENT CODING MAKES US LOOK BAD"

If Debian can't release more often, it's their own damn fault. You don't see Hollywood companies bitching because they're being owned into the ground by Pixar, you don't see sports teams giving interviews on why a better team is ruining everything.

[TravisNewman]

See, the one thing people may be missing is that Debian doesn't really care about releasing often. They want to make a stable product, and Woody is most definitely stable. It can't compete very well by todays standards, however-- but that's Debian's thing, and they have to decide what their priorities are.

As far as Hollywood companies, and sports teams: That's different. Hollywood companies compete with each other, Sports teams compete with each other. Ubuntu's goal was never to compete with Debian, but to build on Debian for a different audience. It's grown way past that though-- I mean, HP is now bundling Ubuntu with the software they send with new notebooks. Ubuntu has just gone WAY past anyones expectations I think. So yes, it's shocking and offputting for Debian, because they now seem to be competing, though I'm not sure they really are.

[poofyhairguy]

Ubuntu only damages Debian's image among the non corporate crowd.

[nocturn]

The fact of the matter is that I evaluated several options for both my home desktop and server and my server at work.

Debian made all the lists, but was the first one to drop off. Unstable wasn't an option because off security and stability. Stable was not an option for the servers because the sofware I need isn't running on it (PostFix/Cyrus with Kerberos and anti-virus anti-spam - Apache2 + Tomcat5 + MySQL 4)...
On the desktop, gnome 1.x or KDE 2 would be ridiculous.

So, in came Ubuntu for my Home desktop and soon my home server. My work server got SuSE (I would have preferred Ubuntu there too, but it was decided otherwise).

Even without the existence of Ubuntu, Debian would have been the first to go in favour of Slackware, maybe even Gentoo or even FreeBSD.

[asimon]

jdong was right, SuSE was based on Red Hat. If it was based in Slackware, wouldn't it use tgz packages, instead of RPM (Which is what it's using right now?) ?

SuSE used tgz packages at the beginning. They switched to rpm much later (I think end of 90s).

[soul_rebel]

I don't think ubuntu is stable enough to be a server os... soon debian sarge would be declared stable and that will be my choice for a while. Anyway this is not the place (and it wouldn't be useful) to start a discussion about which distro is better.

I have heard that ubuntu was supposed to good to debian:
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/ubuntu/relationship/document_view
And that is what I want. I want the truly free distro upon most of other distro are based to prosper, because that will be good to all!
Just think about it:
1) the better debian gets, the better ubuntu gets.
2) interoperability between the two is good for both
3) debian is a "de facto" standard, ubuntu must be stricly debian compatible, so we can get a debian package and install it on ubuntu too.

[ghost]

I don't think ubuntu is stable enough to be a server os... soon debian sarge would be declared stable and that will be my choice for a while.


I have to agree to that, depending on the use of the distro. If I have to chose between Ubuntu or Debian for my Critical Server. I will choose Debian, it is more stable and less security hole. (FYI, our company uses Debian for all our Linux server)

I will still prefer to have Ubuntu for my desktop system.

[nocturn]

I don't think ubuntu is stable enough to be a server os... soon debian sarge would be declared stable and that will be my choice for a while. Anyway this is not the place (and it wouldn't be useful) to start a discussion about which distro is better.

Just a question, but in what respects is Ubuntu lacking as a server, and where does Debian do better?

I personally think that the dated software in Debian stable is a security issue by itself (outdated snort and snort signatures, no clamav, ....).

[Sabator]

You have to wonder if Ubuntu is actually mature enough to branch off from Debian and become more unique. It is one of the best distros IMO, but the number of users for such a new distro can't compare with the gigantic userbases of Gentoo, Red Hat (and it's 10 thousand clones), and others. Right now many people I speak to regard Ubuntu as "Debian+", or an enhanced version of Debian. Breaking off from Debian could mean Ubuntu loses some of that popularity.

[poofyhairguy]

Just a question, but in what respects is Ubuntu lacking as a server, and where does Debian do better?



Its a mental thing. Debian is older. For some reason, on a server older=better (even though I agree with you, I've always thought that newer would be better because it would have more bugfixes).

[plb]

I use both Gentoo and Ubuntu, Gentoo is appealing for the bleeding edge as well as being very customizable, Perhaps one day unstable repo will be as bleeding edge as a gentoo :)

[Tomkat]

ubuntu is good, popular and free. The last Libranet release for example contains many ubuntu packages (I think mostly x related packages):

http://archive.libranet.com/archive/libranet/dists/hemlock/main/binary-i386/

I don't know how many debian based distros use ubuntu packages. Of course many sell and Ubuntu is free.

[poofyhairguy]

http://archive.libranet.com/archive/libranet/dists/hemlock/main/binary-i386/



That link is funny considering how expensive Libranet is...

[TravisNewman]

yeah, I've never understood how they charge so much and still have users. Their choice though, obviously.

[poofyhairguy]

yeah, I've never understood how they charge so much and still have users.


Maybe because Ubuntu didn't exist? I wonder if Libranet's creators have lost any sleep about the doings in this part of the woods....

[TravisNewman]

Good question-- especially since it appears they're using ubuntu packages to try and keep people. OK So that may not be why they're using them, but it IS strange.

[plb]

Debian is damaging Debian....not Ubuntu

[stevenyu]

I think it is important for Ubuntu and Debian to reach a agreement on the comptiablity between each of them, even Ubuntu states it is derived from Debian, the package build for Ubuntu sometime can't even runs on Debian.Maybe in the future we can see both project combine in to one distro. :neutral: