LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 04-22-2005, 11:09 PM   #1
wardialer
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: SUSE Linux Pro 9.3
Posts: 375

Rep: Reputation: 30
Is Linux just Linux?


I have seen many screenshots of different linux distros like slackware, Debian, mandrake, red hat, etc. and they appear much alike as far as the looks of the desktops. or when KDE is installed it preety much looks the same for different distros. And by reading the featrues of all they all contain mostly the same apps including openoffice, gimp, firefox, and the same development tools. But what makes another distro different if they have almost the same looking KDE desktops/applications? Is Linux just Linux? Or, people just go by the kernel versions? what makes a different distro different from the others if they have almost the same type of apps? and lets leave out on how easy a install from the others is. I'm only talking about how is a distro different when they are in use?
 
Old 04-22-2005, 11:27 PM   #2
spoody_goon
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Michigan USA
Distribution: Mandrake, DamnSmallLinux, VectorLinux
Posts: 416

Rep: Reputation: 30
No the different distro vary, although some just a little bit. A screenshot of kde on Slackware my look like one on Mandrake but how they install packages, handle configuration etc. is very different.
Mandrake is a more windoz like distro
Slackware is a more Unix like distro
Remember a gui is just an interface not the actual program.
 
Old 04-22-2005, 11:46 PM   #3
detpenguin
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: lost in the midwest...
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,091

Rep: Reputation: 45
Quote:
lets leave out on how easy a install from the others is. I'm only talking about how is a distro different when they are in use?

for the most part, yeah linux is linux. it's built on the linux kernel...what the different distros add to the kernel as far as packages and how the distro handles them kinda separates things a bit...but kde, gnome, fluxbox, and almost all apps are all the same across the distros...
 
Old 04-23-2005, 12:07 AM   #4
2damncommon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: Debian Wheezy
Posts: 2,872

Rep: Reputation: 88
Quote:
Is Linux just Linux?
You make lots of correct observations wardialer.
The pieces of the puzzle go like this.
Linux is the kernel. Every "Linux" distribution uses the Linux kernel.
With a salute to the GNU project it must be admitted that the core utilities in most Linux distributions are GNU software. (You may have read of the GNU/Linux thing.) GNU software is also available for other operating systems. BSD, Solaris, Unixware and even Cygwin or Services for Unix in Windows. Using these programs is going to be very similar no matter which OS it is on.
Then there are Window managers. Looking at a screenshot of the CDE desktop in Solaris is going to appear almost identical to a CDE desktop in Unixware. The operating systems are very different. KDE or Gnome will also look very similar no matter where you find them.
A Linux distribution is going to choose and tweak the Linux kernel the way is wants, compile the software with the features it chooses, offer a range of programs they choose, use the package manager it chooses, create the utility programs it chooses, and arrange the filesystem the way it chooses.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 12:28 AM   #5
foo_bar_foo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,553

Rep: Reputation: 52
all the core software is the same
sometimes versions are different
there are basically two branches of linux distributions
each has a different package manager
debian .deb packages
redhat .rpm packages
this is a major difference like night and day though some south american hackers bridged the gap a bit with some debian type package stuff that works with rpms
complex debian packages like mail servers come with super easy configurtion utilities for setting them up.
redhat gives the mail server package and you got to buy 15 books to try to figure out how to set it up.
beyond that the difference is in how it's all compiled linked and put together
these differences can also be extreem
self compiled distributions like gentoo allow you to optimize the compiler settings for your specific machine
some distributions patch the packages for security or other reasons
some distributions use alternative directory structures
some distributions have distribution specific administrative and security applications they have developed
different distributions use different boot script styles going back to the redhat/debian split
some distributions like debian test the crap out of everything so it works and is secure others just spit out whats new to please stockholders ala redhat and it's always half broken
 
Old 04-23-2005, 12:59 AM   #6
wardialer
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: SUSE Linux Pro 9.3
Posts: 375

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Ok, so for example, how can I make SUSE more UNIX-like? Because stating the fact that Slackware is based upon the same Linux kernel as all the others, then there must be a way to make SUSE Linux a UNIX-Like oriented as Slackware..right?

Last edited by wardialer; 04-23-2005 at 01:01 AM.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 01:42 AM   #7
fancypiper
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Sparta, NC USA
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.04
Posts: 5,141

Rep: Reputation: 58
Distro Watch has some good comparisons of the different stuff included.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 01:45 AM   #8
P0ldy
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2005
Posts: 28

Rep: Reputation: 15
Slackware claims itself as the "oldest Linux distro" and hence the most "UNIX-like." Everything is built from source (programs, not necessarily like Gentoo). SuSE is much more about eye-candy, uses YaST configurations and Sax2, and, getting it to a barebones Slack approach, you'd probably have to do a ton of tweaking, which is way above my knowledge of Linux to be able to comment on.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 02:05 AM   #9
kencaz
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Distribution: Mandriva Slackware FreeBSD
Posts: 1,468

Rep: Reputation: 48
Well, I have to say I guess I am just another KDE Lemming. I have tried other WM's but just found KDE suited me... I don't do a whole lot of tweaking my Desktop other then BG's and menu configurations, the usual stuff, however, I have seen some pretty amazing Desktop in Linux... You can get as creative as you want, much more so then windows.

I say, get a good stable distro, then start making your own themes, create your own background pictures, icons, menu's etc... It's all configurable.

Also I think if you want a "UNIX" like Linux OS try OpenBSD. There is even a live FreeBSD version. I have burned it but not had a chance to boot it up yet.
http://www.openbsd.org/
http://www.freebsd.org/

KC
 
Old 04-23-2005, 09:05 AM   #10
Padma
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Omaha, NE, USA
Distribution: PCLinuxOS 2007
Posts: 808

Rep: Reputation: 30
Except that BSD is UNIX, not Linux.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 12:52 PM   #11
Komakino
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Somerset, England
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Slackware 10.0, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 1,938

Rep: Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally posted by foo_bar_foo
all the core software is the same
sometimes versions are different
there are basically two branches of linux distributions
each has a different package manager
debian .deb packages
redhat .rpm packages
this is a major difference like night and day though some south american hackers bridged the gap a bit with some debian type package stuff that works with rpms
complex debian packages like mail servers come with super easy configurtion utilities for setting them up.
redhat gives the mail server package and you got to buy 15 books to try to figure out how to set it up.
beyond that the difference is in how it's all compiled linked and put together
these differences can also be extreem
self compiled distributions like gentoo allow you to optimize the compiler settings for your specific machine
some distributions patch the packages for security or other reasons
some distributions use alternative directory structures
some distributions have distribution specific administrative and security applications they have developed
different distributions use different boot script styles going back to the redhat/debian split
some distributions like debian test the crap out of everything so it works and is secure others just spit out whats new to please stockholders ala redhat and it's always half broken
And where does Slackware, the oldest linux distro, fit into all this? I think if anything Slackware is much different to both RPM and DEB based systems, and that there actually isn't much difference between DEB and RPM systems for the most part.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 01:50 PM   #12
japetto
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 61

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
And where does Slackware, the oldest linux distro, fit into all this? I think if anything Slackware is much different to both RPM and DEB based systems, and that there actually isn't much difference between DEB and RPM systems for the most part.

please elaborate on the "differences". i do know that all three distro's have package management systems that work with their respective packages. those being pkgtool/.tgz (slack), dpkg/.deb (debian), and redhat package manager/.rpm (redhat). what makes slackware so different, since source installs can be performed on all three distro's and all three systems have ways to convert each others packages to install them. to me the real difference within all distro's is support. other that that linux is just linux_x.x.x.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 02:15 PM   #13
foo_bar_foo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,553

Rep: Reputation: 52
Quote:
Originally posted by Komakino
And where does Slackware, the oldest linux distro, fit into all this? I think if anything Slackware is much different to both RPM and DEB based systems, and that there actually isn't much difference between DEB and RPM systems for the most part.
ok the moniker of "the oldest linux distro" is a bit of a well ....... wasted breath
it's important to add "currently still in production" but what's the point like it's a contest
first linux distribution Soft-landing Linux System or software landing system
or whatever it was

debian was started in 1993 first public release in january 1994
by the summer of 1994 debian had dpkg a dependancy checking package manager
slackware 1.0 1993-07-17
slackware pkgtool doesn't do any dependancy checking and therefore is not an actual package manager.
slackware is/was in fact most likely alot like Soft-landing only didn't work as well and you are right falls outside of the bell curve of what i said as does an even earlier version of linux which is compiling everything from scratch which of course still exists today as well and is used by alot of people like me.
and is actually the "oldest linux distribution"

both slackware and redhat distributions today use ports of debian apt-get (slap-get for slackware)
which to a degree make them both debian like
 
Old 04-23-2005, 03:47 PM   #14
Komakino
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Somerset, England
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Slackware 10.0, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 1,938

Rep: Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally posted by japetto
please elaborate on the "differences". i do know that all three distro's have package management systems that work with their respective packages. those being pkgtool/.tgz (slack), dpkg/.deb (debian), and redhat package manager/.rpm (redhat). what makes slackware so different, since source installs can be performed on all three distro's and all three systems have ways to convert each others packages to install them. to me the real difference within all distro's is support. other that that linux is just linux_x.x.x.
Slackware's /etc directory structure is substantially different from the other distros and follows a more BSD like pattern, and the init scripts are also BSD (rather than SysV? I may have that terminology wrong). The rc scripts are much simplified (I find them far easier to control) and the network initialisation and config files are easier (for me) to sort out.
While linux IS just linux, there can be more differences than just packaging systems.
 
Old 04-23-2005, 03:48 PM   #15
Komakino
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Somerset, England
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, Slackware 10.0, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 1,938

Rep: Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally posted by foo_bar_foo
ok the moniker of "the oldest linux distro" is a bit of a well ....... wasted breath
it's important to add "currently still in production" but what's the point like it's a contest
first linux distribution Soft-landing Linux System or software landing system
or whatever it was

debian was started in 1993 first public release in january 1994
by the summer of 1994 debian had dpkg a dependancy checking package manager
slackware 1.0 1993-07-17
slackware pkgtool doesn't do any dependancy checking and therefore is not an actual package manager.
slackware is/was in fact most likely alot like Soft-landing only didn't work as well and you are right falls outside of the bell curve of what i said as does an even earlier version of linux which is compiling everything from scratch which of course still exists today as well and is used by alot of people like me.
and is actually the "oldest linux distribution"

both slackware and redhat distributions today use ports of debian apt-get (slap-get for slackware)
which to a degree make them both debian like
You've missed the point - I'm saying slackware is fundamentally different to both deb and rpm systems, not for the package system it uses but for the reasons in my post above ^^^
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
link dies intermittently-seemingly at random- between win<->linux not linux<->linux?? takahaya Linux - Networking 10 03-09-2007 11:37 PM
triple boot linux/linux/linux No Windows involved toastermaker Linux - Newbie 12 03-02-2006 11:40 PM
New Forum for Linux-Gurus[Programming/Administration] or Linux-Advanced Users [ Progr raees LQ Suggestions & Feedback 5 04-12-2005 08:35 PM
Will a firewire host adaptor with a Linux supported IEEE1394 chipset work in linux? mmx87 Linux - Hardware 1 09-25-2004 03:22 AM
Redhat (rhel v2.1) bootup problem with linux (linux vs linux-up) namgor Linux - Software 2 06-24-2004 03:49 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration