Can we consider LTS a real distro?

glats · 07-25-2017, 10:58 AM

As far I know a distro is consider a operating system with a own package manager. However LFS hasn't a package manager because you install package manually from source. So, can we consider LFS a distro?
Thanks.

hydrurga · 07-25-2017, 03:29 PM

There is no definitive definition of a "distro", but Wikipedia has the following (my emphasis):

Quote:

A Linux distribution (often abbreviated as distro) is an operating system made from a software collection, which is based upon the Linux kernel and, often, a package management system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution

I would tend to agree with that. A bare-bones distro may depend on the user to manually install any required software from source, or perhaps leave it to the user to install a package manager if they so desire.

jefro · 07-25-2017, 07:34 PM

I think they say they aren't a distro. It is just a cookbook not any sort of build.

However, we see it on places like distrowatch.

I doubt anyone would complain one way or the other.

frankbell · 07-25-2017, 08:30 PM

I agree with jefro.

LFS is not a distro; it's a book.

Discussing whether it is a distro is not worth the electrons it takes to do so.

hazel · 07-26-2017, 01:15 AM

It's a meta-distribution.

frankbell · 07-26-2017, 09:02 PM

Quote:

It's a meta-distribution.

So it's a distribution about distributions?

hazel · 07-27-2017, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankbell

So it's a distribution about distributions?

It's about Linux. Linux as such, not a distro. But once you've created it, you can make it look and behave like any distro you like.

hydrurga · 07-27-2017, 03:07 AM

For me, LFS is two things. It's a series of instructions for creating a Linux distro, and it is the finished distro itself. What the minimum stage is in that process that your newly-created distro can actually be called a distro is open to debate. ;-)