Linux - Distributions This forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on...
Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ. |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
 |
08-12-2023, 01:16 PM
|
#1
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2023
Posts: 627
Rep:
|
OpenELA
Hello,
OpenELA is not a Linux distribution and is not intended to be. Is it right?
Thank you.
|
|
|
08-13-2023, 06:04 AM
|
#2
|
LQ Addict
Registered: Mar 2012
Location: Hungary
Distribution: debian/ubuntu/suse ...
Posts: 24,276
|
https://openela.org/about/
what is unclear on that page?
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
08-14-2023, 06:46 AM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2023
Posts: 627
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan64
|
Hello,
Thank you so much for your reply.
This is source, but I want to know if it will become a distribution?
|
|
|
08-14-2023, 08:47 AM
|
#4
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: LFS, AntiX, Slackware
Posts: 8,268
|
You might be interested in this:
It looks like OpenELA is not intended to ever become a single distro, but rather a source for enterprise distros as a class.
This seems to be a response to Red Hat making its sources more difficult to use.
Last edited by hazel; 08-14-2023 at 08:49 AM.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
08-16-2023, 03:57 PM
|
#5
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2023
Posts: 627
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hazel
You might be interested in this:
It looks like OpenELA is not intended to ever become a single distro, but rather a source for enterprise distros as a class.
This seems to be a response to Red Hat making its sources more difficult to use.
|
Hello,
Thank you much for your reply.
Can it be said that this is some kind of a repository?
|
|
|
08-17-2023, 12:12 AM
|
#6
|
LQ Addict
Registered: Mar 2012
Location: Hungary
Distribution: debian/ubuntu/suse ...
Posts: 24,276
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason.nix
Hello,
Thank you much for your reply.
Can it be said that this is some kind of a repository?
|
What is the goal of this question?
Obviously you can say whatever you want. The word "repository" has no any meaning without context, we have a huge amount of different kind of repositories. Therefore, "some kind of repository" means nothing, at most, "something".
|
|
|
08-17-2023, 06:30 PM
|
#7
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Auckland, NZ
Distribution: openSUSE Leap
Posts: 6,006
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason.nix
Can it be said that this is some kind of a repository?
|
Only in the sense of providing source code to allow others (developers) to build/support RHEL-compatible distributions. To quote the page Hazel linked to...
Quote:
The OpenELA will only be producing source code. It will not produce its own binary distribution. The members, and anyone wanting to try it, can create their own EL-compatible distributions from the code.
|
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
08-19-2023, 01:59 PM
|
#8
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2023
Posts: 627
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrari
Only in the sense of providing source code to allow others (developers) to build/support RHEL-compatible distributions. To quote the page Hazel linked to...
|
Hello,
Thank you so much for your reply.
This is my question. What source code? Packages?
|
|
|
08-19-2023, 02:47 PM
|
#9
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2008
Location: NC
Distribution: Slackware64 15.0
Posts: 154
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason.nix
Hello,
Thank you so much for your reply.
This is my question. What source code? Packages?
|
Not packages, rather the source code used to make the completed packages (as in the software is not compiled or packaged for distribution yet). From OpenELA's site:
Quote:
All sources necessary to achieve a 1:1 / bug-for-bug compatible version of EL which will be distributed via Git, encouraging community collaboration
|
What this means is that OpenELA would provide source code (most likely including all patches, bugfixes & security updates) that a project could then use to compile & package said software for distribution (e.g. RPM or DEB files). This would be open & unencumbered, with no restrictions, as we've seen with what Red Hat has done.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
08-20-2023, 08:01 AM
|
#10
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2023
Posts: 627
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedoralinuxjunkie
Not packages, rather the source code used to make the completed packages (as in the software is not compiled or packaged for distribution yet). From OpenELA's site: What this means is that OpenELA would provide source code (most likely including all patches, bugfixes & security updates) that a project could then use to compile & package said software for distribution (e.g. RPM or DEB files). This would be open & unencumbered, with no restrictions, as we've seen with what Red Hat has done.
|
Hello,
Thank you so much for you reply.
Can you show me an example? I think there are quite a few apps that haven't been turned into packages yet!!
|
|
|
08-20-2023, 05:39 PM
|
#11
|
Member
Registered: Jun 2008
Location: NC
Distribution: Slackware64 15.0
Posts: 154
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason.nix
Hello,
Thank you so much for you reply.
Can you show me an example? I think there are quite a few apps that haven't been turned into packages yet!!
|
Best examples I can think of are components that are required for the system to run or basic system utilties, like the kernel, GNU binutils & coreutils, + desktop environments like GNOME or KDE, development tools, things like that. Packages used by a large majority of a distros userbase that also fit in the context of the vision of a distro.
On seeing apps not turned into packaged for (insert preferred distro here): If you're talking about Enterprise Linux (EL), EL users have generally a smaller package subset that they require, being that most EL distros are going to be used more for servers or general workstation desktops for work getting done vs a general user's home PC. There's also only so much time & resources that can be dedicated toward packaging & upkeep of the main distro packages & extra packages, so careful consideration is required when it comes to what gets packaged so that resources aren't spread too thin on packages that may not be used by a large enough user base to justify those resources. There's also storage space on mirrors to consider. Debian has a package that helps with this, popcon, that can be enabled by the user during the installation process to help the developers understand what packages are widely used by sending a report of packages installed back to Debian so resources can be distributed accordingly for packages that are widely used. There's also 3rd party repos you can check as well, like RPMFusion, ELRepo & EPEL on RHEL based distros, external repos for Debian & Ubuntu that can be added to your sources.list, Slackware has SlackBuilds + AlienBoB's repo, Arch has the Arch User Repository (AUR), & there are others depending on what distro you use.
If all else fails, if there's a package you want that doesn't exist, you could always consult your distro documentation for instructions on how to make packages yourself as well. On Debian checkinstall is an example of this, though I don't know if this is still current (haven't used Debian for a while now). There's simply just too many programs out there to package everything, so it has to be narrowed down to what will see the most use & fits with the goals of a distro is what it really boils down to.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:06 PM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|