Hi guys, i'm currently using Debian, and i really like it, it suits most my needs. Recently though i thought i'd really like to use Kde 4.7, so i investigated the methods that might be available to backports it or something, and during this i stumbled upon some documentation talking about the kde packages in debian, and it just sounded like a mess. I thought i was running kde 4.4.5 but i'm not, it's actually i collection of kde packages from 4.4 and other kde versions mashed together to appear like kde 4. My description probably doesn't do it justice, as i'm sure the reasoning for this is the setup has been tested and proved stable. The problem with this is it makes it harder to upgrade a package if i wish to, because it's all jumbled up. I like the slackware philosophy of having vanilla packages (for the most part) installed the way the developers intend on them to be.
So i'm developing more an interest in 'vanilla distributions'. I'm aware of Slackware, Arch and Gentoo; are there any others?

You haven't actually got it quite right with regards to version numbers etc. Some packages are sufficient for newer releases so they are not upgraded at all upstream. Just because you may have something that says 4.4.5 and another package that says it's version 4.4.2 or something like that doesn't mean Debian, or any other distro for that matter, is holding back.

What exactly is a "vanilla distribution?" Though I have heard of it, I never followed along. And how would Fedora be labeled as?

If I'm understanding the OP correctly... its a distro where the software packages are not 're-packaged' by the distro but used literally exactly as distributed by the upstream maintainer, i.e. without little 'tweaks' or patches applied for you.

Oh, ok well thanks for clearing that up with me k3lt01. I use the term vanilla, the same way as in ice cream. Vanilla flavor, is plain. So a Vanilla distro is one that applies little to none patches to the software, and everything is installed the way the developers of that software intended it to be. (I am a little over my head here as i'm still quite new to Gnu/Linux and am still becoming acquainted with the file system, so i can't fill you in much more)

Ahh, ok. I've heard that definition quite a few ways.... Good to know that

If you want the software in the distro to be as close to upstream as possible, take a look at Slackware. The software that Pat includes is not tailored or branded. The KDE is KDE's KDE, not Slackware's.

Note that Slackware values stability over bleeding edge, so it likely won't be the newest KDE, but it will be pure KDE.

1 members found this post helpful.

Yeah, i'm aware of Slack, and i actually really like it, but my issue is the dependency resolution. I know that dependency resolution can cause it's issues, but my girlfriend already gets shitty at me for spending to much time on the computer, and if i have to manage dependencies too, it's just to much. Compare the two for example.

Debian:
'aptitude install 'package'
done

Slackware
'tar -zxf /directory/package'
cd 'package'
'chmod +x package.Slackbuild'
'./package.Slackbuild'
...
..
.
'install /tmp/package'
done

And this is only for one package, not including the dependencies. I know that Robbie, Eric, and all those other cool guys make binary but Slackbuilds is the right way to do it, and we all know; but for me it's just to time consuming.