LXer: What Makes Debian One of the Most Popular Distros Out There?

LXer · 09-19-2010, 01:51 AM

Published at LXer:

Debian is one of the oldest and most popular distributions among the Linux users. There are probably hundreds of distributions which are based on Debian, or others (like Mepis) which are based on distributions which in turn are based on Debian. Although I'm not a Debian developer, I use it for over two years or so, and slowly got to love this OS.

Read More...

Jeebizz · 09-19-2010, 08:54 AM

Well besides the fact that Debian has quite a large repository is one thing, oh and the fact that it is also very stable?

Debian and Slackware are the oldest and aren't going away any time soon, no matter how much the 'other' distros and their users would like them to.

craigevil · 09-19-2010, 09:57 AM

Mepis is based on Debian, not on another distro that is based on Debian.

Even Mint is getting smart, since they built a version based on Debian.

Kenny_Strawn · 09-19-2010, 10:23 AM

And Ubuntu, despite somewhat being a fork, is also basically rebranded Debian, meaning that technically all Ubuntu users (most of whom don't even know about Linux) are also Debian users.

brianL · 09-19-2010, 10:34 AM

Yes, Ubuntu is fu...I mean, forked Debian.

fbt · 09-19-2010, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn

And Ubuntu, despite somewhat being a fork, is also basically rebranded Debian, meaning that technically all Ubuntu users (most of whom don't even know about Linux) are also Debian users.

Ubuntu is more than just a rebrand of Debian. They start from Debian and then rework it to suit their cause. They go thru a lot of work to distance them selves from Debian notably their own repositories. Where as Mepis embraces Debian and just adds a few things to make it easier to install. I'm simplyfiying of course but I think I have it about right.

Jeebizz · 09-19-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianL

Yes, Ubuntu is fu...I mean, forked Debian.

Yea, but isn't the branch that Ubuntu forked on is Debian-testing(unstable?)

*runs for cover from Ubuntu fans*

brianL · 09-19-2010, 11:43 AM

Yeah, they get Debian sid, make it even more unstable, then release it every April and October whether it's ready or not. That's where it differs from Debian and Slackware, they're only released when they're ready. The LTS versions of Ubuntu are OK, when they've been out a few months.

Jeebizz · 09-19-2010, 12:04 PM

Well thats the main factor right there. Releasing something 'on a pre-determined date' even if the product is incomplete or still has major bugs to be ironed out. The whole notion of 'we'll just release patches afterwards' seems like a Microsoft-style mindset to me.

Either Canonical needs to lengthen their release cycles, or preferably do what Debian and Slackware do, and just release a more refined and polished distro when they are sure everything is up to par, not when release cycles dictate. Oh well. *shrug*

Kenny_Strawn · 09-19-2010, 09:11 PM

Actually, I was thinking of switching to Fedora and enabling the Rawhide repositories just to see how bleeding edge it is. You know me: I laugh at instability!

However, I instead am trying to try Arch Unstable + KDE + Firefox + Qt 4 Designer + GRUB2 (on my external HDD) but so far have run into several bottlenecks.