Linux

48365 readers

381 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

163

Opinion: Distributions that only change non-system pre-installed software or desktop environment should instead be packages or scripts (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

80 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The majority of Linux distributions out there seem to be over-engineering their method of distribution. They are not giving us a new distribution of Linux. They are giving us an existing distribution of Linux, but with a different distribution of non-system software (like a different desktop environment or configuration of it)

In many cases, turning an installation of the base distribution used to the one they're shipping is a matter of installing certain packages and setting some configurations. Why should the user be required to reinstall their whole OS for this?

It would be way more practical if those distributions are available as packages, preferably managed by the package manager itself. This is much easier for both the user and the developer.

Some developers may find it less satisfying to do this, and I don't mean to force my opinion on anyone, but only suggesting that there's an easier way to do this. Distributions should be changing things that aren't easily doable without a system reinstall.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They are of course very useful, please do not misunderstand my post. None of what I said downplays the usefulness of these efforts. I am merely suggesting that the method in which they distribute them is not efficient. Maintaining a whole different Linux distribution just to distribute a different DE configuration is overkill. It is much easier to maintain a package instead.

From the user's perspective, installing Ubuntu and doing "sudo apt install [pre-configured KDE package to your liking]" is effortless and virtually indistinguishable from just installign Kubuntu. You get the full support from Ubuntu, whereas a different distribution may not. You are not needlessly breaking away from Ubuntu.

Honestly, it could even be an install option, like Fedora and EndeavourOS do. Do you miss out on anything doing this vs an entire different distro? I dont think so.

Again, a changed DE is pretty drastic, but it does not warrant a different installation process of the whole OS or system. You should only need to take out the parts you need to, and from a user's perspective, it should be possible to make it as simple as running a command or making a choice.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Now that you mention Fedora, the Fedora Server ISO does this incredibly well. You pick your spin, (Workstation, Server, KDE, Sway, etc.) and You pick an extra set of packages if you want. It's the same installer as the desktop (the Anaconda installer), and it works great.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It doesn't warrant it to your taste, but people like it. I don't get your point beyond saying that people shouldn't prefer it because you don't.

So they're "very useful", but shouldn't exist?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Never said that they shouldn't exist. I only said that they must be distributed as packages instead.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I think we're mostly on the same page, but verbiage like "must be distributed as packages instead" is pretty hard to interpret any other way than saying DE-distros shouldn't exist.