Digg

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at linuxjournal.com

Should Linux Standardize on a Single Distro?

linuxjournal.com — When I demonstrate software for Linux Journal, I tend to use Ubuntu as my operating system. The reason is simply because Ubuntu is extremely popular, but it begs the question, should the Linux community standardize on a single distribution?

Bury

carlief007 11 days ago

37 diggs
digg it

oomfoofoo, on 05/05/2008, -5/+12No. Especially not ubuntu. Buried.
- FapCommander, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4Couldn't have said it any better myself
- martalli, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I use kubuntu, but I agree - one distro is a bad idea. What would be a good idea is standardizing adequately enough that vendors could an easy installation process for commercial purposes. This would be most helpful for the consumer community, since the business community would be better served by continuing to use local repositories. Even in that case, a consistent interface would be helpful.
  
  However, this should not require a single distro, which certainlyis neither possible, enforceable, nor desirable with open source software.
  - Philluminati, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2I disagree still. Portable code is possible. We shouldn't have to standardise in any sense to make things easier for vendors. After the distro, where would you stop? Let's put everyone on exactly the same machine architecture, i386? Let's standardise every piece of hardware - stifling innovation. You can't add more disks to your machine because it falls outside of the standard?
    
    We have different needs and we shouldn't be expected to standardise for the sole purpose of making things easier. Open Source's reliability and stability comes about because the developers accept variables in the environment as the "norm" and because they build software with flexibility in mind. Businesses need to do the same.
    - Adelie, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1I love Ubuntu and LinuxMint and use it almost exclusively, but I would be the first to riot in the streets if it became the 'standard' distro. Isn't it good enough that Debian / Ubuntu are the De Facto standard for desktops? Just tell yourself "Ubuntu is the standard", be happy, and don't tell anyone. Problem solved (While we laugh at you behind your back) :)
Rolcol, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6Just from the title: No. It would become too much like Windows and other distros would die.
- trunkboy, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3That was my conclusion when writing it too -- but there *are* some valid points on both sides. Again, I'm squarely in the no camp as well though...
minigamer1896, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6Why? It's a pointless act, and possibly a dangerous one at that, in my opinion.
I do have to agree with the advantages, but the downfalls that the trail of "one" presents are too great to pursue.
- srg13, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2I can see it now - any decision making breaking into a chaos of thousands of developers all yelling out 'the best way' of doing things. The only way I can see it turning out is a management hell, where you would never be able to satisfy more than a few percent of Linux users...
  - Adelie, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1Its called Kernel development :) FORK IT! DON'T FORK IT!! Why aren't we using HERD?!? It only gets crazier after that. The only sanity about the whole situation is Freedom of Choice.
Peterix, on 05/05/2008, -0/+8Trying to standardize on a single distro would be like herding cats. Simply impossible.
Phucked, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Short Answer hell the phuck no!!!
fyanardi, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4Like all other comments: No!
CAPITALLETTERS, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3No.
cquilliam, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Easy answer no.

However, I think there should be some standardizations in package management. What that standard should be, I have no idea.
- calcium20, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3packagekit in fedora 9 is a step in the right direction.
  and NO there should be no flagship distro.
  - Adelie, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1WHAT!!! Debian Package Manager is definitely the best! Good thing neither one of us gets any control over what the other must use. Hurray for freedom!
thelastknowngod, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3no there should not be a "standard" distro.

if commercial organizations want to release closed software on linux then they can build a .bin file. it should work on all distros. thats how google earth does it. no reason anyone else couldnt do the same.
Philluminati, on 05/06/2008, -0/+3I'd hate to see one distro. I'd be forced to use a machine that was "dumbed down" for the masses even though I'm happy to read a book, experiment and fail before I get things working. I'm happy to learn things, I don't fight it. I don't need people to pander to me. I don't need stupid-ification.

The ONLY benefits he gave were simplicity. There are NO technical benefits - not even bug fixing or testing wise. Open Source's reliability and scalability is tantamount to the fact we __accept__ we run different software. Shoehorning everyone to the same distro to ease manufacturing just stinks of lazy programming.
ArthurSucks, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2That's impossible. That's very un-GNU.
Stonekeeper, on 05/07/2008, -0/+1I think people get really confused in this area. My take is this:
1. Standards are good. Where would we be if we didn't have SMTP, TCP/IP, HTML, etc?
2. Competition is good. We only need to look at Microsoft to see why.

So my take is that competition based on standards is the only solution. What linux lacks right now is standardisation, and i don't mean a single distro, i mean APIs. If i had the "freedom" to choose any distro i liked and knew the all my hardware worked with it then that is truly freedom. Without that assurance, the only freedom i have is choosing which distro is less of a ballache.
So come on people, don't mix competition with standards, or our freedom will be severely limited.
jordo1, on 05/13/2008, -0/+0I agree with Stonekeeper. I believe that is spot on.
Adelie, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1no, actually, HELL NO!!! And same goes to people that say get rid of the command line. Simple solution? Don't mess with what you don't understand. If you want a standardized easy to use, out of the box distro similar to windows, get LinuxMint: It is Ubuntu with all the questionably legal stuff, or better, legal stuff someone may still try to sue you over just to ruin your life. DSL, RedHat, Knoppix, Ubuntu, Gentoo are all very different, and have their place. What about embedded devices, or routers. Sorry, but as it has been said been said before, Linux is just a Kernel. Standardizing to one distro would be the same as saying 'Kill every FOSS project that I don't think serves me'. How about this, get everyone to pick one window manager and desktop environment, and then we can discuss this. Come on, look at all the controversy over the damn scheduler!
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Should Linux Standardize on a Single Distro?

Login or register to add a comment