If you could read more carefully "to get fame and money" doesnt mean they are all rich, but they want to.

oneandoneis2 : I applaud your lack of understanding of simple sentences.
And I also applaud that you dont bring any serious information about the too high number of distros.
I applaud your highly useless message.

Best laugh I've had all day. Keep it up!

oneandoneis2 : dont you agree that the high number of linux distrib is quite a problem ?

Imagine you are newbie to linux and you are searching what is the right product for you.
Can you imagine the headache when you find their are hundreds of distros ?
And when you ask the forum, each one will tell his favorite one, so you wont get a very precise or objective answer...

I find it very good that linux is diverse, but sad that the diversity doesnt always help the speed or the quality of the project.
In the industry, when you have too many diverse products, only the best ones will survive. Many original linux distro have disappeared because they didnt have enough developpers, or ressource. If their energy was used for an already existing distro, that energy wouldnt be lost forever. Can you imagine the lost energies ?

So we should focuse on the best linux distros, and try to concentrate on them.
10 distributions is more than enough for all the needs.

No, I don't.

Been there, done that, got the distro CDs gathering dust.

I wasn't born with Linux, you know. We all started out ignorant newbies.

Actually, when you ask the forum, you'll probably get "This question gets asked every week! Don't you newbies EVER use the SEARCH button!?!?"

What on earth for? How many people do you think it needs to maintain a distro? Hell, Slackware is maintained by just one man!

Tell the car industry that. Do you really see a year where only ten models of car are available? Or will the hundreds of "variations on a theme" continue, because it costs virtually nothing and means people have a good chance of finding their ideal product?

If you like to gather tonns of cds, that's your fun, not everybody's.

Many newbies ask for which distro to choose and they are answered. You should better do a search.
Choosing the right distro is not that easy.

And the 10,000 people for Debian ?

Each car company has a limited number of cars models, they cannot afford selling hundreds of models of cars.
So does Linux.

While this thread should probably be allowed to die a dignified death, it is actually an interesting question.

I expect there will be a continued Darwinian evolution of distros and the fittest will prevail.

You can already see minor speciality forks of major distros either dying or flourishing depending on a whole range of factors. Case studies:

For example, a single-developer fork like KnoppixMiB hasn't been upgraded for years - this means its loop.o driver is WAY out of date and its early-version loop-aes encryption (its specialty and claim to fame) is now very insecure ie MiB's encryption actually should not be used anymore.

By contrast, another Knoppix fork - Damnsmalllinux - only has two main developers but is flourishing due to very active development and a rapidly expanding user base. But it knows its place - it's not trying to be Debian. But in the world of livecds it has pioneered a number of innovations which have then been copied by others - for eg, mounting large apps on their own compressed filesystem to avoid overwriting system files (.uci "extensions"). And actually, if all you want is a livecd, it's easy to see why damnsmall is doing so well. Why boot up eg big fat Knoppix to do something quick when you can run 50mb dsl entirely from ram and watch it fly, and on an old machine at that ....

The latter case shows how an initially minor distro fork can develop innovations that end up being ported to other distros - potentially the whole linux world can benefit. It also shows how the increases in hardware speed and RAM have changed the landscape against which a distro is measured.

The dead wood should eventually die off on its own.

Anyway, I may be wrong, but don't hardcore linux people tend to concentrate on those few dominant major distros, and for good reason? ie Debian, Gentoo, Slackware etc. They tend to set the example.

But to take the evolutionary metaphor further: mutations are the critical element in evolution. Distro forks and experimental distros (mutations) will get tested against the environment and there will be a selection for the fittest features. The same is true of the whole OSS world. It's a wonderful, rapid innovation alternative to the closed-source hegemony of the likes of M$, which can stifle innovation or at least slow it down.

WoofDeF, I agree with your nice analysis !

It depends if these mutations drain too much energy which could be better used.
And I think they can be better used for linux.

I don't really see the reason why there should only be 10 top distros. Actually, pretty much the only difference in each distro is the default software and the package management. Thinking of it that way there are only really 3 variations I can think of; rpm (RH, Mandriva, Novell), deb (ubuntu, debian, mepis) and source (gentoo, LFS).

As you said, choosing the right distro is hard, that is why it is better to have more choices to choose from so you can find the one that tailors to you the best.

By the way, where did you see that there are 10,000 debian programmers? I think most non-commercial distros only have a fraction of that. Maybe 100 or so at the most, if that.

most of your ignorant slackware comments could be classified as flamebait by definition... so honestly i don't find it surprising that you would be called on them... and i don't think you could classify masonm's and my comments as "flames" by any means... the basic idea is simple: you have no idea what you are speaking of regarding slackware so you should probably stop pretending like you do...

Quote:

you prefer to compile from source

that's completely beside the point, because SLACKWARE IS A BINARY DISTRO... it is NOT a source-based distro... comprenez vous??

Quote:

Maybe you prefer to use packages so you use pkgtools which are not as good as apt...sorry.

OMFG, there's like so much wrong with that statement - i just wouldn't know where to start...

*sigh* APPLES AND ORANGES MON AMI, APPLES AND ORANGES...

69_rs_ss :
yes there are only 3 types of distros (redhat, debian and source/binary).
I gave the number of top 10 distros, just to have enough distros for all the tastes...

10,000 debian programmers? I have read that somewhere, but I am not sure about the right number neither.


win32sux :
sorry I was confusing with Gentoo .
I didnt use Slack that much, so I dont know it good.
I remember Slack was quite special and not user-friendly. It uses gzip files which are not optimized for all x86 processor and doesnt resolve dependancies (there are also packages tools but they are not as good as apt).
I wouldnt recommend that distro for newbies.
Slack and Gentoo are quite original distros . At the begining, I didnt want to count them because of that, but a lot of people use them so why not .

So dont you think developpers should focus on fewer distros ?

No.

Linux's biggest strengths come from it broad and varied community. It's all about finding new and different ways of doing things. The huge volume of distributions stems from people having ideas and testing them out. The ideas which are truly good become adopted by others and eventually become a standard. Those that don't either remain a niche item to fill specific needs or they wither and die.

Linux is not, nor should it be a one size fits all OS. Everyone has specific needs their system needs to meet. Different distros are designed to meet different needs, or meet those needs in different ways. Choice is a good thing whether you think so or not.

You obviously don't understand what the Linux community is really about. Perhaps your resources would be better spent on whatever it is you do instead of posting threads telling the rest of the Linux community what it's "problem" is and how you think it's resources are wasted. Do you really think you're the first to post such an obnoxiously "you're all stupid and don't know what you're doing" thread?

Give up the Microsoft monopoly mindset and realize that Linux (and Open Source in general) isn't looking to dominate the world, or lure anyone away from Microsoft. It's about people working on something they enjoy, and having the freedom to do pretty much whatever they want to do with it.

We happen to like freedom and choice. We like the broad diversity that is Linux.

NO, there are NOT "only 3 types of distros"...

BTW, both red hat and debian are binary distros so i'm not sure why you placed "binary" in a separate space...

the main binary distros (from which most other binary distros are based on) are:

- Red Hat

- Debian

- Slackware


and the main source-based distros are:

- Gentoo

- LFS (which is more like a cookbook, but it's still considered a distro...)

Quote:

I gave the number of top 10 distros, just to have enough distros for all the tastes...

but that's a totally subjective rundown... i mean, how can you say that "10" distros is enough for everybody's taste/needs?? that's impossible... nobody can determine how many distros are "enough" for everyone's taste/needs... IMHO this is the sorta thing that we should allow to simply play-out and see where it goes, let the linux distribution phenomenon evolve on it's own... why should we try and get every developer to dedicate themselves to one of the "top 10" distros?? the argument that doing so would produce better "top 10" distros might hold some ground (although in a way it's beside the point) but has at least a couple flaws in it:

1 - a developer that enjoys working on his/her distro won't necesarily have the same motivation to work on someone else's just because it's one of the "top" distros... one reason could be that he doesn't get the same level of satisfaction, also perhaps it might not be as much fun, etc.

2 - there's nothing preventing the main distros from absorbing ideas from the little guys either way (the nature of the GPL)...

Quote:

win32sux : sorry I was confusing with Gentoo . I didnt use Slack that much, so I dont know it good.

yes, that was precisely my point...

Quote:

I remember Slack was quite special and not user-friendly. It uses gzip files which are not optimized for all x86 processor and doesnt resolve dependancies

whether or not it's user-friendly is totally debatable... it depends on the user... i find slackware much friendlier than the other distros i've tried... but my definition of "friendly" probably is not the same as yours...

i don't know if there's any binary distro that's optimized for "ALL" x86 processors... AFAIK that's an oxymoron - think about it... anyways, FYI most of the slackware packages are compiled to run on architectures as low as i486, while being optimized for the i686 architecture...

as for the dependancy issue: you speak like it's a bad thing... that's your opinion, but most slackers (including myself) feel that it's actually a GOOD thing...

Quote:

there are also packages tools but they are not as good as apt

once again - you are comparing apples and oranges... APT is what's called an "automated package management system"... you can't compare APT to the official slackware package tools because slackware does NOT have any automated package system... so saying that slackware's package system isn't as good as APT is like saying that some vehicle's automatic transmisson is better than some other vehicle's manual transmission - it's subjective... some people prefer automatic transmissions in their cars, but some people prefer manual transmissions - and both types have their own merits...

Quote:

I wouldnt recommend that distro for newbies.

most of the time neither would i, but that's beside the point...

Quote:

Slack and Gentoo are quite original distros

i would really appreciate if you could explain what you mean when you say a distro is "original" cuz i have no idea what you mean...

Quote:

So dont you think developpers should focus on fewer distros ?

NO, i don't... i think developers should focus on whatever distro they want to focus on... if they wanna contribute to one of the "major" distros that's great... if they wanna run their own little project i think that's great also...

<jokingly> if you want developers to focus only on the major distros then i'd say why not better have them forget ALL the distros and have them focus strictly on the GNU project... i mean all distros are based on the GNU project so maybe developers times would be better suited contributing to GNU instead of to some distro... </jokingly>

The reason there are so many distros is that anyone can make their own distro, and different people have different wants and needs. Some people like to stick with the idea of having their entire Linux distro fit on a bootable floppy diskette - so, they make their own distro without X and with just the bare minimum. Then again, some want to be able to carry their distro with them but still want X, so they make their own distro with X and some other software, but keep it from getting too big to fit on a CD, like Knoppix. Others like to have it LOADED with software and games - so, they make their own distro with X, games, all kinds of software. . . and it ends up being huge and needing 4 or 5 install CD's, like many Linux distros. Some don't want to have to compile software (or don't know how to) and want pretty frontends to take care of everything for them, so they look for the distributions that do this, like Mandriva. Others don't mind compiling software and don't care too much about having a pretty frontend as long as they get rock-solid performance and/or don't want to have to wait around for someone to make an .rpm or .deb, so they make a distro that suits them.

I guess all I'm really saying is that the reason there are so many distros is that they all suit different needs. Of all the distros you listed, I don't see any that can fit on a floppy diskette - what if I don't have a CD drive but want to be able to carry Linux around? I also didn't notice any distros built explicitly for use as a server. And what about distros built for certain unusual purposes, like KnoppMyth?

I upgrade Slackware with all libraries dependencies online using Swaret... Apt-get maybe is good, but dpkg is bad... bad...
Pkgtool is tomanage packages, Swaret and other programs are used to online upgrade.
I recently upgraded kde to 3.4.1 and swaret installed three missing libraries...

Why not directly put the good ideas in the big distros ?
And the big distros need manpower : union makes strength.

Hum... You forgot to say that any distro can install from source...
The advantage of Gentoo is that the source compiling is automated by the tool portage , so it is different than installing with hand.
The 3 main used binary packagers are : apt-get (debian), yum (red hat) and installpkg (slackware).
So it makes 4 main categories :
-debian based
-red hat based
-slackware based
-only-source based (like gentoo)

They come from the top 10 most used distros. There are enough for all tastes. (I am not talking about the industry).
And take Gentoo for instance, this could be the universal distro : so simple to install and efficient.

Because they need good developpers and manpower.

Because the dependancy issue can be very long and complex.
Either you have a complete automatic tool for binaries, either you compile from source.
Slackware comes between and it is not a brilliant choice.

That's the final goal, but to reach it, first focuse on the top distros.

Some distros can fulfill almost all those needs.
And costumizing a distro isnt hard.

Who needs that ? Except industry companies. I was talking about the normal users.
If there are unusual distros, why not, but try to focuse on the best ones too.