What do you think will be freed up if there were only a handful or top 10 distros? What would benefit that way? I'm not sure why there would be any major benefits? I think the more competition, the more innovation you will see because that distro wants to stand out from the rest and draw more users.

Wrong AGAIN, I'm afraid, portage can install binaries as easily as source code.

Right. . . So why do you think everybody needs to focus on the "top ten" to do something that isn't hard. . ?

Manpower

yes but it's just a secondary option.
And why using Gentoo if I still use binaries ? I would better use Debian instead.
The advantage of Gentoo is to compile easily from sources.

Some innovations can be added to the top ten and can be hard to add.

Ok, and what would this manpower work on then? And what would the benefits be to having this extra manpower only working on a select number of distros?

Look at here :
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=335897

Ever read the book 1984? Yes, union does make strength but that's not always a good thing. Windows has plenty of people that use it, and they continue to use it just because they see others using it. Does that mean that it's better to just give up Linux and join the Microsofties? I don't know about you, but I don't think so - I think that if an OS doesn't suit your specific needs and wants, then you shouldn't use it.

Two key words there - [B]some[B] and almost.

Wow - you're really contradicting yourself with this one.

Are you saying that if I want to be able to install Linux from a flash USB drive I'm going to have to customize another distro EVERY TIME I WANT A NEWER VERSION? Sure, it's one thing to just personalize the software and add/remove certain pieces of software, but it's a whole other deal if I'm going to need to actually remove things from the CD - who wants to sit there and look through every package, figuring out what they do and don't need to try and fit the installer onto their 256MB flash memory drive?

Who needs that? I don't know, but you might want it if you've got an older machine that you want to put to use - maybe if you've got an old 486 in the basement and you want to fool around with it but it has no CD drive. The point isn't "why would you", it's "if you need/want to, you can."

And who are you to say which distros are the best? Let's not forget that it wasn't too long ago that there were only THREE main distros that people used - Redhat, Slackware, and Debian. People didn't like Redhat because they thought it was too much like MS, but they thought that Slackware and Debian were a little too hard to use. So they created their own distros - then we saw Caldera, Linux-Mandrake, Connectiva. . . among others. Then, later, more and more people heard of Linux and wanted to try it but didn't want to reformat their hard drives - then we saw Phat Linux, WinLinux 2000, and others. Then, not too long ago, people decided to make distros that boot from CDs and now he have Knoppix and other boot-CD distros. Frankly, I'm glad that we have all these distros because it allows people to pick and choose what they like and dislike about each one and create their own, if there isn't already one that suits their needs.

What are you talking about? If you enjoy using binaries so much, then you can use them - KPackage lets you install RPMs. Just download an RPM and use KPackage. Also, most programs don't have a package specifically for Slackware so you compile them from source - and the ones that do have them specifically for Slackware are VERY easy to install. Do you speak English? Because the instructions tell you EXACTLY what to do to install. Yes, it's not point-and-click like with RPMs, but it isn't "hard" - and it works well. If you don't like it, then fine, don't use it; that's the beauty of having so many distros - you're not forced into having things one way if you don't like them that way. I don't know about you, but I'd rather have to compile from source than install an RPM and say, "Great. . . now where the h--- did it install to? Do I need to be root to run it? Did it work? Why can't I launch the program?" and then do a search for the program and find it in some obscure place.

Not always. I tried to run it on my "old" PC (not really old. . . it's an Athlon XP 1800+) and, since the card's plenty good enough to run at 1280x1024, but the monitor it's connected to can only handle 800x600, I couldn't see jack squat when X started. Slackware, though? No problem.

In conclusion, I don't think that we should be focusing on just one single distro or any group of distros because each distro has its own strengths and weaknesses. And, in all reality, I kind of doubt that many people who are actually involved in the creation of these distros are ever on these forums - if you REALLY want something to be done about it, you should probably talk to them through their distros' websites. I can almost guarantee the reaction will be just like the one you got here, but if you still feel that focusing on just a few distros is a GOOD thing, talk to them and let them tell you why it's not.

Trying to scare me uh ? No you must be joking.
If Microsoft wins over Linux, then it will be 1984.
And it seems to be the case. So goodbye Linux, stay in your little gurus ghetto.

oh Yes Linux is perfect. Everyone should use it ! Even people who never touched a computer in theiur life ! Yes Linux is sooooooooo good and sooooo simple.
Ok if you are satisfied with Linux , then keep it and kiss it.
You know I also use Microsoft, and you want to know why : because it is sometimes better than Linux.

What ? If you need such a distro just make it.

Yes everybody does that . Yesterday I said to myself, why not install Linux on my old fridge ?

It is not me, it is the users. I pointed the most used distros.

Running Linux from CD is just a toy. A real usable Linux runs from a hard disk.

No I hate binaries, I prefer compile from sources.
And there is no universal binary packaging, so it is the hell.

Have you tried the forum to solve your problem ?
Or does it really come from gentoo ?

We should really have more universal standards.

the reasons for not wanting to do that are as varied as the developers themselves... some like to do that, some don't... there's nothing wrong with either aproach...

Quote:

And the big distros need manpower : union makes strength.

the gnu/linux community focuses on what it's own needs and wants are... the big distros are part of that communty and are welcome to participate... in other words, they are welcome to become greatly involved in the community... but it sounds like you want all the distro developers to work in big distro sweatshops...

Quote:

You forgot to say that any distro can install from source...

i didn't forget, it's just pretty obvious that one can compile source code on any distro that has a working compiler...

Quote:

The advantage of Gentoo is that the source compiling is automated by the tool portage , so it is different than installing with hand.

i don't think that because something is "different" it automatically (no pun intended) makes it an advantage... honestly, i think the advantages of gentoo go beyond portage in itself and they actually encompass the core fact that it is a source distribution, THE source distribution... things like the level of adaptability to different hardware architectures, the level of customization that one can give one's binaries, the level of optimization, etc... those are the things that make gentoo great IMHO... it's not just because you can easily "emerge" stuff...

Quote:

The 3 main used binary packagers are : apt-get (debian), yum (red hat) and installpkg (slackware).

says who?? installpkg is a slackware command, it's not a "binary packager" whatever that means...

this is a technical forum, so let's be technically correct... the three "main" binary package types are:

- DEB (Debian) - the package tool itself is DPKG...

- RPM (Red Hat) - the package tool itself is also called RPM...

- TGZ (Slackware) - the package tools are, well, pkgtools (installpkg/removepkg/upgradepkg/pkgtool)...

things like APT and YUM are just AUTOMATED PACKAGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS... they work WITH the packages after they've already been made, so they cannot under any circumstances be called "packagers" like you are doing... look at the description directly from the Yum website: http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/

Quote:

So it makes 4 main categories : -debian based -red hat based -slackware based -only-source based (like gentoo)

ummm, sorta... it's a better idea to separate the binary and source distros... there's TWO main categories: binary and source... that's where your tree should start...

Quote:

They come from the top 10 most used distros. There are enough for all tastes. (I am not talking about the industry).

FALSE. how do you know which the 10 most popular distros are?? please don't tell me you are using the page hit counter from distrowatch.com to determine this... LOL... there's no way you can know which the 10 most used distros are, what you CAN do is take your best guess...

enough for all tastes?? LOL!!! not only is that completely untrue, but it also ignores the fact that distro selection isn't ONLY a matter of taste - it's also a matter of NEEDS... and just because your needs might be satisfied by one of distrowatch.com's top 10 most popular distro pages doesn't mean that everyone else's needs will be satisfied by them...

Quote:

And take Gentoo for instance, this could be the universal distro : so simple to install and efficient.

well if the linux community makes gentoo become the "universal" distro (whatever that means) then that's great... but it's something that would have to happen naturally... i mean, that's something subjective, there's lots of people that don't feel the same way you do about gentoo, for example...

Quote:

Because they need good developpers and manpower.

but why should one put the needs of the big distros before the needs of oneself and one's users?? that doesn't make sense... imagine if the Knoppix guy woke-up one day and said "F*ck Knoppix. I'm gonna join the Debian team and dedicate my life to pure Debian." or what if Patrick Volkerding woke-up one day and said "F*ck Slackware. I'm gonna dedicate myself to Mandriva." it just doesn't make any sense at all, man... it's like saying all the motorcycle shops that make BAD ASS custom motorcycles should just close-up and send the employees to work in the assembly line for Kawasaki... YUCK!!!

Quote:

Because the dependancy issue can be very long and complex.

which is precisely why certain projects have taken steps to remove the complexity... but there isn't only ONE way to do things in gnu/linux... for example: the debian people chose to fight the package installation dependancy problems by using an automated package managment system... the slackware guy simply eliminated the installation dependancies ENTIRELY and left it up to the the system administrator to properly deal with them... each approach has it's own merits... why do you have this laser beam vision of package management?? things aren't just black and white, you know??

Quote:

Either you have a complete automatic tool for binaries, either you compile from source.

you can also install a binary without using an "automatic" tool, you know?? it happens all the time...

Quote:

Slackware comes between and it is not a brilliant choice.

OMG how can you make comments like that regarding something you DON'T HAVE A CLUE about??

i for one find the simplicity of the slackware package system absoloutely BRILLIANT, and i'm quite sure most slackers here will agree... you should probably use gnu/linux for a while longer before you start making statements like this on gnu/linux message boards...

Quote:

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

ummm, you do realize what i said about GNU was completely sarcastic, right??

Quote:

Some distros can fulfill almost all those needs.

well, as NetRAVEN5000 said: the key words here are SOME and ALMOST...

Quote:

And costumizing a distro isnt hard.

neither is doing an "installpkg *.tgz" but that doesn't mean everyone should use slackware, now does it?? why should i be forced to customize one of the "top 10" distros just so i can do what i need to do?? that's precisely why specially-tailored distros were created...

Quote:

Who needs that ? Except industry companies.

IT'S OFFICIAL: YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE.

Quote:

If Microsoft wins over Linux, then it will be 1984. And it seems to be the case. So goodbye Linux, stay in your little gurus ghetto.

WTF are you talking about man?? what's this about "winning"?? what is this some kinda contest?? is that what you think this is?? OMFG *sigh*

Quote:

oh Yes Linux is perfect. Everyone should use it ! Even people who never touched a computer in theiur life ! Yes Linux is sooooooooo good and sooooo simple.

people who've never touched a computer in their life wouldn't even be able to use windows 98 if you breast-fed it to them...

Quote:

Ok if you are satisfied with Linux , then keep it and kiss it.

oh, okay... thanks... so do we all have your permission?? LOL. yes, i am satisfied with linux. i am very happy with it. thank you very much.

Quote:

You know I also use Microsoft, and you want to know why : because it is sometimes better than Linux.

did anybody here say it wasn't?? only a completely un-objective person would say that linux is better than windows in all areas... for example it's a well-known fact that windows kicks linux ass as far as games are concerned... games are one of the main reasons why people choose to dual-boot instead of moving over to linux completely...

Quote:

If you need such a distro just make it.

we can't... the tools don't exist... all the non-mainstream distro-making tools were erradicated during the programmershous revolution of 2005 and hence the only tools we have now are those made available by the "sacred top 10" and they obviously don't let us have any tools that would allow us to become independant from them...

Quote:

Yes everybody does that . Yesterday I said to myself, why not install Linux on my old fridge ?

even though this comment of yours was just a joke, it does hint at your level of ignorance considering that having linux on household appliances is a very serious business... a business which was erradicated during the programmershous revolution of 2005, BTW...

i mean, take a look at this article for example: http://www.designnews.com/article/CA603743.html

Quote:

It is not me, it is the users. I pointed the most used distros.

no, you didn't - because you DON'T KNOW which are the most used distros...

Quote:

Running Linux from CD is just a toy. A real usable Linux runs from a hard disk.

OMG how long are you gonna be making ridiculous comments like this?? THERE'S PLENTY OF TIMES WHEN USING A CD-BASED DISTRO IS A MILLION TIMES BETTER THAN USING A HARD-DISK INSTALLED ONE. just like there's also times when it's better to use a flash card, or a floppy, or a friggin' external USB ramdrive... a "real usable" linux isn't determined by which storage media it resides on, okay?? geez!!! LOL.

Quote:

No I hate binaries, I prefer compile from sources. And there is no universal binary packaging, so it is the hell.

ummm, so i guess you've never heard of the Linux Standard Base?? this might be news for you then: RPM is the standard linux binary package format.

Quote:

We should really have more universal standards.

we do, look at the LSB link above...

I aggre that we need more distro to suit everyone needs. But 400 distro is going too far. You know there are more than 4 redhat enterprise clone??? ( centos, whitebox, and blabla )

programmershous, several people here have made some excellent points as to why Linux has a variety of distros and why this is a good thing, which you have completely ignored and continued with your bleating. As far as I'm concerned you're just another troll.

Trying to scare me uh ? No you must be joking.
If Microsoft wins over Linux, then it will be 1984.
And it seems to be the case. So goodbye Linux, stay in your little gurus ghetto.

Technically, right now MS is beating Linux in the desktop world though I think times are starting to change. So in that respect, MS is already winning.

Thing is, this is not a competition. If you ask any really serious linux user, they use it because they like it and it is a better alternative for them. What I tend to see though is a lot of new users fresh from the MS world that is looking for linux world domination and such.

oh Yes Linux is perfect. Everyone should use it ! Even people who never touched a computer in theiur life ! Yes Linux is sooooooooo good and sooooo simple.
Ok if you are satisfied with Linux , then keep it and kiss it.
You know I also use Microsoft, and you want to know why : because it is sometimes better than Linux.

No one said linux is perfect. What they are saying is it suits pretty much everyone for their needs.

What ? If you need such a distro just make it.

I thought you said there needs one universal distro. Now you are contradicting yourself and saying create another.

Yes everybody does that . Yesterday I said to myself, why not install Linux on my old fridge ?

Actually, a lot of people do it. They like to make dedicated firewalls or routrs out of it instead of junking perfectly good equipment.

Running Linux from CD is just a toy. A real usable Linux runs from a hard disk.

Not true. there are very usable Livecd's that people use all the time for forensics.

win32sux : you wrote such a long and brilliant intelligent message that it will take me some days to answer ...
69_rs_ss : I will also take some time to answer, I need to find good answers too .
Thanks everybody. .

*All quotes are from programmershous unless otherwise noted.
That really wasn't the point - I was contradicting your comment that Gentoo "could be the universal distro : so simple to install and efficient.".
Technically, this problem is insolvable without modification of Gentoo, unless there's some kind of pre-install option to pass to the kernel that I didn't know about, because the problem has just as much to do with the software as the hardware. As I explained earlier, it was an older monitor, completely incapable of resolutions higher than 800x600 and unable to handle high-frequency refresh rates. I could've easily fixed the problem if I were able to change the XF86 or Xorg config files but, since I was using it to boot from the CD, I couldn't really do that, could I? The point I was making, though, was that Slackware could handle it with *NO* extra configuration (it completely autodetected and setup my graphics config on its own, automatically) and Gentoo (which is supposed to be much easier to setup and use - just pop it in and go) couldn't - it just assumed, "well, 1024x768's the standard, and most monitors can handle this framerate, and his videocard can handle it, so that's what we'll use" not realizing that my monitor couldn't handle it Saw nothing but colored streaks. If I played with the monitor's knobs in the back I could get rid of the streaks, but the picture would be split and the same thing would show four times on the screen (meaning that it showed four cursors, four of each KDE button, four of EVERYTHING).
That's one thing I don't like about so many people new to Linux - they joined in just to be the rebellious one in the neighborhood who said, "Down with M$!" This isn't a "win-or-lose" thing - what I want isn't a humongous user-base. That'd be great, but that's not what I want - I want rock-solid stability that'll let my speedy PC do what I want it to. Also, Linux will ALWAYS be there. MS can't stop it - it's officially here. They can spread their FUD all they want with their "Get the Facts" campaign, but we Linux users know the REAL truth. The only way they could stop it is if they could gain control of EVERY government and have them write laws against GNU, Linux, and open-source software. And I have a feeling people will think something's up before they can do that.
The point of Linux is NOT to destroy MS. And that's why MS will fail - because they are trying to destroy competition rather than competing with it. In other words, MS tries to either BUY or BREAK the best; Linux tries to BE the best. Not all of us hate MS - in fact, I don't think Linus himself hates MS. I use their products myself - just not their software because it seems to me that MS products are great in the fields where MS is forced to be truly competitive. If MS starts to TRULY compete, then I have no problem with people choosing MS over Linux; however, I think that too many people use MS products not because they like MS's products the best, but because they don't know of any other products and/or haven't seen or tried out other products and think that MS's stuff is best just because everyone uses it.
I understand that Linux isn't perfect and, yes, for some purposes Windows might be better than Linux. Running Halo and some other favorite games can't always be done with Linux - especially not without emulators (Halo in particular is a difficult one - I've never heard of anyone who can run it on Linux, and I doubt I ever will now that Bungie was bought by MS). If you like Windows so much, then "keep it and kiss it". But it's not perfect either - IMO it was better in version 3.1 than it is now. Froze just as much, but I liked Program Manager MUCH better than the new GUI (speaking of which, MS didn't come up with the idea for either GUI - it copied the old one from Mac and the new one from OS/2). Not joining the Microsofties doesn't mean "never use MS products" - in fact, not too long ago, I used Windows, and I still use an MS "natural" keyboard and an MS mouse - it means not supporting MS products that suck. I know plenty of MS users who HATE MS products but continue to use them. They get viruses and spamware and all kinds of crap. And they just keep on limping along with it like there's no alternative - I don't even mean not switching to Linux but not switching to ANY product that's not fed to them by MS, their ISP, or the vendor that sold them their PC - like they're some kind of software masochists or something. With Linux it's not "here's the competition, let's show them who's the best", it's "here's what we want, let's make it."
And don't act like it's so hard to use Linux, okay? I learned to use MS-DOS when I was about 4. It wasn't hard, it just took getting used to - same with just about any OS, why do you think they have "Windows for Dummies?" ANY OS can be hard until you get used to it.
NOTE TO ALL READERS:Please, I'd like to do a little "virtual 'show-of-hands'" here so, if you would, please just send a reply with this question and your answer.
Do you think that programmershous is being contradictory to his original statement that there are "Too many Linux distributions"?
Yeah, because everybody has a 486 in their FRIDGE. Mmm, mmm. . . that 486 is tasty! A little crunchy, though.
486 is the name of an old CPU that Intel used to make. What's it doing in your fridge? I'm pretty sure computer processors aren't and never were used in refrigerators - more than likely, they use a special chip made just for fridges. You don't find them in your fridge, but you might find them in the trash somewhere or at a used computer store if you want a cheap PC just for browsing the 'Net or to run as a file server or something.
How do you know who uses what distro? I'm sure there's PLENTY of people who don't tell people what distro they're using, or take part in polls about what distro they're using, or any of that (not that they wouldn't tell you if you asked them personally but maybe they don't want to vote or join the forum).
So? I wasn't using it like that - I was using it to check out an old HD to see if there were any files I needed from it or if it was OK to reformat to set up a Linux server.
Because who's to say what's a "good idea?" What's a "good idea" for someone trying to setup a server (removing X or recompiling without ALSA, for example) might not be such a good idea for someone who wants to use it as a desktop PC for games, Internet, and MP3's.
Automatic installation and updates isn't ALWAYS such a great thing, you know - I've seen it break things before (more specifically, my sound).
programmershous is exaggerating this, though. Yes, there are a lot of distros, but most of them aren't well-known. Most people only know about 5 or 6 distros. In fact, I doubt anyone (at least that's not a huge Linux fan) could name more than 6 or 7 just off the top of their head.
The point is that we don't have to pick distros from a "top ten" list - each one has its own strengths and weaknesses, programmers work on the ones they like the most, and, if these distros aren't very well-known, they work their way up toward the top or, if they are, they stay up there. The ones that aren't well maintained get used less and less until they aren't used anymore, but they're still there, which is why there are so many distros - it's just that pretty much the only person who knows about it is the original creator. (Aside from programmershous and his list of 400 distros, that is )
And, why get rid of them? Did you know that there are also plenty of non-Unix based freeware/open-source OS's out there? Plan 9, Unununium, and V2_OS, to name a few - just check out www.freeos.com if you don't believe me. Why don't their programmers just throw in the towel and work on Linux? I don't know, but I don't think we should make a big deal about it - they're not hurting anyone. Leave them and their OS's alone, and leave the creators of these distros and their unique distros alone. Unless there's a NukeLinux or AtomLinux or something, I see no reason to tell these programmers to stop their hard work, drop their beloved distro, and start working on another one just because they didn't make it into a stupid "top-ten" list.
That's sad to hear but I can't say I'm surprised. When are you gonna learn, programmershous. . . we don't FIND these good answers, we MAKE them. We're using our knowledge of the past, our knowledge of what's new, and our knowledge about Linux and other OS's to formulate our answers, not "finding" them.

That is the most stupid thing i have ever heard, Kanotix is my distro/livecd of choice and i love it, i think live cd's are such a great advance, and so many new ones are being made all the time. Soon we could just use live cd's to install OS', plus its very user friendly being put in a fully working GUI desktop from the start.

yes, when he said "If you need such a distro just make it" he completely contradicted himself...

i think he's just trolling, and his "i need to find good answers" was lame...