SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Datamation examines the Debian and Ubuntu distros in detail by starting with the question, what is the difference between Debian and Ubuntu? Neither GNU/Linux distro has been out of Distrowatch's top six since 2005, and for the last four years neither has been out of the top three. There are good reasons for that. Though if systemd is not your cup of tea, there is also a Debian fork, Devuan, which is basically Debian GNU/Linux minus systemd.
[Ed Note: For many in the community who are Linux experts, this article may have no appeal. For those of us that are new to it and trying to learn, something this basic is a nice read and contains good information.]
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Debian vs. Ubuntu: What's the Difference?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 57 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
If we can ever make red tape nutritional, we can feed the world.
-- R. Schaeberle, "Management Accounting"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16 2017, @03:03PM (6 children)
Then why do they support systemd?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16 2017, @03:29PM (5 children)
Because it's what their users want & need based on the social contract they have. instead of what purists think it should be or what was good tens of years ago. Needs change and what used to work doesn't always keep working ad infinitum. Sometimes you really do have to throw shit out and begin anew.
That being said, I fall in the purist category, but I see their point and don't go all Holy War & Crusade on it. I'm a pragmatic purist, if you will.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 16 2017, @03:38PM
Nonsense. There has been no outcry from users that the distros move to systemd. The users need and want an init system - and few of them cared much about which one to use. Those few have always been free to choose which one to use, of course.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16 2017, @04:02PM (3 children)
Systemd was never designed for users or to meet their needs. It was designed solely for the people that make distros and do the packaging of software for the distros.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by VLM on Sunday July 16 2017, @04:56PM (2 children)
Those people don't want it either. Hey guys, instead of something small simple and has its bugs fixed, here's an enormous cancerous monolith that hasn't been debugged yet, its not exactly a better mousetrap. Its the oldest marketing game in the book, manufacture a need while coincidentally providing the only solution.
I had to move to freebsd, and its working great. Best conspiracy theory ever is the *BSD people are supporting and financing systemd to destroy linux and force *BSD adoption. Its more likely Microsoft has some submarine patent preparing to launch. Embrace extend extinguish. Become the monopoly provider of init, dns resolution, sound, ssh, who knows what else, then whoops a daisy some MS patent is being violated and you can either roll back technology half a decade to pre-monopoly era, or just pay a cheap $5/host licensing fee to microsoft, or accept this generous $10 off coupon to upgrade to Windows Server 2016 or whatever they're calling it.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday July 17 2017, @02:07AM
We need more of this sort of post from you. Modded up. Stick to technical stuff and lay off the politics, huh? This is where your strength lies.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Thursday July 20 2017, @12:58AM
The manufactured solution but not the submarine patent is right asfaik. It's all about Redhat etc being able to sell consulting services and whatnot which requires *drumroll* special knowledge of systemd which only they can provide. They even have the crystal ball for the next "feature"..
And then it exposes Linux to new bugs in case anyone tries to defend their privacy.