Considering a few of the pot shots Ubuntu/Shuttleworth took at Mint earlier in the year, if I were starting a new distro, I’d choose to base it on Debian. Ubuntu raised a few eyebrows when talking about licensing and usage of repositories, enough to make me a little worried for Ubuntu-based distros. Don’t get me wrong, I like Ubuntu-based distros, they do work “better” than other bases, but I think Shuttleworth is narked that Mint is “more popular” than Ubuntu. How much of it was ranty hot air, and whether there was any legal/strategic basis behind it is for Canonical to know, and the users to find out. At least there hasn’t been similar doubt cast by Debian :
I’m not (currently) worried Ubuntu are going to get too uppity … hell they even backed down from that argument with Mint.
Doesn’t mean I agree with some of the stupid decisions they make … but “so far” that’s generally just put me off their desktop, not so much their core.
I get the feeling some distros choose to base on Debian just to NOT use Ubuntu .. but to stay fairly close .. politics.
I do not get it, what give you the idea that using Debian is more difficult? I will give you that, it is boring - just works. No breakages, nothing to tinker with (unless you want to break something) and that on Testing.
Wheezy is as stable as you can get. Running it on my AA1 and EeePC (LXDE).
Because there’s always something that doesn’t work out of the box, and from a new user perspective you need a comp sci degree and a couple of weeks to figure out how to get it working.
I mean the last time I tried a Debian based Distro (couple of weeeks ago) tap-to-click on the touchpad didn’t work under LXDE … and Debian made it particularly difficult to fix.
It’s all those little things that make Debian an unusable base system … hell it takes someone with Ubuntu’s clout to fix all the little things and make it usable out of the box … and that’s just plain dumb, they let someone else do to them what Mint do to Ubuntu … improve their distro and steal their thunder, as I said Dumb.
Well, I think it’s interesting that Mint is now LTS-only on the Ubuntu side, and LMDE is based on Debian Stable only (from the next Debian release), therefore mirroring the release schedules between the two. It’s one stage further of hedging their bets on Ubuntu’s future on derivation (word?). It’d be dead simple for them to drop Ubuntu and promote LMDE as the main release, and people wouldn’t bat an eyelid (to the end users, most of the horrible stuff is hidden anyway unless you “open the bonnet”)
OK, I’m going to take back my “dumb” comment about Debian, they have their priorities and it can’t be argued that it’s not working for them … after all any win for Ubuntu or derivative is a win for Debian too … they’re the “real” base of most distro’s Ubuntu included.
Here’s how I see it … Sorry folks, “car” analogy again…
Debian design and build subsystems from parts supplied by small manufacturers … they “assemble” the alternator, injectors, fuel pump, engine, etc. … they’ll even do a pre assembled complete car, but a lot of the parts will have burrs and it’s unpainted, in a word it’s “unfinished” … now that’s fine, that’s not their area of expertise, they recognise this and are happy to be the builder and recognised experts of the subsystems used by everyone else.
Ubuntu (having the manpower), de-burr, polish and reassemble the subsystems tweaking where necessary … they put them together into a more cohesive whole … the only problem is lately they’ve taken to giving it a spray job, and this is NOT their area of expertise.
Historically Mint and others were customisers who took the Ubuntu car and give it a spray job added a few custom decals, maybe swapped out the cast iron disks for ceramic, and made it “specialist” … a sports version, an off-roader, a soft top, etc.
(Debian already did the reliable old Tractor)
The problem is that Ubuntu decided it too wanted to get into the spray painting and customisation side of things, annoying the customisers by encroaching on their business … turns out they had nothing to worry about, in fact Ubuntu did such a bad paint job that the customisers became more popular than ever … but it still leaves the customisers with a paint job they have to remove first, and a whole paint job to do where previously they could just add lacquer and pin stripes.
Also turns out that to a lot of peoples chagrin, Ubuntu in spending so much attention on their rather naff paint shop have let the sub-assembly rebuilding, polishing and tweaking side of things slip a little … but it’s still a more “finished” car and still the preferred starting point than Debians tractor for anyone that builds custom cars (except possibly engineers who want the tractors reliability above all else, and the possess the skills necessary to make it work for them).
It seems to me, there are a lot of distro builders out there that are now starting to Debian base, not because it gives them a better distro, but for purely political reasons, or to appease a small (but very vocal) niche egghead purisit community … to me it fells like more of an “anti Ubuntu” sentiment than a “pro Debian” one.
A short while ago someone in a rather scathing review of Peppermint said he figured the Peppermint team were loosing interest and that they’d probably at some point do a Debian based version then disappear … ignoring the fact that he was a complete asshat and totally wrong … it did make me question a lot of the Debian based distros and if they’re doing it to “prove they can”, or “for the challenge”, or “for political correctness” as opposed to “because it’s the best base for the job” … and IMHO in most (not all) cases it tends to be the former.
[EDIT]
Mint do not fix/polish Debian … they spray paint Ubuntu and/or Debian … OK, they may have lately taken to putting on cheap wheel arches and fake boy racer side pipes too :
In fact it could easily be argued they’ve just fattened up Debian leaving all the roughness … and just rebadged Ubuntu/Gnome without ‘really’ changing any of their downsides either
I liked Mint when I first got into Linux … it was Ubuntu with a radio that had been pre-tuned in for you … but now I just see them as having the same problems people level at Ubuntu (but are actually ‘less’ true about Ubuntu), they ‘pretend’ to be something different … but at the end of the day they are just Ubuntu/Debian with a different shirt, they retain all the same bloat/roughness and go after the same market, so I’m having trouble differentiating them
Watt os has switched from Ubuntu to Debian as their base in there latest release , the rationale being that with Ubuntu they have to strip many components out whereas with Debian they only add what they need
Except for the fact it was WattOS’s LXDE version where the touchpad “tap-to-click” didn’t work … and would have been a nightmare for a new user to fix … in fact even I gave up rather than jump through hoops.
As I said … Debian is a rougher base, not an easier one … so I simply don’t believe that rationale.
I get the feeling a lot of distro devs think - I’ve learned how to do it with Ubuntu because it was easier, now I’ll go for the “politically correct” base and see how I go … inevitably it’s a “rougher”, and less friendly distro for it (though granted slightly quicker/lighter if you know how to knock off all the rough edges yourself).
[EDIT]
BTW, thanks for reminding me … I couldn’t for the life of me remember which Debian based distro I tried a fortnight ago … but maybe that in itself says something.
There were also problems with their MATE version … though I can’t remember what they were.
Pity because I used to rather like the old Ubuntu based versions of WattOS and IIRC said as much on the old Peppermint forum.
I like the car analogy, although tractors are pretty slow, and it’s mostly acknowledged that Debian is quicker/lighter than Ubuntu. So, maybe it’s more like a Caterham, and Debian aren’t too skilled with a spanner…
Anyway, I don’t really understand your issue with Mint re: bloat. It’s always been bloaty (well, the main releases, not the Xfce/Fluxbox ones), certainly no worse than Ubuntu and better than Windows. I get you can get Ubuntu base and it’s light, like Debian base. Also, I get that there are 2 perspectives here - the end user (driver) and the distro builder/maintainer (mechanic). As a driver, I don’t really care how difficult it is to maintain (especially as there’s no charge from the mechanic!), as long as it’s a nice drive. And as long as you’ve got the hardware, Mint is a nice drive. If OS performance is like fuel economy, then I don’t care if Mint Cinnamon is thirsty compared to LXDE, if I can afford to put the fuel in it. I know it’s an upside down way of thinking about it, maybe I’ve had too many cups of tea, but it makes sense to me lol
It’s 2 different ideas - KDE/Cinnamon is the expensive-to-run Merc, and LXDE is the economical yet nice little VW. If you don’t have much hardware/money for fuel, you might be forced towards LXDE, if you’ve got lots then it’s up to you. Some people prefer the little cars even if they are rich!
Err, off track now. So, with regard to Debian’s lack of polish, it’s really only a big problem for the “mechanics”. A well built car should just work, if not the mechanics job isn’t finished. So, I don’t think Debian is bad, just that it’s more work for the mechanics and they haven’t cracked it yet. Just like cars were crap in the 80s, but they are better now (hence why we don’t drive around in cars designed/built back then). Hmm, actually it’s more like a Honda builder deciding that they want a new job at Fiat, and things are a bit different, so it takes a while to properly get the hang of it. And it shows in the final product
I meant “tractor” as a stable reliable workhorse, if a little boring and requiring a uncommon level of expertise to operate … not so much as a speed comparison…
And besides, who says tractors have to be slow
I’m not saying Debian is “bad” … just that I think the reason a lot of distro devs seem to be basing on it are political decisions, not that it’s the best base for the job.
I can’t personally see any benefit to using a less polished base that’ll be rougher and harder to setup for the average user … specialist distro’s fine … the rest are either being political or are doing it for themselves not their users.
Mint - Again I’m not saying it’s “bad” … I’m just saying it’s basically Ubuntu (or Debian for LMDE), so I seriously don’t get the “Ubuntu bad”, “Mint good” thing.
What exactly are the benefits of Mint over Ubuntu … or LMDE over Debian ?
So, with regard to Debian's lack of polish, it's really only a big problem for the "mechanics". A well built car should just work, if not the mechanics job isn't finished.
Agreed … I’m saying Debian make it harder for the mechanic (which often translates into harder for the driver too), with no real benefits … so why use it as a base ?
What exactly are the benefits of a Debian base over Ubuntu ?
I started off saying I can’t see the point in basing on Debian over Ubuntu other than for political reasons … in most cases I stand by that.
(same argument can be used for Mint/Ubuntu)
Mint vs. Ubuntu - Mint doesn’t have Unity (and the themes are nicer that just forcing a different DE on Ubuntu). And Mint has all the codecs and Flash and what-have-you pre-installed. Also, Mint has some nice utilities like the control panel and mintupdate. But basically it’s the same (you only have to check the Mint repo to see that there’s only like 100 packages in there, everything else is drawn directly from Ubuntu’s repos)
Debian vs. Ubuntu - Politically, it’s only the fact that Ubuntu employ specific patches in some packages that mean that you can’t compile Debian sources on Ubuntu successfully (I don’t have a concrete source on this, but it’s kinda known about - Unity is a decent example of Ubuntu-specific software). Not a major issue, but not exactly open. But the biggie for me, is the shot across the bow that Shuttleworth made regarding use of Ubuntu’s repos by seperate distros. It’s scary, as it would end Mint’s (and possibly others such as Peppermint) main version immediately. They’d have to fork & maintain their own repo, and even if that’s a mirror like CentOS, it’s still a lot of infrastructure and I doubt the project has the funds. I’d be 99% sure they’d say bugger it and can the Ubuntu-based release, and focus 100% on Debian at that point.
It’s just a case of Shuttleworth flexing his muscles, but the open-source community just doesn’t need that kind of attitude. Closing up shop isn’t the way to proliferate open-source software, and it’s damaging to the argument for it.
Edit: I agree about the use of Debian for political reasons - if it’s for e-peen reasons, you might as well use Arch or Gentoo (something that is going to make a notable performance difference). Debian isn’t that different, certainly not in any relevant measures. It’s not more secure or reliable than Ubuntu (probably gotta look towards Red Hat/CentOS or Slack for that)
I'd be 99% sure they'd say bugger it and can the Ubuntu-based release
I’d pretty much guarantee it … and Ubuntu would become a pariah, and most of its devs would probably leave and rally around Mint, thus fulfilling the prophecy … Which is why I have no fears of it happening.
(what I doubt would happen is that people would go to Debian … they’d find a way to fork Ubuntu, or fork Debian into an Ubuntu-alike replicating what Ubuntu did)
Ubuntu backed down and cleared that up pretty quickly suggesting it was more about “branding/licensing” than repo usage … and IMHO was just a sour grapes off the cuff (and quickly regretted) comment … I’m not reading much into it.
When I compare Ubuntu/Mint … I’m not too much concentrating on the DE, which Ubuntu (so far) have made easy to change.
I’m more on about the work done behind the scenes to make Debian “work” out of the box for people more “normal” than you or I
(Mint do little in this regard other than use what Ubuntu did … and as I said, they don’t even specialise, they’re after the same user group … so I can’t tell the difference)
Mint, Ubuntu … Ubuntu, Mint … they’re the same thing.
LMDE, Debian … Debian, LMDE … they’re the same thing
Lubuntu, Lxle, LinuxLite, etc…
at least Peppermint tries to specialise and go after a different (niche ?) user group, even if differences are pretty superficial.
Isn’t that true of pretty much all deriative distros though?
With the exception of stuff like Knoppix, most distros based on others are very similar to the original, and interchangable to a degree (except Unity - I don’t think anyone has managed to run Unity outside of Ubuntu)
Edit: Ninja edit - I agree about the different target users, but it just becomes Lubuntu - Peppermint then.
No … see the bit I added at the very end of that posting
Edit: double ninja edit … Oh, you did
I’m not saying Mint,etc. shouldn’t exist, choice and diversity are good things (with the possible exception of Ashley Banjo) … I’m just saying … oh hell, I don’t know what I’m saying ???
[EDIT]
I didn’t realise there were people about that would try to run Unity outside Ubuntu … “WTF ?” is all that springs to mind :o
