Weekly Edition
Return to the Distributions page
| |||||||||||||
The Debian Core Consortium launches
The much-rumored Debian Core Consortium has finally announced its existence. "Founding members of the Alliance include credativ, KNOPPIX, LinEx,
Linspire, MEPIS, Progeny, Sun Wah, UserLinux, and Xandros. The initial
release of the Debian Common Core, expected in the September time frame, will
be based on Debian 3.1 ('Sarge') and certified to LSB. The common core will
be the basis for future releases of each member's Linux products, and the DCC
Alliance will serve as a single point of contact for software and hardware
vendors who want to ensure that their products will work with Debian."
(Log in to post comments)
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 10, 2005 14:28 UTC (Wed) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link] When will Ubuntu sign on? And why didnt they?
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 10, 2005 15:13 UTC (Wed) by huffd (guest, #10382) [Link] Why should they? In two years at their growth rate Debian can join their consortium.
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 11, 2005 4:06 UTC (Thu) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link] Not in the least. Debian is still incredibly strong, and Ubuntu cannot survive (let alone thrive) without a healthy, strong, Debian at its base. Say what you will about it, but it does an excellent job of providing a base distribution, matched by absolutely no other.
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 12, 2005 8:16 UTC (Fri) by piman (subscriber, #8957) [Link] Of course, Debian is not actually part of the "Debian" Core Consortium.
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 10, 2005 15:17 UTC (Wed) by TxtEdMacs (guest, #5983) [Link] From my understanding of Ubuntu, via my son, an Ubuntu release is based on the then current snap shot of Debian Unstable. Obviously that is NOT Sarge.
The distribution consists of bug fixes and refinements to a more limited set of packages that are then released as an Ubuntu distribution.
Given this routine it is difficult to see Ubuntu matching the DCC core specifications. Moreover, beginning from a differing base set of code they would seem less useful in supporting commercial needs. Ubuntu role may well be to serve new, non-commercial users that wish to try Linux.
Perhaps the better approach to creating more <i>weight</i> to this coalition would be to entice Mandriva to reconsider its current base distribution. While I suspect Ubuntu may at the moment have more raw numbers and be more nearly associated with the Debian model, I think Mandriva has had some success in the government/commercial distribution model that could lend a bit more credibility to a DCC effort.
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 10, 2005 15:17 UTC (Wed) by debacle (subscriber, #7114) [Link] I assume, that the goals of DCC and Ubuntu are different. DCC is based on Debian stable (sarge, 3.1). Ubuntu is more or less based on unstable (sid). But it would be nice to see DCC and Ubuntu working together.
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 10, 2005 15:33 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] To me the so-called DCC basing it's system around Componentized Linux seems a very brillant idea.
You not only stick to established file system standards but you use a identical basis for your system.
It's developed out of Progeny and they use it for developing specialized distros for customers (like if you want a media player or a NAS type setup).
You have the 'Debian Core', which is a carefully selected set of basic OS software out of Debian. This will be used as the basis for all DCC distros.
This will create the 'standard API' that commercial (not neccisarially closed source, but anything 'enterprise'.. like say the Lustre cluster filesystem) developers need so desperately for Linux.
No matter what variation of Debian-based distro.. be it a specialized Progeny version, or Linspire, or Xandros.. you know that that set of core functionality will aways be present and always be compatable with Debian Stable.
On top of that Debian core they would create componates.. Like for isntance if you need to integrate into a Microsoft Active Directory system you can install the 'Active Directory support componate' and get all the packages pre-configured and setup the user authentication to be used with a AD.
With componatized Linux, the goal is to setup a building-block system were distros will build up variations suited towards their specific task.
For instance Redhat/Suse/Mandrake are all originally based around the similar REdhat 5-6 era distro. Redhat made big changes in 7.0, and again in Fedora Core and RHEL. Then Mandrake went it's way, and Suse went it's way. Each modern rpm distro is using around the same library versions, similar versions of KDE, similar versions of Gnome. Similar kernel versions... Everything is very much the same, except trying to make a cross-compatable rpm file would be a nightmare.
That's because they never realy bothered to work together.
Between them there is a lot of 'reinventing the wheel'. They each maintain their own little island of compatable packages and there is a lot of repeat effort and potentionally time/money wasting. And in the end it makes their software more difficult for the end user to deal with and for third parties to support effectively.
Wouldn't it be nice if I wanted the new version of VLC media player I could simply get a .deb file and have it work flawlessly on Debian, credativ, KNOPPIX, LinEx, Linspire, MEPIS, Progeny, Sun Wah, UserLinux, and Xandros? (a little copy-n-paste there) It would "just work" and not cost VLC any more effort then is already used in the support of Debian.
Of course the Major downside is that Debian has been WAY TO SLOW TO RELEASE NEW STABLE VERSIONS.
Huge huge problem. For example UserLinux started off with interest, but it basicly had to put everything on hold just until Debian got it's act together and released Sarge.
This is the reason I figure that Ubuntu hasn't joined.
They don't want to wait 5 years until the next release for the core functionality of their system.
If Debian can get Etch out the door and keep the high quality in a dozen months instead of a half dozen years, then I wouldn't be suprised if more distros join up very quickly including Ubuntu.
That way Ubuntu could get the core system taken care of, for basicly no-effort, and concentrate all their efforts on making their version of the Gnome system as good as it possibly could be.
They could release two updated 'Ubuntu' components for every Debian release and everybody will be happy and Ubuntu users would be able to keep their state-of-the-art Gnome desktop and have it much better tested and polished.
(or state-of-the-art KDE desktop in the 'Kubuntu' component if your a KDE fan.) :)
SuSE was based on RedHat 5-6?? Posted Aug 10, 2005 15:55 UTC (Wed) by vblum (guest, #1151) [Link] Really - in which era? I thought SuSE was rather old, as a company ...
SuSE was based on RedHat 5-6?? Posted Aug 11, 2005 1:22 UTC (Thu) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] No, SUSE was never a Red Hat derivative. It just uses the RPM package format too, that is the only common point.
SuSE was based on RedHat 5-6?? Posted Aug 11, 2005 6:50 UTC (Thu) by kstalker (guest, #31739) [Link] Suse is based on Slackware, but uses rpm.Have a look at the wiki :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suse
Where is Ubuntu Posted Aug 13, 2005 0:35 UTC (Sat) by syntaxis (guest, #18897) [Link] "For example UserLinux started off with interest, but it basicly had to put everything on hold just until Debian got it's act together and released Sarge."
Terrible example. Bruce Perens claimed "There will be a commercially-supported UserLinux release about a day after the Debian release. There is nothing else but the Debian release on the critical path." (See http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=143486&cid=...) Well, since Sarge has been out for ages now and UserLinux still hasn't released, it's fair to conclude that Bruce was telling a big fat porky.
easy to base your "core" on stable *now*, but what about later? Posted Aug 10, 2005 16:43 UTC (Wed) by stevenj (guest, #421) [Link] Since a new stable Debian was just released, it should be relatively easy for them to roll out their "core" release now. It will become interesting, however, to see what happens in a year or two when stable is more out-of-date and a new stable release is not yet on the horizon.
easy to base your "core" on stable *now*, but what about later? Posted Aug 11, 2005 10:00 UTC (Thu) by debacle (subscriber, #7114) [Link] Debian has to move to time-based release schedules anyway. A slip of one month is no problem, but one has to know, whether the next release will be 2006-12 (which I hope and expect) or around 2007.
What is their relation to "Debian"? Posted Aug 11, 2005 13:00 UTC (Thu) by ber (subscriber, #2142) [Link] It would be interesting to know how the relation to Debian has evolved. According to DWN 32: Ian Murdock explained that it won't be called Debian Core Consortium on July the 24th. Their website seems to use that name today. Did Mr. Murdock change is mind?
What is their relation to "Debian"? Posted Aug 11, 2005 15:30 UTC (Thu) by edgewood (subscriber, #1123) [Link] The title "The Debian Core Consortium launches" seems to be LWN's: the linked article states that the new entity is the "DCC Alliance" and their website refers to themselves as "DCC Alliance" in all the instances I could spot on a quick scan.
What is their relation to "Debian"? Posted Aug 12, 2005 7:36 UTC (Fri) by sweikart (guest, #4276) [Link] The front page of the website nows says "DCC(Debian Common Core) Alliance"
-scott
|
|||||||||||||