The majority of Linux distributions out there seem to be over-engineering their method of distribution. They are not giving us a new distribution of Linux. They are giving us an existing distribution of Linux, but with a different distribution of non-system software (like a different desktop environment or configuration of it)

In many cases, turning an installation of the base distribution used to the one they’re shipping is a matter of installing certain packages and setting some configurations. Why should the user be required to reinstall their whole OS for this?

It would be way more practical if those distributions are available as packages, preferably managed by the package manager itself. This is much easier for both the user and the developer.

Some developers may find it less satisfying to do this, and I don’t mean to force my opinion on anyone, but only suggesting that there’s an easier way to do this. Distributions should be changing things that aren’t easily doable without a system reinstall.

  • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
    0·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think they’d be so popular if they weren’t useful.

    Why should the user be required to reinstall their whole OS? I don’t think they are: it seems relatively straightforward to change DEs on Ubuntu at least.

    On the other hand, if someone knows they want Ubuntu with KDE, why should they have to go through a regular Ubuntu install just to do the post configuration themselves? Plus, maintainers of these offshoot distros can potentially more deeply remove dependency on the default DE.

    I think focusing on differences in system software is less illustrative than looking at the out-of-the-box user experience and capabilities. A changed DE is a pretty huge practical difference.

    This line of thought does really underscore how nebulous the definition of an operating system really is. Pour one out for GNU being totally subsumed culturally by a Kernel that everyone sees as an OS.