Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Storm Linux

justin++ posted about 15 years ago | from the another-day-another-distro dept.

Linux 150

Stormix, a Vancouver-based start-up, has announced the release of Stormix Linux v0.99 Alpha r1, their first public release. The new distro is based on Debian, and uses dpkg as its package management system. It seems they have some new ways of going about things, and even an interesting project called SAS. SAS allows developers to write a program once and have a text-based and a GUI interface. Thankfully, they have stated they will release all of their software under the GPL (or a "related" license).

cancel ×


Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811888)

How is the creation of yet another Linux distribution justified? If even half of the two-dozen or so distribution development teams would concentrate on improving one or two major distributions, Linux would be standardized (Unix98 branding? With 30 fervently competing distributions? I don't think so) and not be in so much danger of imploding.
This saddens an old crufty bastard like myself. It seems that the Linux community has learned NOTHING from the tragedy of the UNIX fragmentation failures.
Wake up, community, before Linux ends up a sad footnote on the history of modern computing.

Re:Linux fragmentation: no big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811889)

I don't get it why the bsd ppl attack linux so much.

It's just dick-swinging. I've used both OpenBSD and Linux myself (I use the Mandrake distro) and I like both without smacking around either.

Re:Linux Community:Try Adding Some Real Value (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811890)

>As a FreeBSD user, I am eagerly awaiting the INEVITABLE fragmentation of linux.

Yeah, so we can all move over to that delightfull unified redmond OS... win95, err 98 ... umm NT... or 2000... whatever...

Seriously tho, Linux provides a great recruiting ground for *BSD and wishing it fragmented and dead is not going to help FreeBSD at all.

Re:Linux Community:Try Adding Some Real Value (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811891)

As a FreeBSD user, I am eagerly awaiting the INEVITABLE fragmentation of linux.

You are confusing Linux (the kernel) with Linux (the distribution[s]) ...

Re:Linux fragmentation: no big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811892)

I dont think that it is a big deal either.

I spend a bit of time helping out newbies on some web BBS's and most that show up have gone with either Red Hat or Caldera or sometimes Mandrake.

Only experienced linux users are using the niche distros like this latest one.

And since the smaller distro doesnt have the install base of the larger distros, it is in their interest to remain compatible with the more popualr distros. i?action=intro y.cgi?action=topics&forum=Linux+Kung+Fu&nu mber=4&DaysPrune=10&LastLogin=

Fragmentation doesn't have to be bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811893)

Let's say that we have three big ones:
Debian (with Corel)

Other distributions could be local variants, e.g. a Chinese distribution building on one of the three big ones. Or a distribution specialized on a specific architechture. And the distributions doesn't have to be on Linux, they could be ported to other unices.

And if we have LSB, I see no reason why there can't be more distributions. It's still Linux, and then we could still help people with problems on distribution xxx.

Hate to enourage you but . . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811894)

There is already a distribution based on Mandrake.
Forget its name right now. If you want to be a true idiot why don't you base your distribution on that.

No, it is a Troll. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811895)

Actually there are more apps for Linux than for the BSD's. If there weren't why would BSD be trying to run Linux apps. What useful apps are you looking for that you can't find? I do not have the same problem. Stop being arrogant and stupid.

damn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811896)

slashdotters got up on the wrong fsckin' side of the bed this morning. i bet half of u didn't even go to the site and check it out. i liked the way the install looked. i'd like to see more people using debian and if it takes an easier install to attract more users, then more power to storm linux.
now i'm gonna go get some sleep

Re:No, it is a Troll. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811897)

Actually there are more apps for Linux than for the BSD's.

That's complete and utterless bullshit. If there are APPs for Linux you can as well run them on *BSD - yes, without recompiling.

Re:List of distributions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811898)

the poster probably sees (counting....) 44 separate, unique, and competing distributions and thinks "it can only get worse".
seriously though, standardization of Linux is a Good Thing.


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811899)

uh, 4 OPERATING SYSTEMS based around a common code base (4.4BSD-Lite2) does not mean the same thing as almost *50* Linux distributions.

Re:Linux fragmentation: no big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811900)

"no big deal"??
there are 40-some linux distributions, and i bet you that only about 25% of them are compatible. if you're a commercial software developer, are you going to even think twice about not porting to "linux"?

*BSD's never claimed to be unified! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811901)

So it can't be fragmented

Re:Not really a fragmentation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811902)

It's just as reasonble to say various version of Linux as it is to say various versions of Unix. In fact, since Linux is one set of versions of Unix, you now have various versions of various versions. The "distro" marketing terms fool no one.

Re:Fragmentation doesn't have to be bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811903)

Fragmentation is good. It increases competition. If you don't like competition, choose W2K.

Re:Pendulum Swings (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811904)

Isn't Debian less a SysV version of Linux than
it is a BSD one? If so, that would be welcome relief.


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811905)

"GNU/Linux"? I thought the FSF distribution was called Hurd.

Yet another KDE based dist. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811906)

What is that now, 20? ;-)

Re:Linux fragmentation: no big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811907)

Any comment with "GNU/Linux" in it should be automaticly moderated down as flame-bate. This is just the Gnufree Software Foundation pushing there agendums on us, trying to make us argue.


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811908)

As soon as the FSF makes their own Linux distribution, they get to call it GNU/Linux. Anything else is a self-serving lie.

Sad; so here's what we DO about it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811909)

I agree, the number of distributions is getting to a point where the Linux community *looks* fragmented -- despite the fact that "fragmented" in the UNIX sense means broken into incompatible versions, and there are few if any such splits in Linux that meet that requirement.

So let's extract our thumbs from their current residences, stop whining, stop making panicked plans to abandon the ship at the first sign of trouble... honestly, how many of you thought the code level was the only one where you'd find bugs??

What the Linux community needs now is for someone to draw up a chart *showing* that Mandrake is just RH with blah-de-blah extra; Stormix is Debian with the addition of SAS, et cetera... so people can realize that the "fragmented" Linux community, far from being weak and ready to die, is engaging in a super-evolutionary process: instead of individuals trying out their own mutations and the one or two most beneficial of a generation becoming the new baseline, it's individual projects trying out their mutations and ALL of the successes being available to the next generation...

Oh, and to those BSD users who 'can't wait to see Linux die'... grow up. You sound like Joe Barr.

Re:[off topic] will the moderators please .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811910)

I didn't realize that slashdot was such a pro-Linux and anti-BSD place. Was that in its charter, or is it just because all the teenagers without real jobs have nothing to do but diddle Linux and post here?

Re:The beauty of OSS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811911)

heck no, nothing beautiful about splintering distributions and lack of standards.
linux needs to standardize before it implodes. then again.. maybe that's a good thing.

Re:[off topic] will the moderators please .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811912)

I for one am really fucking tired of the fucking famous people getting fucking good moderation just for being fucking famous.

Re:[off topic] will the moderators please .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811913)

if you notice, most of the fragmentation posts are by LINUX USERS. wake up and realize that linux is losing.

Re:Linux's problem is you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811914)

where's the moderation button for stupid-tear-jerking-philosophical-bull$hit?

Re:[off topic] will the moderators please .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811915)

I don't think that rms would get a 10 in the swim-suit competition. Now jwz... maybe.

Linux is dying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811916)

the poison is fragmentation and in-fighting.
someone needs to pull the plug on this doomed project

Re:It's NOT anti BSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811917)

that's what psychologists call a 'god complex', i think.

Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811918)

maybe 20 KDE-based distributions out of the 50 distros available. not bad, but not overwhelming.

Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811919)

Hey chowderhead: KDE was/is/always will be a replacement for CDE. If you think it looks Windowseque, that's because CDE does the same thing.


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811920)

(psst, BSD Lite is where much of current BSDs started). Anyway, there's also Irix, Ultrix, SunOS 4, MacOS X, ...


Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811921)

How about... Irix, Ultrix, SunOS 4.x, MacOS X, probably a lot more.

Re:No, their by hired shills like yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811922)

Losing is a way of saying 'obnoxious or unusually stupid'. See the jargon file.

Re:No, their by hired shills like yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811923)

haha, U HAVE FOUND UZ OUT. we are all m$ employees acting like bsd users for amusement and entertainment.
read the comments, chucklebrain. most people upset about the splintered linux distributions are linux users.
1. read 2. ponder 3. respond. you failed to do steps 1 & 2.

Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 15 years ago | (#1811946)

> There's gotta be a reason they keep choosing KDE. Think about it.
There is a reason: they want to make it look as much like Winblows as they can to suck in the idiots. It's so far from original you could paint an Apple with it.

No, no... it's a good thing. (2)

Erich (151) | about 15 years ago | (#1811947)

You have some distributions that are geared towards making sure stuff is stable before making architectural changes, like Slackware.

You have some distributions that are geared towards making small systems, like the Linux Router Project.

You have some distributions that are based off of one another, like the 158 RedHat based distributions... but each one has its own merit. Each one is different. And since most / all of the software is open, new changes can be incorporated back into RedHat if they are good and they are what RedHat is interested in. RedHat might not be interested in having to support a MkLinux port -- but having MkLinux have a RedHat base allows the MkLinux people to get a great headstart on having a nice distribution.

And are these distributions incompatable? If a distribution is libc5, then maybe they can't run libc6 binaries. (But then again, there are incompatabilities between glibc 2.07 and 2.1... but I digress)... But things tend to compile out-of-the-tarball on most distributions I have seen.

If the Debian people love their package manager, then they will do everything to make it the best. Likewise, RedHat folks try to make the unbeatable RPM. Slackware folks just stick to a tarball with a script. Does this mean that if everyone used Slackware that tar would would have features like rpm or dpkg? Of course not. Different distributions foster growth and new ideas. Different distributions appeal to different groups of users with different tastes or hardware platforms.

And having their own distribution probably helps Stormix keep tabs on the systems that they have to support. They can make sure that the packages they want to support are in their distribution and that packages they don't want to deal with aren't. This is an amazing feature of Linux, one that will make it (in my opinion) great for companies doing support. They don't lose anything (compatability with debian means most things work really easy) and they gain immensely (they control what they have to support). And after they've modified the distro how they want, why not offer it to everyone else? It costs them little. If three random users have it fill a need, great. And if no one uses it besides their customers, well that is fine, too.

Re:This is getting inflationary (1)

whoop (194) | about 15 years ago | (#1811948)

Agree totally! The last thing Linux needs is any more choice. So, to solve this, I hearby suggest that we remove all references to copying and modifying from the GPL and related licenses. This is the core of what allows any yahoo out there to make something based off of some other set of apps. Obviously this does nothing but bad for the community. Further, without the requirement to release patches, et al under the GPL, real innovation will be able to occur as companies make their own proprietary versions.

Next since SUSE is leading in sales, I say we make it the one true Linux. If anyone is not using it, then we should send them to New Zealand or something. And since SUSE has KDE, GNOME needs to go by the wayside as well. And since most new users will be confused by crazy command lines, we can do away with them as well. Besides, who makes utilities so archaic anyways? If there isn't a GUI to it, it must be inferior/antiquated.

Only if we do away with the other 68.239 distributions, applications, etc will there be any future in Linux. Allowing people to just copy/modify anything without approval from one central person (I suggest me) is pure lunacy!

I think I've grown up too...

Re:Why? (1)

whoop (194) | about 15 years ago | (#1811949)

Why, you ask? For the single most important reason, because you can. This is not the single-vendor proprietary world folks.

Re:Who Dares Wins! (1)

whoop (194) | about 15 years ago | (#1811950)

This is the good ol' US of A, where suing is a sport. It's too much trouble to sue for something so trivial clear across the great oceans. But here, it's a sin not to sue, even if the two products are not competing, not even mistakable for the same thing, etc.

Re:Why? (1)

whoop (194) | about 15 years ago | (#1811951)

Yes, how is this justified? And why wasn't the Linux board of directors consulted before using clauses in a license to distribute packages? More people should consult the grand poobahs before doing anything with free software. It's the natural way of things. Just because the license says you can isn't reason enough any more. We've got stockholders that want to know, dammit!


Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (1)

whoop (194) | about 15 years ago | (#1811952)

There's gotta be a reason they keep choosing KDE. Think about it.

Linux's problem is you (2)

Falrick (528) | about 15 years ago | (#1811954)

Yes, whoever you are reading this right now. What is it that you have done to further the Linux community. Have you helped to add anything to the LSB? Have you provided any useful feedback or positive criticism for any product available for Linux?

Perhaps some of you have. Possibly many of you. But to those of you who haven't (and I am one of them), stop complaining about everything that you see straying from the norm. This seems like Europe in the 15th century! Luther "recently" started the reformation with his ninety-five theses and suddenly people are beginning to wonder about what they had accepted up until that point. (not to say the repercussions have even close to the same significance here as they did for Luther and the world in general) We have the OS equivalent of the inquisition running here.

"Do you believe in the one true distribution as the one true church has seen fit for you to believe?"

"Yes... well mostly, except that I'd like this feature added"

"Well, then you shall be flamed for your beliefs and audacity to feel differently than the church has ordained for you!"

Do we really need a force like Catholicism running our operating systems? If you see a true problem with the way that these distributions are dealing with things, then talk to one of the standards groups out there. Ask them what you can do to help develop standards for whatever it is that you feel needs standardization. At the vary least, read the Linux Advocacy How-To. But don't cry "Foul" every time something happens that you don't like.

Re:BSD is dying (1)

Dom2 (838) | about 15 years ago | (#1811955)

Oh, grow up.

BSD's are doing well. Just not as well as Linux. There's certainly plenty of room for both in the "marketplace".

Re:This is getting inflationary (1)

Dom2 (838) | about 15 years ago | (#1811956)

Come on, there's nothing wrong with another Linux distro. BSD certainly won't leave it behind. They will remain (hopefully) keen competitors for many years to come.

(heck, I love my FreeBSD, but I certainly don't want Linux to disappear!)

SAS... (3)

Per Abrahamsen (1397) | about 15 years ago | (#1811959)

> SAS allows developers to write a program once
> and have a text-based and a GUI interface.

...not to mention its strong build-in support for statistical analysis.

Pendulum Swings (1)

peel me a grape (1399) | about 15 years ago | (#1811960)

Good luck to Storm! Its good to see a Debian
based commercial distribution. I don't see any
reason why new distributions cannot be useful and
successful if they can differentiate their
product. But if the ability to differentiate
is eroded we'll start seeing more mergers, I

GNU/Linux vs. *BSD posts should be moderated down (0)

Freed (2178) | about 15 years ago | (#1811961)

GNU/Linux vs. *BSD posts should be moderated down_because they are so devoid of character, about like KDE vs. GNOME.

Look folks, if flaming is so much fun, why not bring out the old warhorses, such as emacs vs. vi or c vs. c++.

This recent spate of *BSD vs. GNU/Linux tripe suggests the cute conspiracy theory of MSFT-instigated rabble-rousing. They certainly are capable of such dumb stuff--ask any OS/2er. :)

This has turned into a *BSD hate campaign. (0)

Freed (2178) | about 15 years ago | (#1811962)

Generally, GNU/Linux and *BSD advocates are reasonable people. But this morning there is a crazed Anonymous COWARD who is making *BSD look extremely uncool. I don't care, no matter how hard he tries, I will still try out FreeBSD.

The more the merrier and a note on Linux vs. *BSD (1)

Freed (2178) | about 15 years ago | (#1811964)

Regarding yet another GNU/Linux distribution, I think too many people fail to appreciate evolutionary behavior and competitive benefits.

This GNU/Linux vs. *BSD thing is so silly. How many of us like one or the other? Quite a few, huh? Well, what's the problem, then? Here is an idea for any doubters: work on fun projects that benefit both, such as KDE, GNUStep, or GNOME. I hope this settles this pathetically petty bickering.


Freed (2178) | about 15 years ago | (#1811965)

No, the canonical form is GNU/kernel, where kernel is Linux, Hurd, etc.


Freed (2178) | about 15 years ago | (#1811966)

As soon as the FSF makes their own Linux distribution

I think you are confused, AC. You don't mean distribution, you mean kernel, right? Don't worry about it, the Hurd still lives and GNU/Hurd will eventually be released by Debian. When? I am not sure, the FSF is a non-prophet organization. :)


Rendus (2430) | about 15 years ago | (#1811967)



What am I forgetting?

To say BSD isn't fragmented is... Well, it's rather obvious what it is.

Re:SAS... (1)

jochen (2803) | about 15 years ago | (#1811970)

It looks like the developers of this distribution are not aware of SAS [] .

There even is an effort to get SAS ported to Linux [] .

-- Jochen

Re:Worse than UNIX fragmentation (1)

stu (3749) | about 15 years ago | (#1811971)

The commercial vehndors were not trying to 'add value' purely for the good of their health, you know. I would say that greed (or commerce, however you want to call it) played a significant part. Any added value was only available to the purchasers of that particular product and in the end resulted in a lack of choice for the consumer.

The Linux distros 'add value' too - both in the form of choice & flexibility and also by bundling extra software which is useful for the tasks the distro is intended to solve. (e.g. Caldera OpenLinux has a shedload of NetWare utils)

The big benefit with Open Source software is that this added value is available to a much wider auidience.

Not really a fragmentation (3)

stu (3749) | about 15 years ago | (#1811972)

It may look as though Linux is going through the same fragmentation as UNIX went through, but this is not really true.

When UNIX fragmented, it was due to the competing vendors adding proprietary extras, closing up the code and introducing deliberate incompatibilities in order to lock in customers.

The various Linux distros, on the other hand, are all rooted in the same code base, are largely compatible with each other (bar a few different directory placings & choice of package management, etc) and by & large are not trying to lock out their competition.

Also,of the vast number of distros, a large number are specialist installs or micro distributions for narrow purposes (such as rescue disks, routers, simple IP masquerading for windows networks, etc) and do not need to be 100% code compatible with their mainstream counterparts.

Just chill out, there is room for everybody, it is going to be ok.

Re:Why? (1)

BooRadley (3956) | about 15 years ago | (#1811973)

This saddens an old crufty bastard like myself. It seems that the Linux community has learned NOTHING from the tragedy of the UNIX fragmentation failures.

Sad to see that you are so saddened by this. The only reason UN*X was fragmented was because of companies making PROPRIETARY builds against PROPRIETARY hardware for PROPRIETARY applications.

As far as learning lessons, I don't think this is even the same school. Linux distro's are built from mostly publicly available code for commodity hardware to run whatever application you care to write for them. The old UN*Xen imploded because they were exactly the opposite of this.

crufty indeed. :/

[off topic] will the moderators please .... (0)

cthonious (5222) | about 15 years ago | (#1811976)

score all the ridiculous fragmentation posts down as trolls (because 9/10 of them are). So a herd of BSD users saw fit to come and flame linux. Go back to BSD, I don't care what you use.

And while I'm off topic, why does everyone moderate up posts by famous people, even if they're trolls or otherwise off topic or uninteresting? It's annoying. "Oh, I noticed jwz/Tom Christiansen/RMS/ESR made a post! I'll have to score that as a '10'". Who cares? We're all in this together.

It's NOT anti BSD (1)

cthonious (5222) | about 15 years ago | (#1811977)

I happen to like BSD, I just don't like the snobbery of (some of) their users (like you). Linux people never flame BSDers, it always starts the other way 'round. And of course, no, not all of them are like that.

No, their by hired shills like yourself (1)

cthonious (5222) | about 15 years ago | (#1811978)

Linux is losing what? What is it losing?

I'm starting to think MS is hiring all these AC's to come over here pretending to be BSD users flaming linux. Now that's a good tactic!

sad... (1)

doomicon (5310) | about 15 years ago | (#1811979)

There has always been discussions in the past of Linux fragmenting like Unix... how may distro's now:

Debian (aka Stormix)
RedHat (aka Linux Mandrake)

I know I am missing some help me out...

Re:List of distributions (1)

Psiren (6145) | about 15 years ago | (#1811980)

Why does BSD look appealing just because another distro has appeared? I agree it's probably a bad thing, but why does it affect your current system?


Psiren (6145) | about 15 years ago | (#1811981)

Thank god for FreeBSD. One distribution, released 4 times a year. How very very SANE.

Change the record. The linux kernel is released on a regular basis. The distibutions of Linux are a completely different thing. And bashing on Linux users because they have a new kernel to play with is sheer stupidity. Has it occurred to any of you that some people actually like being able to use brand new hardware almost straight away, rather than having to wait up to 3 months for it? Above all, its fun. Stop fucking complaining about it. You don't use it, so whats the problem?

Re:BSD is dying (1)

poink (7454) | about 15 years ago | (#1811982)

This is the third or fourth time I have seen *this specific paragraph* posted on /. Me thinks that someone just blindly posts it whenever they see "FreeBSD" on slashdot.

depends... (2)

Lazy Jones (8403) | about 15 years ago | (#1811984)

There are 2 kinds of distributions:
  • those with a particular target audience, area of application etc., like Trinux
  • the "generic" distributions, which differ mostly in their licensing and other political considerations and try to cater for all users
While the first kind of distributions is extremely useful and I'd like to see more of them (e.g. Linux specifically for laptops, with a mostly ramdisk-based installation and very few disk accesses), the generic kind results in too much duplication of efforts and too little diversity to have a good reason to exist in such large numbers. Newcomers to the market like Stormix will have to realize that they need to offer more than just yet another distro for Joe User in order to take market share away from the established distributors like RH, SuSE (and to some extent, Debian and Corel).

Re:SAS... (1)

Knuckles (8964) | about 15 years ago | (#1811985)

The website states: SAS Storm Administration System for local and secured remote administration. So their SAS seems to be neither a developer tool nor some sort of statistics tool.

This really looks great! Where do I get it? (1)

benmhall (9092) | about 15 years ago | (#1811986)

I checked out their FTP, it's REALLY slow, any mirrors? Is there even an ISO on the FTP?


(currently using Debain Potato)

Re:Not really a fragmentation (1)

Mr Foobar (11230) | about 15 years ago | (#1811988)

>The various Linux distros, on the other hand, are >all rooted in the same code base, are largely >compatible with each other (bar a few different >directory placings & choice of package >management, etc)

The biggest argument these days seems to be in the use of /opt and /usr/local, and sometimes /usr/opt. Otherwise as a Slackware user myself I've had great success installing *everything*, unlike occasions in the past of failures with Solaris and AIX, not to mention NT and 95/98.

Re:SAS... (1)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | about 15 years ago | (#1811989)

Look at I think they'll need to change their name. SAS is pretty good at protecting their name...

Re:sad... (1)

Col. Klink (retired) (11632) | about 15 years ago | (#1811990)

I got the "real" 1.1.1 off Red Hat's update site.


Azul (12241) | about 15 years ago | (#1811991)

NetBSD, OpenBSD, BSDi, FreeBSD... That's four. And each with a different kernel.

You know, Linux is just succesful and you are just jealous. Would FreeBSD be as succesful as Linux, you know there would be MyBSD, YourBSD, PepeBSD, JohnBSD, UltraBSD, BSDragon, SBSD, BSDPower, Calavera BSD, BSDLight, YKZBSS, TheBSD, White Cup BSD, BSDebian, RealBSD and more.

All those companies are just making distributions of a succesful OS.

And all those BSD would be really worse than all the GNU/Linux, since all GNU/Linux distributions at least use the same kernel.



Azul (12241) | about 15 years ago | (#1811992)

Yes, it means BSDs are far less succesful. Would they be as succesful as GNU/Linux, you know there would be around 50 different BSDs.

And that is measuring success in number of users.


Re:Linux fragmentation: no big deal (1)

Azul (12241) | about 15 years ago | (#1811993)

I bet you that 99% of them, if not more, use either libc5 or glibc, and they all use the same kernel. It means I can use anything standard (fork, sockets, pthreads on glibc-based, flock, fcntl...) on any of them and my programs will compile out of the tar on any of them. I doubt, for example, that the Apache guys had any difficulty getting Apache to work on GNU/Linux because of so-called 'fragmentation'.

This whole fragmentation deal is to me just FUD against GNU/Linux from both the WinNT and the BSD people.

And, in the latter case, I find it ironic since I believe that would BSD be as succesful as GNU/Linux is, we would have 50 BSD distributions. At least all GNU/Linux distributions share the kernel and the C library.


Re:sad... (1)

tomed (13012) | about 15 years ago | (#1811994)

Debian (aka Stormix)
RedHat (aka Linux Mandrake)

I think this is an important point. Not only do we have all this balkanization of Linux, but we even have distros like Stormix and Mandrake that are derivatives of other distributions, for reasons ranging from political disagrements (Mandrake and RH's refusal to include KDE) to no apparent reason (Stormix). Frankly, this is quite counter-productive and is, and will continue to hurt Linux.

PS: For the record, yes, I am a FreeBSD user, but I am also a former Linux user, and had this concern beforehand.

Why bother? (1)

bonk (13623) | about 15 years ago | (#1811996)

Why do we even need another distribution? I know stormix probably wants to make money off of services/support (didn't look too closely at the site though) - but why do they need their own (derivitive) distribution? Why not just support debian? They could then add any improvements, ie, their text/graphical installation utility (I don't see what the big push is recently torwards having an X based install program - why bother?) to the base system if it complies with debian guidelines...

Instead, they just blindely rip off all the hard work debian users have done (yes, I know they legally can, but that doesn't mean I like it any more) and slap a few utilities into it and call it storm linux.

Like we need any more derivitive distributions...
Hey, let's mirror debian, run a text search and replace and replace all occurances of the word 'debian' with 'slashdot' and distribute our own slashdot linux!

"Better close the windows, the storm's coming in" - a quote or something like that from the stormix site.

both GUI X and console installation (1)

josepha48 (13953) | about 15 years ago | (#1811998)

I think that this is good. I hope that the nice GUI installation makes its way back to debian. The one thing that I found difficult about debian 2.0 was the install.

If debian gets easier to install, I may consider switching distros, or atleast running it too :-)

Someone asked why another distro? Why not? If the LSB does a good job, then we can have many thriving distros, and companies will not have to do anything to port from 1 distro to another. The program should work out of the box.

The only problems is the packageing deb, tgz and rpm for Slack, debian, and RH.

I think that this is good! IMHO and I am entitled to it!

Re:sad... (1)

geekd (14774) | about 15 years ago | (#1812000)

They USED to refuse.... and still set up GNOME by default (not like they paid for it or anything.. :-) Mandrake sets up KDE by default, and came with the "real" 1.1.1 instead of the 1.1.1pre

I like mandrake. x11amp actually worked right out of the box.


Linux fragmentation: no big deal (1)

SalsaDoom (14830) | about 15 years ago | (#1812001)

The *BSD ppl are having a linux bashing fit, but really, with LSB on the way, i don't see any problems with having a lot of distros.

Right now, i don't see any of these so called damages done by fragmentation, and when I see some concrete problems, which i seriously doubt i ever will thanks to the above mentioned LSB, we will deal with that then. Probably with adjustments to LSB.

Hence, the fix is already on the way. So give it a rest.

(since everyone else is doing it =) I'm a Linux and OpenBSD user. I like both, even freebsd. I don't get it why the bsd ppl attack linux so much.)

Stop whining. (0)

Ellis-D (19919) | about 15 years ago | (#1812005)

Stop complaing about all the distros. The more the better, I say. Why I say this is becuase if the distro has good ideas behind it then it should help later on down the road.

Slashmeat is one that has some revolutionary ideas (yes i'm solicating again) behind it. There is a webpage, but it's still a bit under contruction, but you have to take things slow. But if you want to make a revolutionary linux, email me at the email about (take the spam part out) or ar or icq me @ 1763538
The webpage, if you want to see the pretty graphics is at
I ate my tag line.

Re:sad... (1)

randhol (21641) | about 15 years ago | (#1812007)

(Mandrake and RH's refusal to include KDE) This is not true. Both mandrake and RedHat includes KDE.

Re:sad... (1)

davedavedave (27890) | about 15 years ago | (#1812008)

disagrements (Mandrake and RH's refusal to include KDE)

Are RH refusing? I installed RH6 yesterday, and I'm sure I had the option to install KDE?

Isn't this the whole point? (1)

sugarman (33437) | about 15 years ago | (#1812015)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the business model for a company in the OSS environment?

As money cannot be made off the GPL's software itself, the most common means of revenue generation that I seem to see people pointing to here is support, or other value-added services.

This is the same thing that Red Hat, et al. do to raise funds, so why is there a great upcry about it here? If the distro sells, then there is more added to the community. Is SAS takes off, then eventually others will adopt it. If it is weak, then it will fail, as is supposed to happen in a competitive environment, where only what is good & useful is kept by the community.

I'm just at a loss as to why there is so much gnashing of teeth regarding the release of another distro. This is supposed to be a good thing, people.


SAS? (1)

CharlieG (34950) | about 15 years ago | (#1812016)

I think the SAS institute MIGHT have a problem with that name! For those of you who don't know, they are a big time vendor of Multi platform statistical Analysis software

Re:BSD is dying (1)

Junta (36770) | about 15 years ago | (#1812017)

While interviewing for jobs and such, I've seen more companies using FreeBSD for their work than linux. FreeBSD is especially popular with corporations because any in-house improvements they make can be sold without any of the restrictions of the GPL.. And I know at least around me I've seen growth of the FreeBSD userbase around me. Though among normal computer enthusiasts around me I see more linux than FreeBSD, both are growing in the community I know. I personally run linux still, but I've gone back and forth on which I run.

Re:List of distributions (1)

Junta (36770) | about 15 years ago | (#1812018)

That's not perfectly right. Extreme Linux is a very specialized distribution for clustering, so most of the market would ignore that product. And of course you included the linux floppy distributions,and anyone in their right minds would not use a floppy distribution for everyday stuff. I am slightly bothered by the fragmentation, but they all have to remain compatible with one of the major distros (Debian, Redhat, Suse) SO I don't see it as that big of a problem so far...

Re:Linux Community:Try Adding Some Real Value (1)

careilly (49407) | about 15 years ago | (#1812019)

As a FreeBSD user I'd ask you to think a little harder. Why do you want Linux to fragment? Why wish their efforts, which cross-pollinate with
the *BSD all the time and which have benefited us

The difference between Linux and FreeBSD is one of philosophy and style, not or religion or technical merit. Stop acting as if it's a children's gang or a football team.

Mind you, the Linux heads who bash FreeBSD are just as silly. No need to fall to their level.

Re:BSD is dying (1)

careilly (49407) | about 15 years ago | (#1812020)

I have this vision of Microsoft running training camps in the desert for Open Source Infiltration where they teach hand-to-hand fighting, demolition and how to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt.


Re:BSD is dying (1)

Tom Christiansen (54829) | about 15 years ago | (#1812021)

Don't you folks get tired of the same old trolls?

BSD is used in hundreds of commercial applications, from companies with special purpose video processing or security technology to consumer-ended companies such as Apple with their MacOS X. In fact, BSD more easily lends itself to this kind of thing in a non-trivial number of commercial environments than does Linux. You may not like this, but that's the way it is.

Repeating an untruth has no effect on its veracity.

Re:Worse than UNIX fragmentation (2)

Tom Christiansen (54829) | about 15 years ago | (#1812022)

That's what you get with an OS that has no central design and no vision.
This reminds me of a passage I once read by Waldo with regard to C++:
What seems to have been lost over the years [...] is the common understanding of what the design center of the language is. While it is clear that the original design center as enunciated by [its creator] is no longer sufficient to guide the development of the language, there has been no discussion of a replacement for that design center. Indeed, it is not at all clear that the current community of users is even in agreement about what the language ought to be capable of doing and, perhaps more important, what it should not attempt to do.

The lack of a clearly articulated, generally accepted design center for the language has resulted in a lack of a set of principles that can be used to judge the direction of language change. The danger is that the language will attempt to become something that does everything, with the result that it will do nothing well.

In his book Wonderful Life, Stephen Gould argues that one should not confuse biological evolution with progress. The forces that shape the survival of one species over another, Gould points out, are far more random than what is required to allow one to claim that species for recently evolved are in any way more advanced or superior to those from which they evolved.

Without a clear design center than can be used to determine a notion of progress in the evolution of a language, the changes that have been made [...] take on many of the aspects of biological evolution. The language has been used able to adapt itself to the changing environment of the increasing number of users. But with no goal for the language, the evolution of the language can only be seen as change, not progress towards that goal.

It seems applicable to what your querulous remark was speaking of.

Re:Why? (1)

brianof (56469) | about 15 years ago | (#1812024)

well, i tend to look at it this way: if the kids can't work together and share their toys then maybe they'll at least try to show each other up. let's hope that this will be the effect of all this fragmentation - a competition of improvement not who can make the slickest boxed distro.

a positive note - at least we're not dealing with the "one OS or else" that mac and windows folks have to deal with.

Re:Why bother? (1)

styopa (58097) | about 15 years ago | (#1812025)

Well, they said that they will be using dkpg from Debian and that all of their software will be open. If this is the case then, perhaps I'm going out on a limb but, they are supporting Debian. This may seem like a rip off but with Corel and now this "Storm" group selling Debian for Dumbies Distros gives Debian a larger presence outside of the Linux community. This could be very helpful, for both money and 3rd party support.

We have all read people in the past say things like, if Red Hat stumbles or gets bought out Debian will be there to pick up the pieces. Well, Debian isn't going to market their product, but Corel and Storm will.

Think of Linux like a tree. There is the kernel, which is the base of the tree. From there there are several branches, ie the main set of distros like Debian, Red Hat, Caldara ... . Eventually a branch gets big enough, and strong enough to branch into several other branches, like Corel Debian, and Storm, and Mandrake. The idea of having other Distros pop up based off of Debian is only showing the strenght of Debian.

Soda (1)

styopa (58097) | about 15 years ago | (#1812026)

I wonder if they got the idea of calling it Storm while drinking a can of Storm from Pepsi?

Re:Yet another KDE based dist. (1)

styopa (58097) | about 15 years ago | (#1812027)

I have several guesses on why they are choosing KDE. It's older, and more stable. I personally think Gnome has a better user interface, but I have had problems with some of the Gnome apps and understand that it needs more time to be ready for main stream.

Personally I don't think it really matters to most of us whether a distro has KDE of Gnome as the primary install because we can always not install it and go out and get the other. It only matters to those who either don't want to download, or aren't very computer literate. And for the computer illiterate, KDE is probably a better choice right now due to stability and its connection with CDE.

The beauty of OSS (1)

NtG (61481) | about 15 years ago | (#1812030)

Isn't this the beauty of OSS, rather than a downfall?
What is wrong with the ability to customize to suit taste? It just creates a broader range. I wouldn't worry about fragmentation, because nearly all distributions are based on the model of one of the major few. If a distribution can't keep up, it dies. It's that simple.

Who Dares Wins! (1)

Mai Longdong (63346) | about 15 years ago | (#1812031)

Just hope the British Special Air Service doesn't take offence!

It's healthy (1)

DanaL (66515) | about 15 years ago | (#1812033)

Isn't lots of competition a sign of a healthy, growing marketplace? The linux distribution business is relatively new and still developing. If there are too many distributions, then some of them will die or merge with others, it's natural for a new market. Besides, the more companies that spend dollars advertising linux, the more users will be attracted to the platform.

The only downside may be the appearance of a fragmented OS, but as long as the vendors don't start slagging each other's distributions, that won't be so bad either.

Mind you, I may be biased because they're a Canadian company and it's nice to see a Canuck distribution :)

Re:Why? (1)

fozzybear (67611) | about 15 years ago | (#1812035)

I have to agree. I don't believe that "fragmentation" is the right word for what is happening in Linux, at least not in the same context as what happened to Unix. The more distros there are, simply mean more groups putting things together in different ways. As long as MOST of the software remains GPL (and it pretty much has to) then that allows for other groups to expand on, and learn from what is being done elsewhere in the community. No, my freinds, fragmentation isn't the enemy, proprietary licensing of distribution software would be much more threatening.

ISO-only? (1)

Emptiness (67618) | about 15 years ago | (#1812036)

I have a problem with a distribution (prerelease or final) that is available for download *only* as an ISO image. Looking at the screenshots it says that installation from anything other than CD is currently unavailable. I'm not that anxious to burn a CD just to take it for a spin, and having to hack on the installer myself defeats half the reason for getting a distribution instead of rolling my own. Since the other options are there in the screenshot, I'm guessing that they will be around in the final release, but will they actually work the first time?

Re:sad... (0)

jrcamp (150032) | about 15 years ago | (#1812037)

I got these from

Linux Pro
Turbo Linux
Yggdrasil Linux
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account