On 23 August 2012 03:22, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. <eoconnor25@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/22/2012 09:03 AM, Ian Malone wrote: >> >> On 22 August 2012 13:38, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> There's CentOS, and there was (may still be) a long life version of >>> Ubuntu. Where you install a particular release, and there isn't a >>> cut-off date for the creation of any updates. So, you can do package >>> updates for years to come, without having to do a destroy and rebuild >>> total upgrade. >> >> CentOS or Scientific Linux are the obvious RPM based choices. As an >> alternative Open SUSE's evergreen project aims to extend support for >> nominated releases to 3 years (there was a similar effort for Fedora >> early on, but it's quite tough for a community-based effort, so not >> sure if SUSE will keep it up either). Then there are the paid-for >> enterprise options. >> > Wow....I'm just "blown away" by the depth, breadth, and EXTENT that Linux > goes!....this is like a kid in a candy store moment for me!..LoL! > Debian?.....gonna have to check that one out too......and > Scientific?.......now THAT sounds interesting....ESPECIALLY to a nerd like > me...LoL! Once again thanks to all of you....you're like my own personal > "Computer Expert Emergency Team"!......LoL! > You may want to check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_distributions http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Gldt.svg Which has much more detail than I'm able to judge. The three main families are Debian, RedHat and Slackware, and are mainly distinguished by their traditional approaches to package management, though some derivative distributions have changed between them. Things I've learnt in the last five minutes I didn't know previously: * SUSE/OpenSUSE though RPM-based seem to have originated with Slackware. * Gentoo was preceded by something called Enoch. * There appear to be as many Ubuntu branches as any other family contains, but I think quite a lot of those look like spins rather than genuine distros. * Scientific Linux appears to be based directly on RHEL, I'd assumed it was based on CentOS. * There are far more distributions than I ever realised. To answer to your question about how you choose one (or even half a dozen), that list does seem to make it rather hard. However if they indicated number of users or developers for the different branches the picture would be rather different (also, it wouldn't exist because the data is pretty hard to collect). If I had to actively pick one for something (rather than just defaulting to Fedora because I know it well), I'd try a few of the more major ones out and then have a quick check to see if any of the derivatives of the most appropriate of those was better targeted to the application. Turnover/lifetime and where they position themselves relative to the cutting-edge is a big factor as is the suite of available packages for the smaller distros. Package management tools or GUI (or not) is generally another area where they try to set themselves apart. If going down a Gentoo route, its derivative Sabayon seems to be gathering attention. Somewhat related to all this is the question of desktop environments. While Fedora provides pretty good support for a number of desktops many of the other distros align themselves to a particular desktop (this is a major differentiator for the different Ubuntu flavours). Fedora itself has tried to be the Gnome cutting edge distribution for the past few releases. -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
