![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Earlier this morning I added the tag
{{
refimprovesect}}
to the Fortress Linux section under Slackware based. I'm not real satisfied with re-adding it now that distribution page seems to have risen above WP:COPYVIO, and the entry for FL re-added to this List, under the edit-warring idea (not that there is an edit war, I merely don't want to foment one); I'm tired of it. Somebody else can re-add it, if appropriate.
But can somebody please tell me how any Linux distribution, except maybe Yggdrasil, can be "unprecedented"? It makes no sense to me except as a marketing term, which I don't think is allowed here. Also, how can a distribution be built "from the ground up" and yet influenced by "Slackware, Hardened Linux From Scratch, Zenwalk, Gentoo, Debian, Ubuntu, NetBSD and Freebsd" at the same time? Again sounds like marketing distortion rather than encyclopedic fact to me. Back to WP:Wikislothing for me. — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 20:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Diffs 1 November 2009 and 30 October 2009, are the same text as before. Look, I expect, above all, a Linux distribution maker to have a clue as to what it takes to join a community. What kind of LART do you need exactly, Krocht31, to get it? Please specify. Those of us who have been members in good standing of both communities for years (decades even) have plenty of clues to provide, we just need to find the right one here. — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 18:29, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Bleah, just got re-added again (fourth time this go-round). Whose turn is it to remove it this time? — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 00:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
Do you ever think Simxp, Alladin Insane and their other bureaucrats friends will even leave Fortress Linux alone even when it's added properly to this wiki? This wikipedia is "maintained" by unsocial, nerdy and weak persons that have a urgent need for compansation in one or other way. You guys are so (delete) trigger happy in order to receive one of the communistic Barnstars for their work. Do you really think deleting is better then adjusting? I really believe you all are a no-body in real live. -- simxp ( talk) 01:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krocht31 ( talk • contribs)
Well Aladdin, I don't think I have prove to myself to you in any way. What I want to know is, why did you and your friends tried to Denial-of-service_attack our website? You don't like competency at this wiki? Anyway, you and you friends are block permanently from our website and our OS. I am not wasting my time with these kids anymore. Krocht31 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC). |
Why does "Ubuntu Christian Edition" redirect to this page and then there is no listing for said distro? Unless there is any reason why it should not, I think it should be added to the "Unofficial distributions" section. IIRC, this is also a Ubuntu Muslim Edition that might fit as well. Surv1v4l1st ( Talk| Contribs) 17:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
deserve a mention here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Earthpigg ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
The last version of Nova is based on Ubuntu. You can check the official page and Distrowatch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.55.184.43 ( talk) 19:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I had heard of Mint on board I was reading, but I haven't seen it on this List of Linux distributions. Brian Pearson ( talk) 03:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Mint has released a new distribution based in Debian, appart from the main one based on Ubuntu. 83.59.85.204 ( talk) 00:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
How does MeeGo fit in? 62.194.120.187 ( talk) 21:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
This list is actually missing alot of the smaller distributions, like lucid puppy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.199.144 ( talk) 14:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Ubuntu CE redirects here but there is no info on that distro. I think that, even if Ubuntu CE is possibly dead (I can't tell, but from their website download page they are still at 9.10 and it is currently April 2011) That there should be a brief mention of it. But I don't know much about it (hence coming here to look it up). I do know it is more of a branded package set of Ubuntu and doesn't deviate very much. However, I think it is notable and should be included (and certainly was before). Maybe I'll just write a quick stub of a blurb about it so that someone else who knows more can have somewhere to start. People rarely do stuff based on discussion page suggestions. Rusl ( talk) 05:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, I'm not interested in getting into any edit wars. But a recent revision undid a revision pointing to operating systems as a reference for Linux distributions. If a Linux distribution is not an operating system (the justification was "POV"), then my monitor must not be a monitor, because my monitor is merely a monitor from my POV.
Further, if Linux distributions are NOT operating systems, Yworo, then the references to GNU/Linux in the operating systems article need to be removed as well.
I detect a contradiction. -- Aladdin Sane ( talk) 02:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Any linux distribution clearly fits the definition provided by the article for operating system. and that is the POV of the relevant article, in addition to my own.-- 69.107.87.153 ( talk) 02:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Linux is not an operating system. Linux is one of the kernels of the GNU operating system. User:Quiliro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.217.101.26 ( talk) 18:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't have enough knowledge where to include them in the article. Maybe someone know where to put them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.36.139.188 ( talk) 18:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Missing important and classical non X based distributions.
Android? Linux kernel, Java based desktop. Google stewardship. Oracle anti Linux lawsuit.
Mameo? Nokia phones and Internet tablets.
Moblin? Intel's embedded distibution.
Meego? Intel and Nokia agreed to merge their Moblin & Mameo.
μLinux? (Mu) or micro-linux contemporary of Tom's RBT Linux, floppy based minimum linux.
monkey linux? Had mini-X and web server
Shjacks45 ( talk) 12:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Exherbo is missing as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.229.232.206 ( talk) 16:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
SplashTop Linux systems are "distributed" by using whole computers (often in the BIOS PROM) as their distribution media and as such the binaries are not easily extracted for network transmission.
What defines "distribution"? Is a "distribution" characterized by the media used for storing the binaries such as a CD, a network connection, flash memory such as a USB stick, EEPROM, SD card, ... ?
SplashTop systems are "distributed" on EEPROM's or ROM's for "installation" on (literally in) PC's. The "installation" is conventional in terms of socketing a chip containing SplashTop onto the motherboard and not by the usual transference of the system onto a hard drive.
I did not spot Linux Mint as an Ubuntu-based dist. Since it is a widely-used distribution, surely it should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.13.60.38 ( talk) 20:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Pardus is a Gentoo fork which is still based on new relases. You can actually see that in Pardus page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.174.71.72 ( talk) 18:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
How about this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_OS Didn't see it listed on the page as a distro? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.107.240.37 ( talk) 16:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
See my deletion of Ubuntu JeOS: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=List_of_Linux_distributions&diff=557170697&oldid=557156528
(along with info and refs). I'm not sure this was the right thing (I was being bold..), this might be useful information to someone(?). But it's not an official distribution anymore. It's still available as a functionality (in Ubuntu Server). I don't think it should have been moved to "Third-party distributions". Feel free to revert or move it (or put info, with Ubuntu Server). Not sure what to do with this. I could be wrong.
More generally, is this the right thing to do with (Corporate-sponsored) EOLed distros? Comp.arch ( talk) 13:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Could someone, pls, add a line and data about SnakeOS (a minimal linux used on small soapbox-sized network servers)?
Same for Tomato/TomatoUSB (I see openwrt and ddwrt already in the list). 207.253.7.190 ( talk) 20:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Article itself and DistroWatch http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ututo say that it is Gentoo-based. And graph shows it as independent. Yurivict ( talk) 00:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Earlier this morning I added the tag
{{
refimprovesect}}
to the Fortress Linux section under Slackware based. I'm not real satisfied with re-adding it now that distribution page seems to have risen above WP:COPYVIO, and the entry for FL re-added to this List, under the edit-warring idea (not that there is an edit war, I merely don't want to foment one); I'm tired of it. Somebody else can re-add it, if appropriate.
But can somebody please tell me how any Linux distribution, except maybe Yggdrasil, can be "unprecedented"? It makes no sense to me except as a marketing term, which I don't think is allowed here. Also, how can a distribution be built "from the ground up" and yet influenced by "Slackware, Hardened Linux From Scratch, Zenwalk, Gentoo, Debian, Ubuntu, NetBSD and Freebsd" at the same time? Again sounds like marketing distortion rather than encyclopedic fact to me. Back to WP:Wikislothing for me. — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 20:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Diffs 1 November 2009 and 30 October 2009, are the same text as before. Look, I expect, above all, a Linux distribution maker to have a clue as to what it takes to join a community. What kind of LART do you need exactly, Krocht31, to get it? Please specify. Those of us who have been members in good standing of both communities for years (decades even) have plenty of clues to provide, we just need to find the right one here. — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 18:29, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Bleah, just got re-added again (fourth time this go-round). Whose turn is it to remove it this time? — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 00:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
Do you ever think Simxp, Alladin Insane and their other bureaucrats friends will even leave Fortress Linux alone even when it's added properly to this wiki? This wikipedia is "maintained" by unsocial, nerdy and weak persons that have a urgent need for compansation in one or other way. You guys are so (delete) trigger happy in order to receive one of the communistic Barnstars for their work. Do you really think deleting is better then adjusting? I really believe you all are a no-body in real live. -- simxp ( talk) 01:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krocht31 ( talk • contribs)
Well Aladdin, I don't think I have prove to myself to you in any way. What I want to know is, why did you and your friends tried to Denial-of-service_attack our website? You don't like competency at this wiki? Anyway, you and you friends are block permanently from our website and our OS. I am not wasting my time with these kids anymore. Krocht31 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC). |
Why does "Ubuntu Christian Edition" redirect to this page and then there is no listing for said distro? Unless there is any reason why it should not, I think it should be added to the "Unofficial distributions" section. IIRC, this is also a Ubuntu Muslim Edition that might fit as well. Surv1v4l1st ( Talk| Contribs) 17:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
deserve a mention here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Earthpigg ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
The last version of Nova is based on Ubuntu. You can check the official page and Distrowatch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.55.184.43 ( talk) 19:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I had heard of Mint on board I was reading, but I haven't seen it on this List of Linux distributions. Brian Pearson ( talk) 03:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Mint has released a new distribution based in Debian, appart from the main one based on Ubuntu. 83.59.85.204 ( talk) 00:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
How does MeeGo fit in? 62.194.120.187 ( talk) 21:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
This list is actually missing alot of the smaller distributions, like lucid puppy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.199.144 ( talk) 14:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Ubuntu CE redirects here but there is no info on that distro. I think that, even if Ubuntu CE is possibly dead (I can't tell, but from their website download page they are still at 9.10 and it is currently April 2011) That there should be a brief mention of it. But I don't know much about it (hence coming here to look it up). I do know it is more of a branded package set of Ubuntu and doesn't deviate very much. However, I think it is notable and should be included (and certainly was before). Maybe I'll just write a quick stub of a blurb about it so that someone else who knows more can have somewhere to start. People rarely do stuff based on discussion page suggestions. Rusl ( talk) 05:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, I'm not interested in getting into any edit wars. But a recent revision undid a revision pointing to operating systems as a reference for Linux distributions. If a Linux distribution is not an operating system (the justification was "POV"), then my monitor must not be a monitor, because my monitor is merely a monitor from my POV.
Further, if Linux distributions are NOT operating systems, Yworo, then the references to GNU/Linux in the operating systems article need to be removed as well.
I detect a contradiction. -- Aladdin Sane ( talk) 02:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Any linux distribution clearly fits the definition provided by the article for operating system. and that is the POV of the relevant article, in addition to my own.-- 69.107.87.153 ( talk) 02:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Linux is not an operating system. Linux is one of the kernels of the GNU operating system. User:Quiliro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.217.101.26 ( talk) 18:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't have enough knowledge where to include them in the article. Maybe someone know where to put them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.36.139.188 ( talk) 18:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Missing important and classical non X based distributions.
Android? Linux kernel, Java based desktop. Google stewardship. Oracle anti Linux lawsuit.
Mameo? Nokia phones and Internet tablets.
Moblin? Intel's embedded distibution.
Meego? Intel and Nokia agreed to merge their Moblin & Mameo.
μLinux? (Mu) or micro-linux contemporary of Tom's RBT Linux, floppy based minimum linux.
monkey linux? Had mini-X and web server
Shjacks45 ( talk) 12:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Exherbo is missing as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.229.232.206 ( talk) 16:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
SplashTop Linux systems are "distributed" by using whole computers (often in the BIOS PROM) as their distribution media and as such the binaries are not easily extracted for network transmission.
What defines "distribution"? Is a "distribution" characterized by the media used for storing the binaries such as a CD, a network connection, flash memory such as a USB stick, EEPROM, SD card, ... ?
SplashTop systems are "distributed" on EEPROM's or ROM's for "installation" on (literally in) PC's. The "installation" is conventional in terms of socketing a chip containing SplashTop onto the motherboard and not by the usual transference of the system onto a hard drive.
I did not spot Linux Mint as an Ubuntu-based dist. Since it is a widely-used distribution, surely it should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.13.60.38 ( talk) 20:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Pardus is a Gentoo fork which is still based on new relases. You can actually see that in Pardus page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.174.71.72 ( talk) 18:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
How about this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_OS Didn't see it listed on the page as a distro? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.107.240.37 ( talk) 16:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
See my deletion of Ubuntu JeOS: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=List_of_Linux_distributions&diff=557170697&oldid=557156528
(along with info and refs). I'm not sure this was the right thing (I was being bold..), this might be useful information to someone(?). But it's not an official distribution anymore. It's still available as a functionality (in Ubuntu Server). I don't think it should have been moved to "Third-party distributions". Feel free to revert or move it (or put info, with Ubuntu Server). Not sure what to do with this. I could be wrong.
More generally, is this the right thing to do with (Corporate-sponsored) EOLed distros? Comp.arch ( talk) 13:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Could someone, pls, add a line and data about SnakeOS (a minimal linux used on small soapbox-sized network servers)?
Same for Tomato/TomatoUSB (I see openwrt and ddwrt already in the list). 207.253.7.190 ( talk) 20:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Article itself and DistroWatch http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ututo say that it is Gentoo-based. And graph shows it as independent. Yurivict ( talk) 00:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)