 DistroWatch Weekly |
| Tip Jar |
If you've enjoyed this week's issue of DistroWatch Weekly, please consider sending us a tip.
(Tips this week: 0, value: US$0.00) |
|
|
|
 bc1qxes3k2wq3uqzr074tkwwjmwfe63z70gwzfu4lx  lnurl1dp68gurn8ghj7ampd3kx2ar0veekzar0wd5xjtnrdakj7tnhv4kxctttdehhwm30d3h82unvwqhhxarpw3jkc7tzw4ex6cfexyfua2nr  86fA3qPTeQtNb2k1vLwEQaAp3XxkvvvXt69gSG5LGunXXikK9koPWZaRQgfFPBPWhMgXjPjccy9LA9xRFchPWQAnPvxh5Le paypal.me/distrowatchweekly • patreon.com/distrowatch |
|
| Extended Lifecycle Support by TuxCare |
|
|
| Reader Comments • Jump to last comment |
1 • RE: Categories and RedHat/Fedora Split (by Honaby at 2003-11-10 15:02:49 GMT)
May I suggest that the categories includes the focus on the features of the distributions like Multimedia support, Hardware support, Desktop focus, etc. Aside from the usual CD/LIVE based, source-based, firewall, etc.
The categories can also include Graphical Boot screen, Graphical Install, Etc... this way, new users can easily choose between distributions that they need.
About the Fedora/RedHat split, I second the motion! RedHat clearly states that they do not support the Fedora Project.
Fedora is a trademark of Red Hat, Inc.
The Fedora Project is not a supported product of Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. is not responsible for the content of other sites.
The split is definitely a must!!! The problem is how do you split the page hit ranking for RedHat and Fedora?
2 • fedora/redhat split (by dennis flener at 2003-11-10 15:13:34 GMT)
I definately agree on a seperate listing for fedora. even though it has contributions from the redhat developers, it also has support from non-redhat contributors. redhat and fedora are as seperate as say, knoppix and gnoppix. I would even rather have fedora listed instead of redhat if that were the choice.
3 • fedora vs. redhat (by Hell Fire at 2003-11-10 16:06:45 GMT)
I also agree that Fedora should have its own listing... it's kinda confusing to have Fedora and RHL listed together.
- Hell Fire
4 • RedHat/Fedora Split (by sclebo05 at 2003-11-10 16:07:32 GMT)
if RedHat and Fedora are supposed to be separate entities, perhaps the best way to go is to split them. From what I understand the RedHat product is going to be a more secure and controlled product, and the Fedora a more bleeding edge collection of software. This could possibly make listing the packages for one incorrect for the other.
5 • Red Hat/Fedora split (by Elijah Newren at 2003-11-10 16:18:01 GMT)
I'll have to voice my opinion against splitting Fedora & Red Hat pages and tracking them separately. I don't see the need. Although they are vocally separating themselves and reminding people of the fact they they won't provide a business-type support (i.e. staffing a call support center), they really are running the Fedora show. Sure, more people in the community are becoming involved (I started helping some once it became a community project), it'll be some time before the outside community matches the amount of work that Red Hat is putting into the distro (if that ever happens). So, in some ways, it seems sort of like Mozilla with the Netscape engineers doing a lot of the heavy lifting with the community growing over time.
However, I do suggest a change. Instead of using "Red Hat" as the text for the link, use "Red Hat/Fedora".
Anyway, that's my $.02.
6 • Categories (by DaveW on 2003-11-10 16:33:53 GMT)
The categories that matter to me are not-rpm, live CD, and special-purpose (like DyneBolic). Not-RPM is for folks like me who are interested in any distro that offers an alternative to rpm package management. There are quite a few alternatives these days, so categorizing each type of package management could get cumbersome to the point of being uninformative.
7 • OneBase Review? (by DaveW on 2003-11-10 16:35:44 GMT)
The new OneBase sounds interesting, but solid info is hard to come by. No reviews are listed. Any chance of a review any time soon?
8 • categorising (by Erik on 2003-11-10 17:55:33 GMT)
I think it would be a good idea to split Red Hat and Fedora, since their development follow different tracks, release cycles, and Red Hat distancing themselves from Fedora.
Maybe it would be possible to categorise the distributions on different items in a database, such as:
- Type: installation / live
- Package management: rpm, apt, ...
- Freely downloadable: yes / no
-
This way people can easily search on a number of criterea, ex. I am looking for a Live CD distribution, that is freely downloadable, with apt package management.
Great site ! Good to see it evolves !!
9 • RedHat Split (by None at 2003-11-10 18:06:52 GMT)
I believe that Red Hat and Fedora should have 2 seperate listings. Fedora is supporting different packages (and versions) like xmms. Also there are different release dates between products.
To sum it up; diffent packages also different versions in addition to a different release schedual might qualify for 2 listings.
PS. Fedora is looking at the 2.6 kernel in its next relase (within 6 months), however the commercial version is looking at approx. 1 year time frame.
10 • Arch review? (by Luk van den Borne at 2003-11-10 18:10:43 GMT)
In one of the previous Distrowatch Weekly, you said you were interested in reviewing Arch Linux. Have you dropped this plan or is it still on the waiting list? I'm eager to hear what you think of Arch Linux.
Regarding the RH/Fedora split, I think Fedora should get a seperate page. There are not many differences with RH yet, but sooner or later the difference will be unacceptably large. Too large to be listed on one page.
11 • RedHat-Fedora split (by BC at 2003-11-10 19:47:45 GMT)
I can see both sides of the argument, and I think the
reasonable compromise is to delay the split until the
second release of Fedora when (presumably) there
will be a more pronounced difference between the two
in kernel/package release levels.
12 • RedHat-Fedora split (by Offer Kaye at 2003-11-10 20:27:05 GMT)
I think the decision should be consistent with current Distrowatch practices, i.e. should follow precedence. Suse Linux is a company similiar to Red Hat, and like them the have both enterprise and personal editions of their linux products.
Distowatch only covers the Suse Linux personal edition. Therefore, to remain consistent, Distrowatch should replace "redhat" with "fedora", in keeping with Red-Hat's official stance that fedora is now a seperate project. If the enterprise edition "RedHat Linux" is also covered by Distrowatch is, of course, up to Distrowatch. But I think for the personal edition the name Fedora should be adopted.
I do however agree with the last poster (BC) in that it might be a good idea to delay the name switch untill the next Fedora release- this is also in keeping with Distrowatch's policy of waiting awhile before accepting a new distribution, which if you think about it Fedora is.
13 • RedHat-Fedora split (by Julian Bane at 2003-11-10 20:49:46 GMT)
I would like to endorsethe comments of "BC" and "Offer Kaye". Having said that I think that the "Red Hat" branding has been a very positive thing for the Linux comunity, its where I started and I would hate to see it fade into obscurity on this site.
On the subject of databases I would love to be able to query this one. e.g. List distros with DEB package management, Gnome, DHCP3, Samba3. But then it is easy to wish when you don't have to implement.
14 • Red Hat Linux is discontinued (by Kent Pirkle at 2003-11-10 22:39:59 GMT)
I think the Red Hat page should be retired as an active page and kept as a historical reference. The product known as "Red Hat Linux" is gone after 9 is EOLed. There should instead be two distributions listed: Red Hat Enterprise Linux, with the different package listings for the WS and ES/AS broken out, and a Fedora Core listing for the Fedora Project. Keeping the Red Hat page for RHEL doesn't make since, you can't upgrade a RHL system to RHEL. But, you can upgrade a RHL system to Fedora Core, but Fedora Core is not Red Hat Linux.
Also, I think SUSE should have a page for their Enterprise offerings as well to be able to compare packages etc. against Red Hat.
15 • Categories (by PastorEd at 2003-11-10 23:02:21 GMT)
Hello, Distrowatch!
I just wanted to give my thoughts on the categorization process.
Linux is a VERY configurable OS. Almost to the point of overkill. I would suggest, to account for the variable nature of Linux distros, a MATRIX of distros based on any number of different attributes. Make the matrix searchable, and people can access the information they're interested in.
Possible groupings for this chart:
- package management;
- parent distro (Morphix is based on Knoppix, which is pased on Debian, so Debian is "parent" distro to both Knoppix and Morphix);
- targeted hardware (Peanut works well on older machines, Mandrake AMD64 won't work on your old i386)
- targeted audience (someone who wants an ultra-secure mail server isn't going to be too interested in eMovix)
- and don't forget all the major divisions you've already got: source, CD-based, etc.
Could this be done with drop down buttons, like the distro selection button on the home page?
Major Source CD-based Package Audience Parent
Distro Based (live CD) mngmnt. intended origin
Just some thoughts.
GBYLBT, PastorEd
16 • Fedora/Red Hat issue (by Elijah Newren at 2003-11-11 00:19:14 GMT)
According to http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html, Red Hat Enterprise Linux will be based on Fedora (see objective #13). So, I'd like to ask this question to those that propose Fedora & Red Hat be split into separate web pages: How do you justify keeping Debian unstable, testing, and stable under a single web page? (Remember: Although Debian unstable becomes testing and testing becomes stable, that's not really all that different from Fedora becoming RHEL). How do you justify keeping SuSE to a single page, in light of Offer Kaye's comments that SuSE has multiple offerings as well?
There may be good answers to the above questions that others can think of for this, but the only one I see is that Red Hat is trying to keep the names for their offerings more distinct than other Linux distributors.
17 • Arch review? (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 02:36:28 GMT)
I wrote a brief overview of Arch Linux for LWN:
http://lwn.net/Articles/40952/
Also, one of the readers is currently working on a review of Arch Linux, which will be published here once finished.
Reviews are hard to write. You really need to spend at least a week in the reviewed product before you can write a decent review. Unfortunately, I don't have the time - DistroWatch is a big site to run and getting bigger and more popular every day.
18 • RE: SUSE Enterprise listing (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 02:43:45 GMT)
Also, I think SUSE should have a page for their Enterprise offerings as well to be able to compare packages etc. against Red Hat.
This is easier said than done. Unlike Red Hat, SUSE does not provide the package list of their enterprise releases - unless I missed it, in which case I'd appreciate the link.
19 • what happened to the BSD's (by David Trimmer at 2003-11-11 03:14:26 GMT)
I know you focus exclusively on Linux distributions. However, I feel that as a majority of your readership are probably of the hobbyist/enthusiest crowd, I feel that the BSD's should be included. The licensing is different but FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD are probably more stable and secure than any of the Linux's. As both BSD and Linux evolved from Unix System V, I feel they should be included on your excellent site.
20 • RE: what happened to the BSD's (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 03:58:18 GMT)
This was covered before and rejected. You are wasting your time bringing up this subject again.
21 • No subject (by John Lowell on 2003-11-11 04:49:51 GMT)
Anyone familiar with the coercive updating practices instituted by Red Hat about a year ago will hardly be surprised to learn that Matthew Szulik, Red Hat's CEO, has written off Linux as a credible alternative to Windows on the desktop. What better way to focus attention on the imagined significance of one's own projects than to belittle the selection of an alternative. Gaining a meaningful impression of the character of a person or of an organizaton ordinarily would require a certain minimum of exposure up close. In the case of Szulik and Red Hat, however, one can detect the odour at a distance of parsecs.
If it weren't for the fact that it will have a continued existence as a server distro, albeit a short one one hopes, I would vote to strike Red Hat from DistroWatch's lists altogether. Given the circumstances, I vote for the two entry scheme.
John Lowell
22 • onebase 2.0 (by jxn on 2003-11-11 06:50:50 GMT)
it's nice to see onebase isn't dead in the water. perhaps I'm just an impatient fool, but I was close to giving up on it after such an expanse of time betwixt the announced and actual release dates. I'm all for taking one's time (heck, I'm a debian woody user :) ), but I wasn't seeing any updates or signs of life. Looks to be a good distro, though...worthy of an install attempt on my new laptop, methinks.
23 • Re: Fedora/Red Hat issue (by fdavid on 2003-11-11 08:56:48 GMT)
I second Elijah Newren's opinion. Just like Debian stable/unstable/testing, Gentoo stable/unstable, Mandrake releases/cooker, and so on could fit Read Hat and Fedora on the same page. This seems to me more logical. I don't find a time delay appropriate in this case, because Fedora is rather a new name than a brand new distro.
24 • RTFA -- Red Hat: Stick with Windows at home (by Eavy at 2003-11-11 09:15:31 GMT)
"I would say that for the consumer market place, Windows probably continues to be the right product line," [Matthew Szulik, chief executive of Linux vendor Red Hat,] said. "I would argue that from the device-driver standpoint and perhaps some of the other traditional functionality, for that classic consumer purchaser, it is my view that (Linux) technology needs to mature a little bit more." -- http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5101690.html
Unfortunately this very informed quote has been turned around and taken out of context by a whole lot of people. Red Hat's CEO never claimed Linux couldn't be used as a desktop OS. Fedora Core 1 is a great desktop OS. But he's honest enough to admit that home users shouldn't expect it, or any other version of Linux, to fully support the latest consumer devices (which - still - generally come with Windows drivers only). This will change, soon, but right now it would be misleading to recommend Linux as the main desktop OS to an ordinary home user (think "mom and dad"). The next step is to take over the corporate desktop, which won't require all the latest gadgets, then use that momentum to advance into the remaining consumer area.
So please read the original statement and stop spreading the misquoted FUD. (This reminds me of the spilled-coffee-lawsuit, often credited as proof how fucked-up the US justice system has become, neglecting that it actually had a lot of merit - just google for more information.)
PS: For what it's worth, I'd keep Red Hat and Fedora on the same page, at least for now. It basically is Red Hat 10 with a new name and development model. Let's hope it comes closer to Debian, my other favorite distro, this way.
25 • Separate RHEL/Fedora (by Dave on 2003-11-11 13:37:24 GMT)
IMHO, RHEL & Fedora should be separated. RHEL has a completely different objective and target audience than Fedora Core. Most users would not be willing to pay the pricey sum for RHEL. On that same note, enterprise level businesses would not be willing to consider using Fedora Core without the support of the company behind it. Therefore, they are separate distros and belong on separate pages.
Including them together would be like putting Mandrake on the same page as RH, since Mandrake was based off of RH orginally. Just because it started from RH originally does not mean it belongs on the same page. It is now a completely different distro.
David Mastny
26 • RE: Separate RHEL/Fedora (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 15:23:07 GMT)
Just because it started from RH originally does not mean it belongs on the same page. It is now a completely different distro.
Have you actually installed Fedora Core 1? I have serious doubts, otherwise you would not claim that Fedora is a completely different distro.
In fact, Fedora is nothing but a re-branded Red Hat Linux, made by the same developers as Red Hat Linux, using the same Red Hat configuration tools, the same Red Hat Networks infrastructure, the same Red Hat kernel patches... I honestly don't see how you can claim that Fedora is completly different. It is not. Install it and see for yourself.
27 • No subject (by John Lowell on 2003-11-11 17:34:18 GMT)
Facinating that Eavy would think that it's the world's responsibility to interpret Matthew Szulik properly and not Szulik's to make himself clear. I think he made himself entirely clear, Eavy:
"I would say that for the consumer market place, Windows probably continues to be the right product line," [Matthew Szulik, chief executive of Linux vendor Red Hat,] said. "I would argue that from the device-driver standpoint and perhaps some of the other traditional functionality, for that classic consumer purchaser, it is my view that (Linux) technology needs to mature a little bit more."
If they are meant, where are the distinctions in that statement? Given the centerpiece of Red Hat's business plan - in corporatese "the enterprise" mentioned so frequently by this clown - why would anyone assume that he had any distinctions in mind at all? I don't think he had any hairs to split here, Eavy, and neither do lots of others, so spare those of us that can read the assertions of misrepresenting him, will you. I mean what part of "the right product line" don't you understand?
John Lowell
28 • Categories (by PastorEd at 2003-11-11 20:39:32 GMT)
Hello, Distrowatch!
I just wanted to give my thoughts on the categorization process.
Linux is a VERY configurable OS. Almost to the point of overkill. I would suggest, to account for the variable nature of Linux distros, a MATRIX of distros based on any number of different attributes. Make the matrix searchable, and people can access the information they're interested in.
Possible groupings for this chart:
- package management;
- parent distro (Morphix is based on Knoppix, which is pased on Debian, so Debian is "parent" distro to both Knoppix and Morphix);
- targeted hardware (Peanut works well on older machines, Mandrake AMD64 won't work on your old i386)
- targeted audience (someone who wants an ultra-secure mail server isn't going to be too interested in eMovix)
- and don't forget all the major divisions you've already got: source, CD-based, etc.
Could this be done with drop down buttons, like the distro selection button on the home page?
Major Source CD-based Package Audience Parent
Distro Based (live CD) mngmnt. intended origin
Just some thoughts.
GBYLBT, PastorEd
29 • RHL/Fedor (by Gary on 2003-11-12 00:53:51 GMT)
I think they should be split but I'm not sure as to when or possibly to what extent. Right now they are one in the same as ladislav noted above. I upgraded RH9 to FC1. The only difference being some Fedora splash screens etc. All of Red Hats tools are still in this release (redhat-config-network, redhat-config-mouse, etc.). I guess one has to think about exactly what makes a distribution a distribution. I think that only time will tell; when we see how far Redhat will distance themselves from Fedora. But like noted above, it's really no different than any other distro 'fork' or 'spin-off' if you will. Right now it seems like they are the same (other then some Fedora stuff I guess they are) but they are indeed separate which will become more evident in the future (or not). Fedora's name, Fedora's work, Fedora's distro. People will continue to contribute including RH engineers and programmers. But how long will RH continue and how much? It's really the community that does all the hard work. Let's not forget that there are other distros based on RedHat. Perhaps I just don't understand what makes Fedora any more special than the others...
I also wonder if the tools mentioned above will change names i.e. redhat-config-network -> fedora-config-network. It really doesn't matter... they contribute too and are entitled to use their RedHat name. IMO if all, or the majority of all the work, is done outside of RedHat then it should be considered a separate distribution regardless of Redhat's contributions. I think the twist here is that, in the future, instead of Fedora being based on RedHat, Redhat will be based on Fedora...
Just my opinion.
30 • Fedora (by David Mastny on 2003-11-13 13:44:59 GMT)
Ladislav,
You do bring up a good point. Admittedly, I have not yet had the pleasure of installing FC1. Perhaps it is not very different yet, but I was assuming that at some point it may be quite different.
Perhaps at this point in the game, we could ride both sides of the fence. In other words, we could keep FC1 listed in *both* the RH section as well as creating a separate page for Fedora. That way, those who didn't know better and were searching for fedora would be able to find it on its own page, while those upgrading from RH would still see FC1 as the next "upgrade."
David Mastny
31 • Split (by Leo on 2003-11-13 15:18:32 GMT)
How about waiting a little and see ? I would split them the moment they start diverging in reality (i.e. using different packages, etc.). If the package list can be maintained consistently for RedHat/Fedora as a whole, then why not keep them as an entity ?
If no important branching occurs, Fedora will end up being for RedHat what cooker is for Mandrake, and cooker is nicely listed within the Mandrake entry ...
32 • RedHat (Szulik) pissing itself (by Leo on 2003-11-13 15:28:39 GMT)
I find Szulik's comments obnoxious. And it is not the first time we hear people from RedHat saying something along these lines. And that was a big factor for me to switch to Mandrake at the time. Look, it is ok if RedHat concludes that home consumer market is not profitable for them and they exit retail market. But this does not imply that Linux is not ready for the Desktop. It is quite ready. RedHat Linux is not ready perhaps, I found my Mandrake desktop much more user friendly, polished, and working out of the box.
What he doesn't realize, is that this irresponsible advertising from a Linux visible head to TheMonopoly is just going in the wrong direction: more power to the monopoly. The only aspect where Linux lags is driver/third party software support. And this is because of the huge dominance of the Monopoly on the consumer market. The same market Szulik is giving up. What a load of crap !
33 • Linux on the Destop (by JeffreyB on 2003-11-13 19:52:06 GMT)
As much as I hate to admit it... IMHO- Linux is NOT ready for primetime use in most new desktop user home settings - unless the home user only wants to surf the net, get email, and do the typical "office" stuff with OpenOffice. I believe that if Linux is introduced to "Joe" home user too soon and he has a bad experience, then he will tell his friends that Linix is a piece of #$%@... The word will spread and thats what M$ would like to see happen. Better to wait until the drivers and applications get more mature and for a user support base get in place.
34 • No subject (by John Lowell on 2003-11-13 20:52:30 GMT)
Hi JeffreyB,
Do work for Red Hat by any chance? :-)
John Lowell
35 • Comments (by Michelle at 2004-06-27 14:03:31 GMT)
It stunk!!! So BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Number of Comments: 35
Display mode: DWW Only • Comments Only • Both DWW and Comments
| | |
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Archives |
| • Issue 1150 (2025-12-01): Gnoppix 25_10, exploring if distributions matter, openSUSE updates tumbleweed's boot loader, Fedora plans better handling of broken packages, Plasma to become Wayland-only, FreeBSD publishes status report |
| • Issue 1149 (2025-11-24): MX Linux 25, why are video drivers special, systemd experiments with musl, Debian Libre Live publishes new media, Xubuntu reviews website hack |
| • Issue 1148 (2025-11-17): Zorin OS 18, deleting a file with an unusual name, NetBSD experiments with sandboxing, postmarketOS unifies its documentation, OpenBSD refines upgrades, Canonical offers 15 years of support for Ubuntu |
| • Issue 1147 (2025-11-10): Fedora 43, the size and stability of the Linux kernel, Debian introducing Rust to APT, Redox ports web engine, Kubuntu website off-line, Mint creates new troubleshooting tools, FreeBSD improves reproducible builds, Flatpak development resumes |
| • Issue 1146 (2025-11-03): StartOS 0.4.0, testing piped commands, Ubuntu Unity seeks help, Canonical offers Ubuntu credentials, Red Hat partners with NVIDIA, SUSE to bundle AI agent with SLE 16 |
| • Issue 1145 (2025-10-27): Linux Mint 7 "LMDE", advice for new Linux users, AlmaLinux to offer Btrfs, KDE launches Plasma 6.5, Fedora accepts contributions written by AI, Ubuntu 25.10 fails to install automatic updates |
| • Issue 1144 (2025-10-20): Kubuntu 25.10, creating and restoring encrypted backups, Fedora team debates AI, FSF plans free software for phones, ReactOS addresses newer drivers, Xubuntu reacts to website attack |
| • Issue 1143 (2025-10-13): openSUSE 16.0 Leap, safest source for new applications, Redox introduces performance improvements, TrueNAS Connect available for testing, Flatpaks do not work on Ubuntu 25.10, Kamarada plans to switch its base, Solus enters new epoch, Frugalware discontinued |
| • Issue 1142 (2025-10-06): Linux Kamarada 15.6, managing ZIP files with SQLite, F-Droid warns of impact of Android lockdown, Alpine moves ahead with merged /usr, Cinnamon gets a redesigned application menu |
| • Issue 1141 (2025-09-29): KDE Linux and GNOME OS, finding mobile flavours of Linux, Murena to offer phones with kill switches, Redox OS running on a smartphone, Artix drops GNOME |
| • Issue 1140 (2025-09-22): NetBSD 10.1, avoiding AI services, AlmaLinux enables CRB repository, Haiku improves disk access performance, Mageia addresses service outage, GNOME 49 released, Linux introduces multikernel support |
| • Issue 1139 (2025-09-15): EasyOS 7.0, Linux and central authority, FreeBSD running Plasma 6 on Wayland, GNOME restores X11 support temporarily, openSUSE dropping BCacheFS in new kernels |
| • Issue 1138 (2025-09-08): Shebang 25.8, LibreELEC 12.2.0, Debian GNU/Hurd 2025, the importance of software updates, AerynOS introduces package sets, postmarketOS encourages patching upstream, openSUSE extends Leap support, Debian refreshes Trixie media |
| • Issue 1137 (2025-09-01): Tribblix 0m37, malware scanners flagging Linux ISO files, KDE introduces first-run setup wizard, CalyxOS plans update prior to infrastructure overhaul, FreeBSD publishes status report |
| • Issue 1136 (2025-08-25): CalyxOS 6.8.20, distros for running containers, Arch Linux website under attack,illumos Cafe launched, CachyOS creates web dashboard for repositories |
| • Issue 1135 (2025-08-18): Debian 13, Proton, WINE, Wayland, and Wayback, Debian GNU/Hurd 2025, KDE gets advanced Liquid Glass, Haiku improves authentication tools |
| • Issue 1134 (2025-08-11): Rhino Linux 2025.3, thoughts on malware in the AUR, Fedora brings hammered websites back on-line, NetBSD reveals features for version 11, Ubuntu swaps some command line tools for 25.10, AlmaLinux improves NVIDIA support |
| • Issue 1133 (2025-08-04): Expirion Linux 6.0, running Plasma on Linux Mint, finding distros which support X11, Debian addresses 22 year old bug, FreeBSD discusses potential issues with pkgbase, CDE ported to OpenBSD, Btrfs corruption bug hitting Fedora users, more malware found in Arch User Repository |
| • Issue 1132 (2025-07-28): deepin 25, wars in the open source community, proposal to have Fedora enable Flathub repository, FreeBSD plans desktop install option, Wayback gets its first release |
| • Issue 1131 (2025-07-21): HeliumOS 10.0, settling on one distro, Mint plans new releases, Arch discovers malware in AUR, Plasma Bigscreen returns, Clear Linux discontinued |
| • Issue 1130 (2025-07-14): openSUSE MicroOS and RefreshOS, sharing aliases between computers, Bazzite makes Bazaar its default Flatpak store, Alpine plans Wayback release, Wayland and X11 benchmarked, Red Hat offers additional developer licenses, openSUSE seeks feedback from ARM users, Ubuntu 24.10 reaches the end of its life |
| • Issue 1129 (2025-07-07): GLF OS Omnislash, the worst Linux distro, Alpine introduces Wayback, Fedora drops plans to stop i686 support, AlmaLinux builds EPEL repository for older CPUs, Ubuntu dropping existing RISC-V device support, Rhino partners with UBports, PCLinuxOS recovering from website outage |
| • Issue 1128 (2025-06-30): AxOS 25.06, AlmaLinux OS 10.0, transferring Flaptak bundles to off-line computers, Ubuntu to boost Intel graphics performance, Fedora considers dropping i686 packages, SDesk switches from SELinux to AppArmor |
| • Issue 1127 (2025-06-23): LastOSLinux 2025-05-25, most unique Linux distro, Haiku stabilises, KDE publishes Plasma 6.4, Arch splits Plasma packages, Slackware infrastructure migrating |
| • Issue 1126 (2025-06-16): SDesk 2025.05.06, renewed interest in Ubuntu Touch, a BASIC device running NetBSD, Ubuntu dropping X11 GNOME session, GNOME increases dependency on systemd, Google holding back Pixel source code, Nitrux changing its desktop, EFF turns 35 |
| • Issue 1125 (2025-06-09): RHEL 10, distributions likely to survive a decade, Murena partners with more hardware makers, GNOME tests its own distro on real hardware, Redox ports GTK and X11, Mint provides fingerprint authentication |
| • Issue 1124 (2025-06-02): Picking up a Pico, tips for protecting privacy, Rhino tests Plasma desktop, Arch installer supports snapshots, new features from UBports, Ubuntu tests monthly snapshots |
| • Issue 1123 (2025-05-26): CRUX 3.8, preventing a laptop from sleeping, FreeBSD improves laptop support, Fedora confirms GNOME X11 session being dropped, HardenedBSD introduces Rust in userland build, KDE developing a virtual machine manager |
| • Issue 1122 (2025-05-19): GoboLinux 017.01, RHEL 10.0 and Debian 12 updates, openSUSE retires YaST, running X11 apps on Wayland |
| • Issue 1121 (2025-05-12): Bluefin 41, custom file manager actions, openSUSE joins End of 10 while dropping Deepin desktop, Fedora offers tips for building atomic distros, Ubuntu considers replacing sudo with sudo-rs |
| • Issue 1120 (2025-05-05): CachyOS 250330, what it means when a distro breaks, Kali updates repository key, Trinity receives an update, UBports tests directory encryption, Gentoo faces losing key infrastructure |
| • Issue 1119 (2025-04-28): Ubuntu MATE 25.04, what is missing from Linux, CachyOS ships OCCT, Debian enters soft freeze, Fedora discusses removing X11 session from GNOME, Murena plans business services, NetBSD on a Wii |
| • Issue 1118 (2025-04-21): Fedora 42, strange characters in Vim, Nitrux introduces new package tools, Fedora extends reproducibility efforts, PINE64 updates multiple devices running Debian |
| • Issue 1117 (2025-04-14): Shebang 25.0, EndeavourOS 2025.03.19, running applications from other distros on the desktop, Debian gets APT upgrade, Mint introduces OEM options for LMDE, postmarketOS packages GNOME 48 and COSMIC, Redox testing USB support |
| • Issue 1116 (2025-04-07): The Sense HAT, Android and mobile operating systems, FreeBSD improves on laptops, openSUSE publishes many new updates, Fedora appoints new Project Leader, UBports testing VoLTE |
| • Issue 1115 (2025-03-31): GrapheneOS 2025, the rise of portable package formats, MidnightBSD and openSUSE experiment with new package management features, Plank dock reborn, key infrastructure projects lose funding, postmarketOS to focus on reliability |
| • Issue 1114 (2025-03-24): Bazzite 41, checking which processes are writing to disk, Rocky unveils new Hardened branch, GNOME 48 released, generating images for the Raspberry Pi |
| • Issue 1113 (2025-03-17): MocaccinoOS 1.8.1, how to contribute to open source, Murena extends on-line installer, Garuda tests COSMIC edition, Ubuntu to replace coreutils with Rust alternatives, Chimera Linux drops RISC-V builds |
| • Issue 1112 (2025-03-10): Solus 4.7, distros which work with Secure Boot, UBports publishes bug fix, postmarketOS considers a new name, Debian running on Android |
| • Issue 1111 (2025-03-03): Orbitiny 0.01, the effect of Ubuntu Core Desktop, Gentoo offers disk images, elementary OS invites feature ideas, FreeBSD starts PinePhone Pro port, Mint warns of upcoming Firefox issue |
| • Issue 1110 (2025-02-24): iodeOS 6.0, learning to program, Arch retiring old repositories, openSUSE makes progress on reproducible builds, Fedora is getting more serious about open hardware, Tails changes its install instructions to offer better privacy, Murena's de-Googled tablet goes on sale |
| • Issue 1109 (2025-02-17): Rhino Linux 2025.1, MX Linux 23.5 with Xfce 4.20, replacing X.Org tools with Wayland tools, GhostBSD moving its base to FreeBSD -RELEASE, Redox stabilizes its ABI, UBports testing 24.04, Asahi changing its leadership, OBS in dispute with Fedora |
| • Issue 1108 (2025-02-10): Serpent OS 0.24.6, Aurora, sharing swap between distros, Peppermint tries Void base, GTK removinglegacy technologies, Red Hat plans more AI tools for Fedora, TrueNAS merges its editions |
| • Issue 1107 (2025-02-03): siduction 2024.1.0, timing tasks, Lomiri ported to postmarketOS, Alpine joins Open Collective, a new desktop for Linux called Orbitiny |
| • Issue 1106 (2025-01-27): Adelie Linux 1.0 Beta 6, Pop!_OS 24.04 Alpha 5, detecting whether a process is inside a virtual machine, drawing graphics to NetBSD terminal, Nix ported to FreeBSD, GhostBSD hosting desktop conference |
| • Issue 1105 (2025-01-20): CentOS 10 Stream, old Flatpak bundles in software centres, Haiku ports Iceweasel, Oracle shows off debugging tools, rsync vulnerability patched |
| • Issue 1104 (2025-01-13): DAT Linux 2.0, Silly things to do with a minimal computer, Budgie prepares Wayland only releases, SteamOS coming to third-party devices, Murena upgrades its base |
| • Issue 1103 (2025-01-06): elementary OS 8.0, filtering ads with Pi-hole, Debian testing its installer, Pop!_OS faces delays, Ubuntu Studio upgrades not working, Absolute discontinued |
| • Issue 1102 (2024-12-23): Best distros of 2024, changing a process name, Fedora to expand Btrfs support and releases Asahi Remix 41, openSUSE patches out security sandbox and donations from Bottles while ending support for Leap 15.5 |
| • Issue 1101 (2024-12-16): GhostBSD 24.10.1, sending attachments from the command line, openSUSE shows off GPU assignment tool, UBports publishes security update, Murena launches its first tablet, Xfce 4.20 released |
| • Issue 1100 (2024-12-09): Oreon 9.3, differences in speed, IPFire's new appliance, Fedora Asahi Remix gets new video drivers, openSUSE Leap Micro updated, Redox OS running Redox OS |
| • Issue 1099 (2024-12-02): AnduinOS 1.0.1, measuring RAM usage, SUSE continues rebranding efforts, UBports prepares for next major version, Murena offering non-NFC phone |
| • Full list of all issues |
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
| Random Distribution | 
Chapeau
Chapeau was a high-performance, cutting-edge operating system built from the GNU/Linux distribution Fedora Workstation with the GNOME desktop environment. In comparison to Fedora, Chapeau adopts a more relaxed approach to software licences and was intended to be just as useful for advanced users as it was easy for those new to using a Linux system. There was built-in access to third-party software and sources repositories not included in Fedora such as RPMFusion, DropBox, Steam, Adobe Flash and Oracle VirtualBox. Chapeau also includes pre-installed core packages to make the installation of new kernel modules pain-free, built-in remote and virtual system management tools, a selection of maintenance tools that come in especially handy when running Chapeau's live image on a DVD or USB drive to analyse and fix broken systems.
Status: Discontinued
|
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
|
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
