- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Linux Distributions Bird's Eye View - a Mind Map
There are umpteen GNU/Linux distributions and then some more. Many claim their roots in Debian and others in Red Hat. Still others swear that they are unique and were created from grounds up. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a picture which gave a broad idea of the roots of each GNU/Linux distributions? |
|
|
Comments (3)
Agree, this is pretty sloppy.
I agree.
Also, it is a mind map of a very particular mind - apparently, small distributions are closer to each other than to their origins...
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
foresight is NOT based on redhat/fedora but on rpath with is an independent development.
turbo linux is also based on redhat.
linspire is debian. almost every distribution using the debian package manager should be based on debian, i don't think there are any that adopted the deb system later in their live, but i could be wrong on that.
suse is based on slackware (and slackware is based on SLS) and eventually changed their packaging to redhat's rpm. sid, etch and sarge are not distributions but versions and therefore just don't fit in this graph. it makes no sense to say that eg xandros is based on etch, when older versions of xandros are based on sarge, etc. it may make sense to include the version if a distribution is a fork and no longer tracks its source, like mandrake/mandriva which tracked redhat for a while and then stopped and and continued on their own.
the groupings small, minimalist and security related distributions are also not useful for this graph because they say nothing about what these distributions are based on but only describe some feature about them. the descriptions even state in some cases what these distributions are based on. why don't you draw the graph accordingly?
please do more research and then update your graph.