What distro would you choose if Debian goes under?

[fox]

Most if not all of us in PLUG are using a Debian-based distro for our main driver. I recently read an article that suggested that Debian could be in trouble. (Wish I could find it again. If you can, please post.) Up until then I had thought about what I would do if Ubuntu stopped making a desktop version, which is a possibility if Canonical goes fully commercial. But what would you do if Debian itself went under? I thought about this recently and came up with a short list of non-Debian based distros I might switch to. My selection criteria would be:

• non-rolling release
• long maintenance period
• easy to install and use
• upgradable
• large repository
• relatively up-to-date applications
• well supported

At the top of my list would be OpenSUSE Leap, mainly because I have some familiarity with it and secondly because it is maintained for 3 years and can be upgraded. (My version is Leap 15.1.) It meets all of my criteria except that app versions are not as recent as those of Ubuntu (but more recent than those of Debian stable).

Next on my list would be Fedora. I have had some experience with it, and it is upgradable. Most of the apps I use have Fedora (or rpm) versions. Maintenance period, though, is not very long (13 months as I recall). Apps are more recent than those of OpenSuSE Leap and even Ubuntu.

After that, I would consider Mageia, openMandriva, PCLinuxOS and CentOS, not necessarily in that order. These I know more from reading about them than using them. They appear to meet most of my criteria.

What are your thoughts on non-Debian based distros you would use if Debian and Ubuntu went under?

[ssfc72]

For myself, I would probably go with PCLinuxOS.  I have used it many years ago and liked the way it operated. Not sure if the current version is the same as the years ago version but I imagine it is still based on Red Hat and uses RPM for it's apps in the repositories?

I believe I saw a sentence on Distrowatch that there was going to be voting for the core people that run the Debian Distro. Maybe that is what is making you think Debian may be in "trouble"

[Jason]

I recently read an article that suggested that Debian could be in trouble

Where did you read this? I'm not doubting that you saw an article but it seems unlikely. And from what I understand most distros are based on Ubuntu, not Debian. Ubuntu is its own beast. But yes, there are packages it receives downstream from Debian although I have no idea how many that is. My feeling is that Canonical may have enough people and experience they'd start doing what the Debian project was doing. Keep in mind that Debian wasn't doing all the packages, those are built and maintained by volunteers irrespective of Debian or any other distro. The other option for Canonical would be to just switch to having their distro based off of Fedora.

Personally, what I'd do if Ubuntu disappeared and therefore, Kubuntu is switch to a Fedora-based distro if not Fedora itself. I can't think of any off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure that Fedora has a Plasma spin.

I'd have similar criteria except that I wouldn't rule out a rolling release. The biggest reason for not using a rolling release for me is having to re-install Nvidia drivers with new kernel releases. But... if the open-source driver works well enough, I don't game in Linux so having the binary Nvidia drivers may not matter all that much.

I'd like an LTS version of whatever distro for the PLUG server, but for the desktop, it isn't that important to me if I have to upgrade every six months. I often get bored with a distro in that amount of time anyway! But I'm surprised that'd be an issue for you, Fox. Aren't you upgrading Ubuntu with every new release that comes out?

Also, you can't have an LTS version and have the most recent software. The reason LTS versions are stable and reliable is that they don't try to have the latest software. They typically only update the software to fix critical and security bugs and kernel updates within a version. When an LTS version is released, at first, it will have fairly up-to-date software, like the upcoming Ubuntu 20.04 and associated flavours. But over a 5 year period, the software will get more and more outdated, as far as features go.

It's an interesting exercise, but I think it's moot because even if the Debian team doesn't want to do it, likely another group will take it over. There are just too many people that work on it for it disappear. But I doubt it's going to away. It was there from the start - not the oldest distro, but close to the oldest.

[Jason]

I believe I saw a sentence on Distrowatch that there was going to be voting for the core people that run the Debian Distro. Maybe that is what is making you think Debian may be in "trouble"

That would make sense although Debian has always had voting for who heads up the project, AFAIK.

I had forgotten about PCLinuxOS, they are probably one of the best yum-based distros and they have Plasma.

[Jason]

It looks like they're pretty active and nothing in Google News feed searching for 'Debian' about Debian being in trouble. They just announced a Biohackathon to fight COVID-19 which involves open-source medical use and medical research software.

[Jason]

Just saw this article. Is that what you're worried about, Fox? It's an elected position that had somebody before him and will have somebody after him.

Btw, that's a horrible picture they used of him.

[buster]

"What are your thoughts on non-Debian based distros you would use if Debian and Ubuntu went under?"

I recognize this as a thought exercise, rather than reality. But it's interesting.

Have used both Mageia and SUSE. And that is exactly the order I would choose them if I had to. Mageia I found stable and pleasant. SUSE is solid but somehow .... I don't know. Stogy?

Still, Mint Cinnamon and Kubuntu  used all the time at present.

[Jason]

Never considered Mageia. Does it have the ole' Mandrake/Mandriva feel?

[buster]

"Never considered Mageia. Does it have the ole' Mandrake/Mandriva feel?"

KDE, rpms, seems most things included with the long but easy install - was all a while ago. Good people on the forum.

There is a thread I started just over a year ago:
https://plugintolinux.ca/forum/index.php/topic,697.0.html

[fox]

Just saw this article. Is that what you're worried about, Fox?
....

Nope, it wasn't that, but for the life of me I can't find the article. I do remember it having something to do with the election of the new leader, or at least that was in the article. At any rate, I don't like to appear to be spreading rumours. Just look at it as a thought exercise.

[Jason]

That's what the article I mentioned was about. It's not the same article but the same story. The present one isn't running again. They change leaders on a regular basis by vote. But definitely an interesting thought exercise. Makes me realize I don't have a backup plan and probably should. Everything I've used as a distro the last few years has mostly been Ubuntu-based.

[fox]

I finally found the internet source where I got the idea that Debian could potentially go under. It was a padcast of Linux Action News. The relevant part starts at around 10:45 into the podcast until about 20:00. The discussion starts with Linux Mint Debian Edition, and it's really pretty hypothetical. Chris Fisher made the point that Debian is "cratering", and that it would be more likely to disappear than Ubuntu. He is concerned with the upcoming election, whom he claims won't solve any of its problems, though it isn't clear to me what those problems are.

[Jason]

Thanks for providing that, Fox. I'll have to check it out. I have even more time on my hands now since I have, what is likely, a cold. But just in case, I'm not going out, at all, even for errands. They even recommend wearing a mask around family and distancing as much as you can.

I think the worry around Debian is that it's a highly-charged development environment. There are programmers with some very strong opinions about how things should be done and some nasty arguments about it that can get quite personal. And they're over what technical matters that don't make all that much difference and nobody other than them really notices. An example is the debate over changing how Linux boots up. A lot of programmers were dead set against it even though most distros have already changed over because the new system was easier to troubleshoot and better maintained. And other programmers were pushing just as hard in the other way and bad mojo built-up between the sides that became overheated.


So the leader's major work was on trying to get the Debian community of developers to play nice and have decisions made more democratically and having the losing side accept they lost and move on. I don't know whether he succeeded but I suspect that's what the segment has to do with. But this stuff with the Debian community goes way way back and it never broke up before so I don't think anything has really changed. But since Ubuntu has a top-down approach, it's a lot easier for them to manage things.

And, let's face it, most distros are built around Fedora, openSUSE, or Ubuntu, not Debian. Ubuntu was originally based on Debian but I think it's a distro in its own right now and used as much on servers as Debian is. That's why Linux Mint has 3 versions based on Ubuntu with different DEs and a version based on Debian (Linux Mint Debian Edition). If you go and look at that edition, they are very clear in saying that Ubuntu IS NOT Debian, and therefore Ubuntu packages don't necessarily work on Debian and vice-versa. They're mostly compatible but it's better to get the packages built for the distro you're using when you can. But I have no idea how compatible the packages are, or to put it another way, how much of Ubuntu is still Debian at the core.

[fox]

And, let's face it, most distros are built around Fedora, openSUSE, or Ubuntu, not Debian. Ubuntu was originally based on Debian but I think it's a distro in its own right now and used as much on servers as Debian is.  .... But I have no idea how compatible the packages are, or to put it another way, how much of Ubuntu is still Debian at the core.

I was under the impression that most of the Ubuntu packages are basically taken from Debian unstable. Is that not so?

[Jason]

I was under the impression that most of the Ubuntu packages are basically taken from Debian unstable. Is that not so?

That's the part I'm not sure of. I know they tinker with a lot of packages and optimize them. But I don't know how many. That's where the incompatibility issues can come in. I think they use a lot of Debian packages but test them in their core install to make sure everything works, especially because they're using 'testing'. I don't think it's 'unstable' 'unstable'. But I might be wrong.