|
|
|
|
|
|
by elros
3383 days ago
|
|
|
Well, that's a kernel. I don't see why something needs to be either a distribution or an OS. Ubuntu is an operating system. It is also a distribution of Linux. If I'm using Debian with the Hurd kernel, is the actual OS Hurd? This makes no sense. |
|
|
Debian is a collection of software and configuration that's distributed for convenience. That's where the term "distro" originates. The OS would be better described as GNU/Linux (the GNU user land and Linux kernel) with "Debian" being the name for that particular set of user land defaults.
Likewise Hurd is often referred to as GNU/Hurd since it too uses the GNU user land. Debian, Arch, etc will then take the Hurd / Linux and GNU sources and add their own touches to it (package management, etc) but fundamentally Ubuntu and Arch are still the same platform at their core in a way that Ubuntu and FreeBSD is not.
I didn't agree with much of what the GP raised (particularly around issues of support), but one point he was correct about was how Debian, Arch, etc aren't the maintainers of the Linux kernel nor GNU coreutils. Sure they will contribute patches but essentially what they do is redistribute GNU/Linux with their preferred packages and configuration. Hence the term "Linux distribution".
So the TL;DR version is:
If you're running Debian you do have an OS installed. The OS might be referred to as GNU/Linux to express the GNU user land and Linux kernel. Debian is the name given to the distributed collection of programs and default configurations that's based on GNU/Linux.