GNU/Linux Distribution Timeline

Jonathan

I saw this on reddit and thought it was pretty cool.

http://futurist.se/gldt/

http://futurist.se/gldt/wp-content/uploads/11.07/gldt1107.svg

Johnboy1951

I wonder how many of those 'distros' are truly distributions in their own right and not just variations on a theme.

If a 'distro' does not maintain its own repository of packages I do not regard them as a 'distro' .... but rather just another 'themed' issue of their base.

Put it another way ..... if the base distro were to disappear in the morning, how many of the derivatives would survive independently?

As an example .... I see that Ubuntu Christian Edition is listed.
IIRC, when that was first released it was just Ubuntu with some specific applications included by default, and some theme-ing.
It was not then a 'distro in its own right, to my way of looking at things. I have no idea if that has changed ... just using it as an example.
There are many such alleged distros in that time line.

What I did find surprising, was the realisation that I have tried (installed) many of those listed.

Eliot Rosewater

Might be interesting to vary the thickness of the lines depending on the popularity of the distribution, measured in percentage, user numbers or some combination. The current graph is interesting enough, but the only thing it really shows is which distributions spawned loads more. Having line thicknesses, as well as some may of marking "non-base" or minor distributions might give more insight...

Johnboy1951

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Might be interesting to vary the thickness of the lines depending on the popularity of the distribution, measured in percentage, user numbers or some combination. The current graph is interesting enough, but the only thing it really shows is which distributions spawned loads more. Having line thicknesses, as well as some may of marking "non-base" or minor distributions might give more insight...

I understand what you mean .... but it would not help me personally.
Popularity, IMO, does not imply much that I would be looking for in an OS.
Heck, if it did then I would be using Windows

OSI wrote:

To be fair, if you were going to break it down as far "if the base distro were to disappear in the morning, how many of the derivatives would survive independently?", then that chart would be about 10% of the size it is.

To me it would make more interesting reading as well as get rid of the clutter and confusion generated by such high numbers of alleged distros.

I haven't seen such a listing .... I think it would make very interesting reading

PrzemoF

Impressive work! I even found my favourite distro on the graph! (PLD)

dioltas

Haha at Christian and Satanic ubuntus!

I thought Arch linux was based on LFS. Maybe it was just created from scratch...

I didn't see Backtrack on there, it's a derivative of ubuntu isn't it? I think it used to be Knoppix though.

Tinfoil Hat Linux:

How to use Tinfoil Hat Linux ....
***************************************************
If at all possible, boot THL on a laptop & disconnect all external
cables, including the power & mouse. Turn off nearby
radios, including cell phones and microwaves. Put yourself
and the computer in a well grounded opaque copper cube. Download
your tinfoil hat plans from http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html.
Boot the floppy....

Jonathan

dioltas wrote: »

I didn't see Backtrack on there, it's a derivative of ubuntu isn't it? I think it used to be Knoppix though.

Debian -> Knoppix -> Kanotix -> Auditor Security Linux -> Backtrack

dioltas

Ah there it is! Thanks.

I like they way they linked it with WHAX too, nice attention to detail.

humbert

Damn Vulnerable Linux