Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by x87678r | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

x87678r

> Linux finally wins the desktop wars

ChromeOS is storming along - best desktop version of linux around. If I could easily run IntellJ on it I would switch.

View on HN

> best desktop version of linux around.

If you don't mind surrendering yourself to Google, at least.

>best linux distro around. If I could easily run IntellJ on it I would switch.

It's not a Distro.

You're right, I've amended.

What makes a distribution a distribution? Wikipedia and others list it as a distribution.

I thought any packaging of Linux kernel + whatever surrounding software needed to make an OS is a “distro”?

Would you consider android a linux distro?

Well at least I thought so (for the same reason as ChromeOS).

People seem divided on the topic. Obviously if distro means “Linux kernel based OS” then it’s a distro just like chromeOS. The Linux foundation for example, thinks Android is a Linux distribution.

It’s those who don’t must argue something more than just the kernel is needed, such as more GNU stuff. Exactly what that is, is what I’m curious about and why I asked.

>Well at least I thought so

Android and ChromeOS are Marketplace-(App) Runtime NOT a Linux Distro

>The Linux foundation for example, thinks Android is a Linux distribution

Well they compare it with embedded Linux:

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/blog/2013/03/intro-to-embedd...

> Wikipedia and others list it as a distribution.

No they don't:

>>Android is a mobile operating system based on a modified version of the Linux kernel and other open source software

Debian:

>>Debian (/ˈdɛbiən/),[5][6] also known as Debian GNU/Linux, is a Linux distribution composed of free and open-source software,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution#Linux_kerne...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution

What are the criteria required for an OS using the Linux kernel to be called a “distribution” then?

Including GNU or free software in the definition seems arbitrary... Is there a class of applications (that aren’t apps from a store) that must be runnable?

Or do you mean that distro is short for “GNU/Linux distribution”?

I’m not arguing for/against (since it’s obviously a long-standing debate), what I’m interested in is the criteria for what makes something a distro.

Yes, a distro implies GNU/Linux.

Neither ChromeOS nor Android expose the Linux kernel directly to userspace apps, so for them is irrelevant what kernel is being used.

>Yes, a distro implies GNU/Linux

Or BSD ;)

Not sure if the same applies, given that BSDs don't even share the same kernel code or overall architecture, and they are created as old style UNIX, meaning each BSD caters for everything across all stack.

>given that BSDs don't even share the same kernel code or overall architecture

Why is that not a Distribution, it's not a Gnu/Linux Distribution true, but it's one for sure. You know what BSD means?

Berkeley Software Distribution

>meaning each BSD caters for everything across all stack

Like every "real" Linux Distribution

Fair enough if you put it like that.

"a distro implies GNU/Linux"

So you mean your definition is "distro" is slang for "GNU/Linux distribution", whereas an os using the linux kernel is not necessarily a "Linux distribution"? Or can it be a "Linux distribution" without being a "distro"?

I use Linux distributions since Slackware 2.0, it is hardly my definition, rather something that I have read somewhere on Usenet or while reading Linux Journal.

Goinng back to Android and ChromeOS.

On Android, NDK states very clerarly what are the APIs available to userspace applications written in C and C++, and none of them are Linux syscalls. Additionally everything outside of the application's installation directory is forbidden.

Starting with Android 7, Google has started to introduce security measures that kill applications that try to work around the rules.

Likewise on ChromeOS, applications are written with the Web stack, ART running on its container and same access rules, with Crostini running on top of a container, using its own kernel and talking to the ChromeOS in a way similar to WSL2 on Windows.

Hence why applications like Termux have several limitations and workarounds to fake being on Linux, and going forward they may not even work anymore, because they refuse to use Java to access the features that Google forbids direct access to the NDK.

So hardly a Linux distribuition.

Thanks. Requiring that userland apps can access the Linux kernel “normally” is a good definition of what it means to be a Linux OS. It seems like a much less arbitrary definition than requiring the presence of specific GNU parts.

But WSL comes with a choice of distros to run on it, so how can it itself be a distro too?

WSL(2) doesn’t feel like an OS to me since it runs in Windows and needs another layer of OS on top to actually be a functioning Linux environment.

> It's not a Distro.

Sure it is.

It's not a general purpose distro (running on GP/COTS hardware), but it is a software distribution built around a Linux kernel.

>but it is a software distribution built around a Linux kernel

No google Play Store is the distributor NOT Android, Android and Linux is just part of the runtime.

I wasn't talking about Android.

Why can't you run Intellij on it? Chrome OS supports all the Debian apps.

You can't run it in crostini?

Yeah my chromebook doesn't support it and is too weak to really run IntelliJ, I use it for web guis and some shell work. I haven't tried hard because Crostini still seems a bit bleeding edge - I think you can run linux apps directly without Crostini now too. I was waiting to see what the new PixelBook is going to do and how things settle down next year.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com