Debian and Ubuntu
Ubuntu seems to be the latest, greatest thing in the world of operating systems. The creators of Ubuntu have done some good things in terms of making Linux easier to use and in providing guidance for Linux newbs. But with newbs you bring ignorance, and there are a couple things I’ve been seeing that are kind of ridiculous.
First, I saw a post stating that “I’m of the opinion that Ubuntu could not exist without Debian.” The poster of that comment is Mark Shuttleworth, the founder of the Ubuntu project. Just as you would expect Bill Gates to downplay the significance of taking ideas from other operating systems, Mark is downplaying his project’s dependence on Debian. The quote above should be “Ubuntu absolutely could not exist without Debian.” That is it – no opinions, just solid fact. Ubuntu is being developed by a relatively small team, and what they achieve seems impossible for their size. Their secret is simple: work on the Debian project is being done by coders working to advance the project, not for money, and Ubuntu is a thin interface on top of that work. I’m not bashing any of the paid Ubuntu developers, but the development of Ubuntu is extremely dependent on the advancement of Debian. In fact, this point has been the source of some unfavorable feelings toward Ubuntu by Debian developers, with the criticism that Ubuntu is taking a *lot* from Debian, and returning very little. So if you take one thing away from this paragraph, let it be that Debian can exist without Ubuntu. Ubuntu cannot exist without Debian.
And second, the number of Ubuntu users who believe “Ubuntu = Linux” or the same users who have never heard of Debian is surprisingly high. If one of you happens to be reading this post, here is a simple analogy to explain the truth. The Linux kernel is the component common to all distributions of Linux – you could say that it is Mr. Potato Head’s body. Distributions of Linux are different sets of packages on top of the kernel that enable the user to do different things easily. You could call these the accessories you put on Mr. Potato Head. Debian and Ubuntu are such distributions. However, Ubuntu is built on /top/ of Debian, so you could call Ubuntu the paint on the accessories on Mr. Potato Head. All in all, there was extra work to make those accessories more appealing, but that work is trivial when compared to what it took to make the accessories themselves. You can make a Debian installation behave exactly like an Ubuntu installation with very little work (just by grabbing the packages, possibly from a different package level), but doing the opposite is near impossible. To summarize: Ubuntu is Debian. Debian is not Ubuntu. Both are Linux distributions.
I really hope that this sheds some light on the dependency that Ubuntu has on Debian. And really, I would *love* to see some activism on the Ubuntu community’s side to give more back to the Debian project. The farther Debian goes, the better Ubuntu gets – they only stand to benefit.
In my opinion you should support Linux in general and not only one distributions. Giving criticm addressed to Ubuntu won’t help Linux nor Debian. Instead of making critic that Ubuntu can’t live without Debian, you should better encourage both distributions to work more together and not just say that Ubuntu is dependent from Debian. I ‘m a newbie in Linux(though I know what distro’s are, and that Ubuntu is derived from Debian and such sort of stuff). I find myself easier using Ubuntu or an Ubuntu derived distro instead of Debian. You say that Debian is able to behave exactly like Ubuntu, well they haven’t done that and that ’s why newbie won’t install Debian.That ’s as easy as that
Feb 3rd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Rob, I’ll agree with you completely. People should know their history. Ubuntu is by no means a bad distro. In fact, I am glad Ubuntu exists. It has put a lot of pressure on other distros to make them “more user friendly.” I would go as far as to say that Ubuntu is the most user friendly operating system on the market today (even more so than windows – it finds all of your drivers, even proprietary ones [ex: video card], for you on the initial boot). Ubuntu being so easy does bring a lot of new people to the “Linux arena,” which is good. I do wish, however, that Ubuntu would make it more of a point to tell people that they are a Debian-based distro.
AA – In my opinion, Debian allows for more configuration than Ubuntu, the cost of which is less default configurations and “out of the boxness.” I have been using Debian for a few years now; I do like how everything seems to “just work” in Ubuntu, but when I want more control or more up-to-date packages for something, I find myself drawn back to Debian.
Feb 3rd, 2008 at 5:06 pm
A.A.:
I never intended to imply that Debian /should/ behave like Ubuntu, especially by default. If you want Ubuntu, use Ubuntu. My point is that Ubuntu is heavily based on Debian, and that is a fact that seems to be ignored by the majority of people that think Ubuntu is unique.
I’m not criticizing Ubuntu’s goals or purpose either, only suggesting that there should be a greater appreciation for what Debian is in relation to Ubuntu. And by appreciation, I mean people should acknowledge that Debian is the base of Ubuntu and put greater effort to collaborate with the Debian project. The focus right now is way too Ubuntu specific, and ignoring this definitely /will/ hurt Ubuntu in the long run if Debian is ignored.
And for the record, I do support Linux in general. However, allowing Linux to become synonymous with Ubuntu is not helpful. It is akin to putting all your eggs in one basket, and there are some areas where Ubuntu is not the most optimal solution. The risk here is that if the Linux community gathers solely behind Ubuntu, you’ll end up with people just as bad as Windows techs suggesting solutions that aren’t a good fit because that is what they are familiar with. Ubuntu is a great desktop solution for people new to Linux, and the community supporting that is incredible. But past that, alternatives need to be examined, and Debian often fits requirements where Ubuntu would be sub-optimal.
Feb 3rd, 2008 at 5:11 pm
This is the best piece of article that I’ve read (from the past few months) that make reference to Ubuntu. Thank you.
Feb 4th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Great article, I have to sat though that I really dont understand why people keep repeating that ubuntu is a great distro for people new to linux. I first tried linux in april 2007 and installed ubuntu and have to say if it had been the only distro I would have deleted it and stayed with windows. since that time Ive installed many distros and tried many more live cds. In my experiance there are many worse distros but also many vastly superior. And by superior I mean for new Linux users. Ubuntu may be an adequate distro but doesnt really deserve all the press it receives.
Feb 4th, 2008 at 1:33 am
Debian can exist without Ubuntu. Ubuntu cannot exist without Debian
Very well said. I never used Debian before trying out Kubuntu back in 2005. When I finally tried Debian, I realized that Ubuntu just made some cosmetics changes. With both Debian and Kubuntu, I still had to edit the same configuration files get things to work. Ubuntu’s saving grace is that it allows new Linux users to install an OS out of the box. Deep down, though, it was the Debian developers that actually made the final Ubuntu/Kubuntu product user friendly. Where would they be without Synaptic or apt-get?
Ubuntu is Debian. Debian is not Ubuntu. Both are Linux distributions.
Again, well said on both counts. A person can get tired seeing Ubuntu = Linux posts online. I think we all remember the one post where blogger stated, “Don’t say Linux, say Ubuntu! These guys might as well call it M$ Ubuntu for all I care because that is where I see Ubuntu going. Give more credit to the Debian guys…
If Ubuntu is really that great of a distro, then they should of forked themselves off awhile back. They didn’t and that should tell you something. From the top-down, the Ubuntu developers seem to know their stuff, from the bottom-up, well that is another story…
Feb 4th, 2008 at 3:24 am
Do you know how many distros are based in Debian? Why so much hate to Ubuntu and not the other ones? Easy, Ubuntu is in sucess and the hate rises…
Anyway, it’s true, Ubuntu could not exist without Debian. In fact there are only three main distros, the other ones depend of that three. Come on, let’s hate the rest! Please…
“Ubuntu is Debian. Debian is not Ubuntu. Both are Linux distributions.” False. Ubuntu isn’t Debian, as Debian isn’t Ubuntu. The correct phrase: “Ubuntu is based in Debian”. If we follow your expression… Is Fedora or Mandriva the same thing than Red Hat? Is Suse or OpenSuse the same thing than than Slackware? NO, THEY AREN´T, THEY ARE BASED IN “X”. But yeah, all them are GNU/Linux distros.
Hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate, jealous, hate…
Feb 4th, 2008 at 5:21 am
@hIST:
There is no hate toward Ubuntu as a distribution, as I stated in my post, it does what it intended to do and there is nothing wrong with that. The problem is with Ubuntu building off of Debian’s work, and when they make an improvement to that base, the devs have been known not to cooperate entirely with the Debian devs in returning that improvement to the Debian project.
The difference between Debian and Ubuntu and the other distributions that you compared it to is big. As SaigonNezumi wisely stated, the Ubuntu distribution had the option to fork from Debian. But they didn’t. SuSe, Knoppix, and other distributions have. Remaining dependent while ignoring that dependence is, in my eyes, a problem that deserves awareness.
There is no jealousy, and no hate. Only ignorance and the ignorant, whose numbers will hopefully decline as this gains more attention.
@SaigonNezumi, Greg, and Mic:
Thanks for your comments! All were greatly appreciated. And SaigonNezumi – cool blog. I really respect what you are doing professionally.
Feb 4th, 2008 at 5:34 am
“Ubuntu absolutely could not exist without Debian.”
–Of course Ubuntu could exist without Debian. They would just instead be “the paint on the accessories” on Fedora or OpenSuse or…
Feb 4th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Ubuntu is not the only distro based on Debian (which I think is one of the best linux distributions), but why do people keep bashing only ubuntu?
I think ubuntu has done a great deal in expanding the number of desktop linux users and doesn’t own to debian any more then other debian based distro’s.(like MEPIS, Sidux, vyatta, knoppix, etc.)
I agree though, that the history should be known by ubuntu users(that ubuntu is based on debian and what is linux).
Feb 4th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Everyone:
I’m not bashing Ubuntu as a distribution. I’m merely bringing attention to the practices Ubuntu (and Canonical) have adopted with regard to Debian. The size of Ubuntu *does* matter in this case. It is similar to when someone starts out on their own – they are going to need a little help. And let’s say that this person gives back what he can, a few cents here and there. Then let’s pretend that this individual makes it big, and is now raking in the cash, but he is still reliant on you for assistance. Even further, the contributions he gives back to you are still only a few cents occasionally, even though you know they are capable of giving you more. No, it isn’t *required* that they give you anything, it is their success. But anyone who would take that much and give so little back in terms of contributions or appreciation is completely selfish and morally bankrupt.
Feb 4th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Debian is a great organisation – like parents – would give all to the children i.e. Ubuntu, as all good parents never demand anhything back from their children, Debian should too. I’m a newbie, was confused which way – distro – to follow until ubuntu came to me, then I realised I’d love debians (debian distro and “children”) more than others. I see Ubuntu helps users around the world to love GNU/Linux OS thru Ubuntu style which based on Debian. Since I never forget the root of Ubuntu, that is Debian, I’m sure all other users won’t either, so let’s just stop this debate, thanking Debian as well as Ubuntu for helping us comprehend GNU/Linux OS. After all Life’s too damn precious to be wasted for some debate over a fact.
Feb 4th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
“Ubuntu could not exist without debian” may be fact in that Ubuntu is based on debian. Mark Shuttleworth obviously knows what he’s talking about – he was probably stating his /opinion/ that Ubuntu would have been harder to build on, for example, a RH base.
Feb 5th, 2008 at 3:35 am
When you are using OpenOffice.org, do you really care whether it’s based on StarOffice originally developed by Star Division GmbH? No, right? Why should it be different for Ubuntu? The thing that really matters for the end-users is that Ubuntu is based on the same Open Source ideology as any other Linux distro. Why should they care about Ubuntu genealogy when they want to browse the web, work on their documents, and manage photos?
Feb 5th, 2008 at 5:37 am
Nomen Nescio:
There’s a big difference: Ubuntu is still actively taking from Debian. Taking is fine, it’s one of the main aspects of Open Source. However, Rob’s point is that the connection between Ubuntu and Debian is still very relevant, and pretty much defines Ubuntu, but it’s being downplayed and ignored by the Ubuntu folks.
Besides the social aspect of it, Rob makes a point about actual contributions back to Debian in the form of patches, or at least collaboration. I’m not sure how much is flowing back into Debian, but if what he says is true, it would be minimally decent for Ubuntu developers to make some kind of effort to contribute to Debian, when their work, their product is so dependent on it.
Rob:
At first I didn’t completely agree with your sentiment. I generally like to think of Open software as a gift, to be used with no expectation of anything in return. But as I read more, I came to agree with your sentiment. I especially like your analogy of a poor man getting rich from someone’s help, but not returning any goodwill; it’s almost unseemly and arrogant.
Feb 8th, 2008 at 3:22 am
You are absolutely correct; Ubuntu is dependent upon Debian for it’s existence.
Though many will perceive this as a bad thing, a failing on Ubuntu’s part, I don’t think that’s the case at all. Debian developers do tons of hard work and deserve a lot of credit for it. The product the produce is superb, allowing easy management of a Linux system, particularly a server or for an experienced user’s desktop. What Ubuntu does is something that the Debian developers aren’t interested in: adding some polish and snazzing things up so that less experienced users or those looking for some flash are interested.
To continue the wonderful tradition of ridiculous analogies in the computer field, think of Debian as a house. It’s a damn fine house, brick on block construction, bathrooms everywhere you want them, a big garage and it even comes with the most comfortable bed in the world. The only problem is that it’s a bit drab. Sure, the fact that there are no sheets on the bed doesn’t matter because the automatic HVAC system in the Debian house keeps the temperature perfect by reading your mind, but it seems a bit weird to sleep on such a bed. Ubuntu adds some sheets, window dressing, landscaping and even an entertainment system in the living room.
Feb 8th, 2008 at 11:10 am
@Drew:
Hahaha! I think if I had to choose one ridiculous analogy from this line of commenting, yours would be it. Classic :)
@Heewa:
You definitely nailed me and the points I was trying to make. Thanks for the comment :)
Feb 8th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
You’re right. Before I became an avid distro- hopper I thought ubuntu was linux. Only after a few years and a few hundred distros do I really see how all the pieces fit together. Its taken a few years, but after starting with ubuntu and then returning to ubuntu,I’ve learned there is no ‘best” distro. When I educate people about linux, i try to always show them a few different distros , each with different desktop environments, so they can begin to see that linux = the kernel, not the desktop or the name that is on the cd you download and burn.
Feb 12th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
I don’t think Debian is a superset of Ubuntu in any sense. It’s pretty clear that Debian and Ubuntu are branching apart whereas the former is clearly the parent of the latter.
If I were to say that you are a subset of your biological parents–that is you, your skill set, talents, interests, etc–I think you would be pretty outraged. In the same way you are incorrect if you state in such a general way that Ubuntu cannot exist without Debian, implying that Debian will forever be the superset. Face the facts, Ubuntu is growing, changing and improving the wonderful code base that is Debian.
Don’t get me wrong. Ubuntu will forever owe a “blood” debt to Debian in much the same way you owe your parents the same debt.
Feb 12th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I remember a few years ago when Knoppix was one of the top Distros and everyone used it. When you actually installed it on the hard drive, it became Debian. The GRUB menu entry said Debian GNU/Linux, and they pretty much told you a HDD install is just installing Debian. When I tried Ubuntu, I don’t remember seeing Debians name once.
I also don’t understand the Ubuntu = easiest to use distro. I find SuSe, Mandriva, PClinuxOS, and Freespire much more beginner friendly, and much more seperated from their base distros. I really honestly don’t like Ubuntu all that much. I never really understood the draw to it.
Feb 12th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
So, if I use Ubuntu, I’m *not* using Linux? If I’m not, enlighten me on what I *am* using. BSD perhaps? Unix? OS/2 Warp? No. I’m using Linux. Ergo, people say, “I’m using Linux on my system at home!” Same thing someone who runs DEBIAN says, “I’m using Linux on my system at home!”
So for newbies, sometimes they get confused and say “Hey, I’m runnin’ Linux!” instead of “Hey, I’m runnin’ Ubuntu!” forgive, enlighten, breathe, move on.
Secondly, Debian is a solid platform. But it’s ugly at installation. There’s no “user friendly” install. There’s no “user friendly” options explanation. Basically, it’s not “user friendly” AT ALL. If you’re not an “experienced user” step back and leave it alone. You’re going to go into convulsions just from trying to set up your NIC.
Ubuntu bridged the gap that the furry toothed developers of Debian never considered important – NEW USERS, and how to get them away from their crappy current OS.
And it’s funny, but the GUI installation setup, the GUI options dialog, the Live CD options…they’ve all been available openly to the Debian developers. How come they haven’t been implemented in Debian? Oh yeah, that’s right, because Debian isn’t USER FRIENDLY. Ubuntu is.
So, my suggestion is to quit being an elitist and recognize Ubuntu for what it has done, and what it has offered – even if those offerings are viewed as a “complete waste of resources” to some.
Just because those who created Debian don’t feel the contributions Ubuntu has made are sizable, doesn’t mean they aren’t.
As for Ubuntu not existing without Debian? Get off your high horse. You don’t think Ubuntu could have been built on the Red Hat, Slack, or even BSD platforms?
Think again.
But hey, if you want to bash Ubuntu, maybe it’ll become popular enough for you to say “Hey, I was one of the first people to bash them when they were just becoming big!” and we can all look at you as some sort of uber god or something.
Whatever4ever.
Feb 12th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
@Ghost|BTFH:
Reread my comments. I’m not bashing Ubuntu at all, they have achieved their goal and I respect them for that. What I don’t respect are the items I mentioned in my post.
And to say Ubuntu cannot exist without Debian is correct. Ubuntu is based on Debian. If it were based on another distribution, then sure, you’d be correct in saying it could be based on another distribution. But it isn’t, so my statement was correct.
I apologize if I came off as elitist, I never intended the post to come off as such. It is more about bringing about awareness to an issue that has been swept under the table by the Ubuntu devs. And again, I’m not bashing Ubuntu as a distribution. Someone else can have the ‘I bashed Ubuntu before it was cool’ tag – I don’t want it. Open source software should be promoted by everyone, but that promotion should proportionate to effort, and I don’t like seeing Ubuntu get all the press while Debian goes without credit. Color me what you will, it just doesn’t seem right.
@Matt:
Another commenter had the same feelings about the usability of Ubuntu for new users. Kudos for sticking with Linux and trying out different distributions!
@man:
You make an interesting point, but I don’t know if I agree with the analogy. It would be more appropriate to say that Ubuntu and Debian are conjoined twins. Debian has all the organs and the main functioning body, and Ubuntu is the consumer attached to the host. When performing surgery to separate the two, Ubuntu would be the one that dies, while Debian would continue without a hitch. Ubuntu is very much reliant on advances in Debian, as Ubuntus entire substructure is dependent on the Debian project.
@Michael:
I too jumped around a lot of distros before settling down with one :) Perspective is good to have, it gives you the experience necessary to prescribe solutions to different problems, as not all distributions are slated for all tasks.
@Everyone:
This post attracted a lot more intention than I ever thought it would. Thanks for stopping by, and thank you for the comments. They really contribute to the discussion, and I do read them all!
Feb 12th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
@peasleer: It is actually a good post that stirring some good debate. This week I will install Kubuntu on my client’s computer because, well, it is easy to use. I can do it in Debian but I just do not have the time to configure the desktop for them :)
My complaint, is like everyone else’s, Ubuntu needs to start giving back to the community.
Feb 13th, 2008 at 12:25 am
My family desktop runs Ubuntu; my own laptop runs Debian. To be perfectly honest, I can barely see any difference whatsoever.
Mar 6th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
The content of this article is against the spirit of open source software. Don’t point fingers like that, its unnecessary. The Debian community should be _thrilled_ that another distribution has chosen their platform to extend and build upon. THAT is the open source philosophy. Why do you think Linus Torvald created the linux kernel? He did it for _everybody_, not so that he could go and take credit for every linux distribution that exists, rather he created it to promote the existence of linux, and open source philosophy.
If debian really feels left out, maybe they should merge more with ubuntu. I am sure the projects could benefit. have two options on install – Debian core, or ubuntu. Or if they want to keep complaining they can just QQ.
Mar 6th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
I think you dost protest too much. Mark is certainly acknowledging Ubuntu’s dependence on Debian. I think you are misinterpreting his remarks.
Mar 6th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
@Jealous:
I can’t tell if your comment was troll bait or not. Given Debian’s free-over-all-else mission statement, it isn’t exactly intelligent to suggest they merge with a distribution backed by a corporate entity.
@Alan:
It is better now than it was a while ago. There was a decent spell when Ubuntu didn’t say anything about Debian on the information page aside of a toss of the name. After a decent amount of protest, this has been changing.
Mar 7th, 2008 at 5:24 am
Ubuntu is currently based on Debian. This is a fact.
In the unlikely event that Debian were to cease to exist tomorrow, and be otherwise completely unavailable, Ubuntu would then become based on another distro.
Someone else mentioned that they like the control that Debian gives them over Ubuntu, and on that point I would agree, hence the reason I use Gentoo. (If it moves, COMPILE IT!!!!) I had Gentoo prior to my Ubuntu flirtations, then went to Sabayon (Based on Gentoo), but am slowly going back to Gentoo.(emerge -av kdebase-meta kdeutils-meta)
User Friendly is ok, but once you’re beyond a certain level of knowledge, you like to poke under the hood. If under-the-hood is where you like to be, then Debian or some other “base” distro, if you will, is for you.
If “It just Works(tm)(r)(c)” if for you, then (E,X,K)Ubuntu, or some other shiny wrapped distro is the path you shall follow.
It matters not how one goes to the mountain, only that one gets there. – An old Proverb I just made up.
Apr 7th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
@All and future:
Looks like the Ubuntu team is starting to show the Debian team appreciation for their success, which is an amazingly good thing!
More here:
http://www.robertpeaslee.com/index.php/shuttleworth-gives-a-nod-to-debian/
Apr 29th, 2008 at 12:55 am