Quote:
Originally Posted by thedirtyvms
I can't understand why is incorrect say Distribution since theorically I can say:
I'm using the Net Berkeley Software Distribution.
And for some unix-like users is wrong if I say:
I'm using the NetBSD distribution {or NetBSDistribution}
|
There is nothing wrong with the word "distribution", but there is something wrong (and factually incorrect) with the idea that there are "BSD distributions" - in the Linux sense - which is a common, perpetuated myth, which shows no sign of going away.
In Linux terms, "distribution" means that there is one lot of ("upstream") software being "distributed" by different means and/or different distributors, but still basically the same software. When you consider that the main differences between most Linux distributions is the package management tools (themselves a means of "distribution"), this does make sense. In fact, it seems that in Linux land you can "distribute" an existing distribution with a different logo, desktop, wallpapers, etc and call that a "distribution". Linux has "distributions" because they are
distributing Linux (or GNU/Linux if you prefer) and there are hundreds (thousands?) of distributions.
When it comes to the operating systems derived from 386BSD/4.3BSD/4.4BSD-lite/-lite 2, etc ("BSD"), these are not purely "distribution" efforts, they are actually independent OS development efforts. Each OS handles it's own development and "distribution".
Reducing the efforts, spanning around three decades, of these software developers to "distributors", via a handful of ill-informed comments, is why the phrase "ignorant" tends to pop up in these threads...
Some further reading:
http://netbsd.org/about/history.html
https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.IS...k/history.html