- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.world
A guy who works for the EU has proposed (in his spare time it seems - not in an official capacity) that Europe have its own Linux distro for European public sector use.
The plan is to base this distro on Fedora with KDE Plasma. I suppose Plasma is relatively similar to the Windows desktop, so it should be familiar for public sector employees.
Thoughts?
You must log in or register to comment.
Suse exists and is european, why would you need another distro?
sigh relevant xkcd
Who knows. And maybe this proposed project will go nowhere. But it would be cool if the European public sector does end up using Linux on the desktop.
As always, the year of the Linux desktop is just around the corner…
This is pure marketing propaganda
(By the random guy who started the project, that is.)
Based on Fedora, run by Red Hat, an American company.
They’re owned by IBM.
IBM color almost match with EU flag color so it might work.
Do a browser instead
Maybe they start supporting open source instead of making new businesses out of it.
Why though? Some of the biggest distros aren’t even based in the US but rather in Europe.
But who builds Debian?
Great! Let’s just make a new one instead of supporting one that’s already well developed and widely adopted, which include countless of options. Surely they got time and effort to develop and market it, right??
Since Europe (especially Germany) likes its acronyms, why not call it EPSos (spoken “app-sauce”) for European Publich Sector OS?
Vereinheitlichtes Betriebssystem für den Öffentlichen Dienst, also known as VereinhBetrSfdÖD. Rolls right off the tongue.
Debian should be the default Linux because it is as far from corporations as possible and it works.
Why debian? what puts it above arc or others? serious question btw
it is as far from corporations as possible and it works
And Debian does it for a few decades as it is one of the oldest distro alive. It really proved its ideology and technical basis as livable.
Yeah, I got that. But how is Arc, for example, “close to corporations” ?
What is Arc? Arch? Arch takes too much attention to maintain (don’t you dare to miss that update or don’t pay enough attention to the changelog). It is a good OS for enthusiasts loving tinkering with OS, but an really awful offer for people who need OS.
I expect institutions and corporations to have an IT department that takes care of these things.
You cannot apply a personal user logic to IT infrastructure of organizations. For such an organization Linux distro the users will never deal with the package manager or any directory outside of /home.
So what is your problem with Debian if you never expect to maintain it?
Moreover – it is nice to have the same tool at home as you have at work. It’s just easier.
i didn’t say anything towards Debian being good or bad. I don’t know enough about it to make such a judgement. I merely pointed out that ease of maintainability by the end user is not an argument for organizations. As for home use, people who decide to use a Linux distro at home are not the main target here. Again, an organization will make a walled garden for their end users, so similarity ends being a relevant factor past the Desktop GUI. And whether you run Gnome, KDE or a different one does not depend on the distro itself.
Yes, of course Arch. But ypu’re still dodging my question. You were saying other distributions were close to Corpos compared to Debian. We weren’t talking about the benefits or drawbacks of specific distros
You were saying other distributions were close to Corpos compared to Debian.
I never said that. I said:
it is as far from corporations as possible and it works
And I want to know why you think something like Arch linux is “close to corporations” in comparison
Debian is frankenstein’s monster of half-baked things that falls apart and rots. Add to it absolute absence of any leadership and direction, where even smallest decisions take years (mawk/gawk/nawk), shipping broken packages for years, and so on.
It is OS. OS doesn’t need leadership or direction. For these things you should address to MacOS. They have a leader, direction and all that.
Debian is just a GNU/Linux OS to run programs.
Actually you need leadership and direction so you won’t end up in current debian situation where they can’t decide on anything where there is three suites of helper utils that do same thing but can’t actually mandate usage of one. Where apt-get is still shipped ten years after apt becoming default and so on. It’s a mess.
So what you’re saying is that you don’t like having a choice.
No I am saying that there should be sane defaults that are followed.
Does Linux have a good alternative to ActiveDirectory? Something where a central server can validate logins, send update commands remotely, integrate it with several other applications so users don’t have to create an account for each different system?
Does Linux have a good alternative to ActiveDirectory?
Centralized IAM, managed updates, and all of the other “stuff” that AD does is available for at least some Linux distributions but it’s not free to use, at least not commercially. You’re going to be paying Red Hat, SUSE, etc for these kinds of features.
I’d rather have my tax euros pay them than pay microsoft. Granted, that money being used to employ devs to create a FOSS solution would be even better, but commercial Linux would already be a great first step in the right direction.
There can’t be good alternative to AD because it’s horrible, but yes there is rh idm(freeipa) that combines ldap server, dns server, ntp server, pki infrastructure and sssd.
