Over the decades the number of Linux distributions has effectively exploded, from a handful in the late ’90s to quite literally hundreds today, not counting minor variations. There lately see…
Ah my bad. Though still, at valid point, Free BSD is one of many BSD distributions. Therefore not “distro less”. I’ve done the distro less thing once and only once just for the experience. I am 100% with you that in general I think any sane person would want a decent distribution.
Sorry. What I meant is it sounds like its suggesting an install interface where you basically choose what you want like you see with freebsd (or did at least back when I was using it which admitadely was some time ago but yes the other bsds). Also I thought the various bsds had different kernels so where not exactly distros of each other.
I don’t know. Maybe you’re thinking of something different than I am, because didn’t most Linux distributions have that as well? Some definitely more than others. Especially arch. Even more user-friendly distributions of arch still allow some insane customization. I installed catchy the other day and was blown away to see them offer system d-boot among others right there in the installer. Even garuda and others just assume system d by default.
Maybe. I certainly have not used them all. Honestly it would sorta mean using one specific package manager and such so im not sure if what they are describing the way I read it is really feasable. I use a really easy out of box distro now so I only make a few decisions at install and mostly just hit enter and accept defaults for them.
You can install nix on most distro and mix and match packages. Things like docker flatpak etc can get you close to being technically distro less at the cost of some storage space for the distro bases.
True distrolessness is a thing almost no one would want. Build once install everywhere OTOH.
Which one? Open, Net, Free? Ports and AUR etc are awesome. But not new or great for everyone.
by freebsd I meant FreeBSD.
Ah my bad. Though still, at valid point, Free BSD is one of many BSD distributions. Therefore not “distro less”. I’ve done the distro less thing once and only once just for the experience. I am 100% with you that in general I think any sane person would want a decent distribution.
Sorry. What I meant is it sounds like its suggesting an install interface where you basically choose what you want like you see with freebsd (or did at least back when I was using it which admitadely was some time ago but yes the other bsds). Also I thought the various bsds had different kernels so where not exactly distros of each other.
I don’t know. Maybe you’re thinking of something different than I am, because didn’t most Linux distributions have that as well? Some definitely more than others. Especially arch. Even more user-friendly distributions of arch still allow some insane customization. I installed catchy the other day and was blown away to see them offer system d-boot among others right there in the installer. Even garuda and others just assume system d by default.
Maybe. I certainly have not used them all. Honestly it would sorta mean using one specific package manager and such so im not sure if what they are describing the way I read it is really feasable. I use a really easy out of box distro now so I only make a few decisions at install and mostly just hit enter and accept defaults for them.
You can install nix on most distro and mix and match packages. Things like docker flatpak etc can get you close to being technically distro less at the cost of some storage space for the distro bases.
True distrolessness is a thing almost no one would want. Build once install everywhere OTOH.