2026-09-27 03:15 UTC
Replies (3)
-
@hperrin@lemmy.ca 2026-09-27 03:26
I mean, there’s not really a clear definition, but if your distro has an upstream distro and the only difference between yours and the upstream is that you added a few packages and some config files, I would call that a community flavor at best, not a distro. Take Bazzite for example. They don’t have their own package manager (well, they kind of do, but it doesn’t use their own repos to my knowledge), but the installation is so vastly different from the upstream repo (Fedora) that calling them a distro makes sense. Or take Ubuntu. It’s just Debian with some new packages, or? No, it’s so vastly different from a base Debian install, including their own repos and builds of every package, that it’s definitely a different distro. Omarchy, by contrast, it’s basically a set of packages and config files that you install onto Arch. Not a distro. Same with Proxmox VE, but they don’t try to call it a distro. They call it what it is, a “solution”. That’s not a bad thing. It’s bad to pretend it’s a distro, like Omarchy does. Proxmox Virtual Environment is an open source server virtualization management solution based on QEMU/KVM and LXC. - Proxmox’ Wiki Omarchy is a beautiful, fun & agentic Linux distribution by DHH. - Omarchy’s GitHub.
-
@JamesBoeing737MAX@sopuli.xyz 2026-09-27 09:57
Also: they assemble their own system Backend; Artix is a different distro from arch, because it uses a different init system (openrc instead of systemd + other choices), but manjaro isn’t, it’s just arch with a shitty toolkit (pamac).
-
@firelizzard@programming.dev 2026-09-28 16:06
The real work of maintaining a distro is maintaining the package lists (and ensuring none of the packages are broken, buggy, etc). So if you have your own package lists, it’s a distro. If you don’t, “it’s a distro” is a much weaker claim IMO.