| Debian, Ubuntu, and the DCC, oh my! |
Jan. 05, 2006
The DCC Alliance, made up of several Linux distributors which are attempting to add LSB (Linux Standard Base) 3.0 compatibility to Debian Linux, has not had an easy time of it.
Even before the group was formally launched, other Debian Linux distributors, like VA Linux Systems Japan, objected to LSB 3 compatibility being added by the group instead of being done within the confines of the Debian Project.
After its launch in August at LinuxWorld, the member companies -- credativ GmbH (site in German), Knoppix LinEx (site in Spanish), Linspire, MEPIS LLC, Progeny Linux Systems Inc., Sun Wah Linux Ltd., UserLinux, and Xandros Inc. -- faced trouble over the use of "Debian" in the group's original name: Debian Common Core Alliance.
Even the settlement of the matter, in which the group changed its name to the DCC Alliance, didn't quiet down some critics.
Now, however, Mark Shuttleworth, founder and sponsor of Ubuntu, the extremely popular Debian Linux variation, has spelled out his problems with the DCC Alliance in a recent Ubuntu mailing list message.
Shuttleworth wrote, "In the early days of the DCC I preferred to let the proponents do their thing and then see how it all worked out in the end. Now we are pretty close to the end :-)"
He then went on to explain why he didn't see any future for the DCC Alliance.
Like others, he mentioned the problem with using Debian in the name. He then moved on to matters of more substance.
Shuttleworth said, "The DCC distro doesn't use the Debian kernel, and it modifies key pieces of the infrastructure like the linking system and core system libraries. So it's not really Debian at heart."
Ian Murdock, the founder of Debian and now a leader of the DCC Alliance disagrees with this assessment of the DCC common core.
"We went to great lengths to not modify the linking system and core system libraries, and what we came up with is an add-on, not a replacement, for what ships with Debian proper," said Murdock in an email interview.
MEPIS has already released a DCC Alliance core/Debian Sarge-based distribution, MEPISLite.
Shuttleworth also believes that the DCC distro is really aimed at shoehorning an LSB-compatible environment on top of Sarge. I think if LSB was a goal for Sarge then that could have been achieved directly in Sarge, not in this hybrid fashion. If we were to do LSB for Ubuntu, it would be done directly rather than as a compatibility layer."
That said, Shuttleworth finds that the "vision behind DCC, which is indeed compelling, is that it would provide a common platform for certification, and that the distros that make up the DCC would all ship exactly that same core."
"But it strikes me that this approach has never worked in the past." UnitedLinux, which briefly allied The SCO Group Inc., SUSE, Conectiva S.A (now part of Mandriva), and Turbolinux.
"In fact, every distro ALWAYS modifies elements of the core, and with good reason. And while we would love that not to be the case, the truth is that the reasons to specialize outweigh the benefits of homogeneity. Much as it may be compelling, the common core idea is ultimately flawed, because it's not just the bits at the core that matter. An ISV that certifies an OS is not just certifying the pieces on which its app depends. It's also certifying the *environment* which it will support, which includes installer, documentation, even packaging."
Murdock disagrees with this view.
"The ISVs, IHVs, and OEMs we're working with are asking for this. They want there to be a single certification for Debian and its derivatives," said Murdock.
Murdock wants Ubuntu and Shuttleworth to join forces with the DCC Alliance.
"Ubuntu is a big missing piece from the DCC perspective. I suspect Mark is hearing the same thing (from ISVs, IHVs, and OEMs). Supporting Ubuntu exclusively doesn't get support for Debian and other Debian derivatives, which is why he's interested in working with us too."
"Where we differ is I want compatibility at the binary level. It should be possible to take a package built on DCC and install it on Debian and vice versa. That isn't the case today with Ubuntu because Mark doesn't think that's important," said Murdock.
"To Mark, it's all about the source code."
Shuttleworth, who wrote, "The essential driver of free software is collaboration to achieve common goals. And that works best at the source code level," wouldn't disagree.
But, while, "That's fine as far as the open source community goes, but I can assure you, the ISVs care very deeply about binary compatibility, and we're not going to get their support (and neither is Mark) until we can deliver on that," said Murdock.
Is there hope for Ubuntu and the DCC Alliance working together? While pessimistic about the Alliance, Shuttleworth does finish, "it's great that Debian-derived commercial distros have a forum and a mailing list on which to discuss problems they run into, and I think the DCC project has served as a good touch point for bringing some of these hidden issues to the fore."
Ubuntu, although primarily a user's distribution, is also starting to be positioned as a business distribution. For example, Ubuntu engineers recently worked directly with IBM DB2 Lab software engineers to do compatibility testing under the DB2 for Linux Validation program to earn the distribution its "Ready for IBM DB2 Software for Linux" service mark.
Shuttleworth also wrote, "I'm in no way opposed to the DCC or its members, and in fact there are some neat places where we are collaborating with the DCC on source code, which is where I think the collaboration works best. The DCC kernel and Ubuntu kernel will be very similar if not identical in future DCC releases, and I expect that collaboration will spread to other parts of the system such as X, ACPI etc."
--Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
Do you have comments on this story?
Talkback here
(Click here for further information)
|
|
|
7 Advantages of D2D Backup
For decades, tape has been the backup medium of choice. But, now, disk-to-disk (D2D) backup is gaining in favor. Learn why you should make the move in this whitepaper.
4 Legal Reasons to Control Internet Access
The Internet is obviously a valuable resource for many organizations. However, many are exposed to legal liability concerns because they fail to control Internet access. Learn if you're safe in this white paper.
Rapidly Resolve J2EE Application Problems
Whether you are in the process of building J2EE applications or have J2EE applications already running in production, you must ensure that they deliver the expected ROI. Learn how in this white paper.
Load Testing 2.0 for Web 2.0
There are many unknowns in stress testing Web 2.0 applications. Find out how to test the performance of Web 2.0 in this white paper.
Build Better Games Online
For the game infrastructure providers, life is complex. Making money from games has become more complicated. Why? Find out in this white paper.
Building a Virtual Infrastructure from Servers to Storage
This white paper discusses the virtual storage solutions that reduce cost, increase storage utilization, and address the challenges of backing up and restoring Server environments.
Gaining Faster Wireless Connections with WiMAX
Welcome to what is quickly becoming the hyperconnected world where anything that would benefit from being connected to the network will be connected. Learn more in this white paper.
Is Your Desktop a Security Threat?
The new wave of sophisticated crimeware not only targets specific companies, but also targets desktops and laptops as backdoor entryways into those business’ operations and resources. Learn how to stay safe in this white paper.
Increasing SAN Reliability by 100 Percent
Storage area networks (SAN) are a strong part of storage plans. Learn how to increase your reliability and uptime by 100 percent in this case study.
|
|
|
|
|
news feed