How is Ubuntu based on Debian?How to sort updates based on release date on debian testing?Debian-based...

How do I run a script as sudo at boot time on Ubuntu 18.04 Server?

Is my research statement supposed to lead to papers in top journals?

What is this plant I saw for sale at a Romanian farmer's market?

How can I detect if I'm in a subshell?

How can I maintain game balance while allowing my player to craft genuinely useful items?

what is "dot" sign in the •NO?

How to sort human readable size

How Linux command "mount -a" works

Explicit direct #include vs. Non-contractual transitive #include

Should I email my professor to clear up a (possibly very irrelevant) awkward misunderstanding?

Do my partner and son need an SSN to be dependents on my taxes?

2 Managed Packages in 1 Dev Org

Does anyone recognize these rockets, and their location?

100-doors puzzle

How can a flywheel makes engine runs smoothly?

What is the color associated with lukewarm?

How to search for Android apps without ads?

Why is Skinner so awkward in Hot Fuzz?

How could I create a situation in which a PC has to make a saving throw or be forced to pet a dog?

How can the US president give an order to a civilian?

How can I ping multiple IP addresses at the same time?

TiKZ won't graph 1/sqrt(x)

Is it possible for underground bunkers on different continents to be connected?

Background for black and white chart



How is Ubuntu based on Debian?


How to sort updates based on release date on debian testing?Debian-based distros that have a regular release cyclecan packages marked Debian/Ubuntu be installed in Linux Mint as well?difference between ubuntu and linux mint is only desktop?Repositories of Linux Mint, Ubuntu, DebianWhat is the differences between distributions, the OS and code names (stable, testing) in linux and what order is that listed in /etc/*release?Is next LTS versions of Ubuntu based on actual testing version of DebianHow to determine in a shell script whether the distribution I am on is Debian-based?How can I find out what version of Debian a particular version of Ubuntu is based on?Are there any x86 security Linux distributions based on Ubuntu?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







32















Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is based on Debian. Like this, there are several other linux distributions that are based on Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, etc. What confuses me is what does this mean i.e one Linux distro based on some other. How they are made?










share|improve this question















migrated from stackoverflow.com Jan 4 '12 at 19:33


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.














  • 1





    @Zenklys - this is not a duplicate. I don't want to know the difference between Debian and Ubuntu. What I want to know is how is one distro based on some other distro. I have taken Ubuntu and Debian as an example only to tell what I am trying to ask.

    – Zeal Kaiser
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:39











  • By knowing the differences, you know the ressemblance. ;)

    – Zenklys
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:43











  • slackware isn't based on debian or ubuntu

    – psusi
    Jan 4 '12 at 23:34











  • The phrase “based on” here, means they took it, they changed it. Therefore Ubuntu is a modified version of Debian.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    May 21 '17 at 13:56


















32















Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is based on Debian. Like this, there are several other linux distributions that are based on Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, etc. What confuses me is what does this mean i.e one Linux distro based on some other. How they are made?










share|improve this question















migrated from stackoverflow.com Jan 4 '12 at 19:33


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.














  • 1





    @Zenklys - this is not a duplicate. I don't want to know the difference between Debian and Ubuntu. What I want to know is how is one distro based on some other distro. I have taken Ubuntu and Debian as an example only to tell what I am trying to ask.

    – Zeal Kaiser
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:39











  • By knowing the differences, you know the ressemblance. ;)

    – Zenklys
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:43











  • slackware isn't based on debian or ubuntu

    – psusi
    Jan 4 '12 at 23:34











  • The phrase “based on” here, means they took it, they changed it. Therefore Ubuntu is a modified version of Debian.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    May 21 '17 at 13:56














32












32








32


12






Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is based on Debian. Like this, there are several other linux distributions that are based on Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, etc. What confuses me is what does this mean i.e one Linux distro based on some other. How they are made?










share|improve this question
















Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is based on Debian. Like this, there are several other linux distributions that are based on Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, etc. What confuses me is what does this mean i.e one Linux distro based on some other. How they are made?







debian ubuntu distributions






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 21 '17 at 11:13









Jeff Schaller

46.9k1167152




46.9k1167152










asked Jan 4 '12 at 18:26









Suyash MohanSuyash Mohan

396249




396249




migrated from stackoverflow.com Jan 4 '12 at 19:33


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.









migrated from stackoverflow.com Jan 4 '12 at 19:33


This question came from our site for professional and enthusiast programmers.










  • 1





    @Zenklys - this is not a duplicate. I don't want to know the difference between Debian and Ubuntu. What I want to know is how is one distro based on some other distro. I have taken Ubuntu and Debian as an example only to tell what I am trying to ask.

    – Zeal Kaiser
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:39











  • By knowing the differences, you know the ressemblance. ;)

    – Zenklys
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:43











  • slackware isn't based on debian or ubuntu

    – psusi
    Jan 4 '12 at 23:34











  • The phrase “based on” here, means they took it, they changed it. Therefore Ubuntu is a modified version of Debian.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    May 21 '17 at 13:56














  • 1





    @Zenklys - this is not a duplicate. I don't want to know the difference between Debian and Ubuntu. What I want to know is how is one distro based on some other distro. I have taken Ubuntu and Debian as an example only to tell what I am trying to ask.

    – Zeal Kaiser
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:39











  • By knowing the differences, you know the ressemblance. ;)

    – Zenklys
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:43











  • slackware isn't based on debian or ubuntu

    – psusi
    Jan 4 '12 at 23:34











  • The phrase “based on” here, means they took it, they changed it. Therefore Ubuntu is a modified version of Debian.

    – ctrl-alt-delor
    May 21 '17 at 13:56








1




1





@Zenklys - this is not a duplicate. I don't want to know the difference between Debian and Ubuntu. What I want to know is how is one distro based on some other distro. I have taken Ubuntu and Debian as an example only to tell what I am trying to ask.

– Zeal Kaiser
Jan 4 '12 at 18:39





@Zenklys - this is not a duplicate. I don't want to know the difference between Debian and Ubuntu. What I want to know is how is one distro based on some other distro. I have taken Ubuntu and Debian as an example only to tell what I am trying to ask.

– Zeal Kaiser
Jan 4 '12 at 18:39













By knowing the differences, you know the ressemblance. ;)

– Zenklys
Jan 4 '12 at 18:43





By knowing the differences, you know the ressemblance. ;)

– Zenklys
Jan 4 '12 at 18:43













slackware isn't based on debian or ubuntu

– psusi
Jan 4 '12 at 23:34





slackware isn't based on debian or ubuntu

– psusi
Jan 4 '12 at 23:34













The phrase “based on” here, means they took it, they changed it. Therefore Ubuntu is a modified version of Debian.

– ctrl-alt-delor
May 21 '17 at 13:56





The phrase “based on” here, means they took it, they changed it. Therefore Ubuntu is a modified version of Debian.

– ctrl-alt-delor
May 21 '17 at 13:56










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















19














Ubuntu uses the same packaging management system (deb and apt) and with each development cycle pulls in the latest packages from Debian and then adapts them to Ubuntu specifics and adds more features and patches where necessary. They also push changes back to Debian and often developers are Ubuntu and Debian developers.



Mint in turn does the same with Ubuntu packages (Update: although Mint does not seem to contribute back as much or at all)






share|improve this answer


























  • thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

    – Zeal Kaiser
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:34






  • 2





    Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

    – tripleee
    Jan 4 '12 at 18:46






  • 1





    Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

    – Manfred Moser
    Jan 4 '12 at 19:13






  • 4





    Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

    – MattG
    Jan 4 '12 at 23:18






  • 1





    Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

    – tumbleweed
    Jan 9 '12 at 8:23



















17














Zack had a great diagram explaining it on his UDS-P Talk Slides



Ubuntu's Source



Basically, Every Ubuntu cycle, until Debian Import Freeze, source packages that aren't modified in Ubuntu are copied from Debian into Ubuntu, daily (the 74% branch). Packages that have been modified in both Debian & Ubuntu get manually merged (the Patch branch), usually by the developer who last touched the package in Ubuntu.



Some core packages (kernel, much of the desktop, and other bits) doesn't come from Debian at all, and comes straight from Upstreams (the 11% branch)



So, Ubuntu gets to maintain its own core set of packages and also get the benefit of the huge quantity of Debian packages.






share|improve this answer































    10














    There are a number of things that define a distribution, apart from the name. Packaging system (deb, rpm, ...), standard environment (eg. the kind of "init" used as a standard), and a number of other things, like scheduling policy, main target users, etc. Notice that sharing certain core tools don't make two distributions "siblings". See the case for Red-Hat and SuSE, for example: on the graph linked by @Zenklys, you see that SuSE is an early derivative from Slackware, but they borrowed the RPM packaging system from Red-Hat, I guess not to reinvent the wheel.



    Most of those things are decisions that someone (a company, individual or a developing community) takes for you. Some distributions are quite different from each other and have almost nothing in common in their origins (Debian and Red-Hat are two examples from early times...), result of parallel efforts on achieving a working environment, but others are born just because a sizeable community agree that certain aspects of an existing distribution could be done in a different way, like having shorter (or larger!) release cycles, or maybe making the distribution less "general" and focusing on certain aspects, like media creation (you pre-install tools, try to have better/easier hardware config for specific things...); or when a company decides they can do business by tuning a distro for certain target audiences.



    Let's keep with Ubuntu from here on, but keep in mind that this process is similar all around.



    Of course, taking the "derivative" way means you start with a working system from day 0, where your work will focus on making the desired changes and on keeping up to date with the "parent" version.



    Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian in that sense: they took a working distribution and decided on a number of things: default (and officially supported) desktop environment and theming, putting emphasis on a non-root user being able to access all the restricted areas (hardware setup, for example), etc., and also integrating tools and, sometimes, also developing new ones, to achieve their goals. At some point, they started taking more fundamental decisions, like changing crucial subsystems (going for upstart, for example), or default version of tools, for example, the one for Python, in which Ubuntu depends heavily. Some of those changes may end up not taking place on the original distribution, or just taking longer time... or the opposite, where you don't like a change that has been made in the parent distro and you arrange things so that your distribution stays the same way as it was (like when Ubuntu moved to Gnome 3 as the default).



    Then again, at some point Ubuntu users decided they weren't happy with all the choices that are being taken for them, so you end up with derivatives like Kubuntu or Xbuntu that may (or may not) end up achieving a certain "official" status within the original project.



    Ubuntu has kept a certain level of feedback with Debian, making it easy to take your knowledge from one to the other (to a certain degree), but that doesn't need to be true for all derivative distros.



    And so on... but the answer is running long by now :P






    share|improve this answer

































      7














      I always liked this little picture about linux distributions and their relations. :)



      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Gldt.svg






      share|improve this answer



















      • 4





        Now that's not really answering the question...

        – levesque
        Jan 4 '12 at 19:58






      • 7





        and it is not a little picture!

        – Aditya Patawari
        Jan 5 '12 at 4:53






      • 3





        Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

        – Zenklys
        Jan 5 '12 at 7:38











      • Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

        – Tyþë-Ø
        Jun 8 at 0:09














      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "106"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f28324%2fhow-is-ubuntu-based-on-debian%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      19














      Ubuntu uses the same packaging management system (deb and apt) and with each development cycle pulls in the latest packages from Debian and then adapts them to Ubuntu specifics and adds more features and patches where necessary. They also push changes back to Debian and often developers are Ubuntu and Debian developers.



      Mint in turn does the same with Ubuntu packages (Update: although Mint does not seem to contribute back as much or at all)






      share|improve this answer


























      • thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

        – Zeal Kaiser
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:34






      • 2





        Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

        – tripleee
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:46






      • 1





        Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

        – Manfred Moser
        Jan 4 '12 at 19:13






      • 4





        Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

        – MattG
        Jan 4 '12 at 23:18






      • 1





        Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

        – tumbleweed
        Jan 9 '12 at 8:23
















      19














      Ubuntu uses the same packaging management system (deb and apt) and with each development cycle pulls in the latest packages from Debian and then adapts them to Ubuntu specifics and adds more features and patches where necessary. They also push changes back to Debian and often developers are Ubuntu and Debian developers.



      Mint in turn does the same with Ubuntu packages (Update: although Mint does not seem to contribute back as much or at all)






      share|improve this answer


























      • thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

        – Zeal Kaiser
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:34






      • 2





        Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

        – tripleee
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:46






      • 1





        Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

        – Manfred Moser
        Jan 4 '12 at 19:13






      • 4





        Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

        – MattG
        Jan 4 '12 at 23:18






      • 1





        Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

        – tumbleweed
        Jan 9 '12 at 8:23














      19












      19








      19







      Ubuntu uses the same packaging management system (deb and apt) and with each development cycle pulls in the latest packages from Debian and then adapts them to Ubuntu specifics and adds more features and patches where necessary. They also push changes back to Debian and often developers are Ubuntu and Debian developers.



      Mint in turn does the same with Ubuntu packages (Update: although Mint does not seem to contribute back as much or at all)






      share|improve this answer















      Ubuntu uses the same packaging management system (deb and apt) and with each development cycle pulls in the latest packages from Debian and then adapts them to Ubuntu specifics and adds more features and patches where necessary. They also push changes back to Debian and often developers are Ubuntu and Debian developers.



      Mint in turn does the same with Ubuntu packages (Update: although Mint does not seem to contribute back as much or at all)







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited Nov 2 '16 at 2:21

























      answered Jan 4 '12 at 18:28









      Manfred MoserManfred Moser

      29316




      29316













      • thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

        – Zeal Kaiser
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:34






      • 2





        Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

        – tripleee
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:46






      • 1





        Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

        – Manfred Moser
        Jan 4 '12 at 19:13






      • 4





        Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

        – MattG
        Jan 4 '12 at 23:18






      • 1





        Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

        – tumbleweed
        Jan 9 '12 at 8:23



















      • thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

        – Zeal Kaiser
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:34






      • 2





        Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

        – tripleee
        Jan 4 '12 at 18:46






      • 1





        Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

        – Manfred Moser
        Jan 4 '12 at 19:13






      • 4





        Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

        – MattG
        Jan 4 '12 at 23:18






      • 1





        Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

        – tumbleweed
        Jan 9 '12 at 8:23

















      thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

      – Zeal Kaiser
      Jan 4 '12 at 18:34





      thanks!!! But I still have a question. If Ubuntu themselves uses Debian packages, then one should use Debian only. But still people would go for Ubuntu?

      – Zeal Kaiser
      Jan 4 '12 at 18:34




      2




      2





      Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

      – tripleee
      Jan 4 '12 at 18:46





      Their goals and philosophies are somewhat different. If you want a stable, cross-platform OS, by all means switch to Debian. If you want a desktop OS which runs reasonably recent versions of popular apps, choose Ubuntu.

      – tripleee
      Jan 4 '12 at 18:46




      1




      1





      Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

      – Manfred Moser
      Jan 4 '12 at 19:13





      Ubuntu uses the Debian packages as base for their own modifications and additions. As such they are not the same packages in all instances. Often things are fixed in Ubuntu and then pushed upstream to Debian later. Also often the stable release of Debian uses way older stuff, because the release less often and focus on stability. Ubuntu on the other hand takes the packages from Debian testing and releases every six month.

      – Manfred Moser
      Jan 4 '12 at 19:13




      4




      4





      Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

      – MattG
      Jan 4 '12 at 23:18





      Debian has a very strong ideology about what packages they would include with their system. Debian would only include things licensed to be "free as in freedom" (open-source licensing) and not "free as in beer" (given away but still not truly open-source licensing). This severely limited some things in the system. For instance, video drivers may be given away, but only as binaries, which did not meet the criteria, and thus hand to be hand-installed. Ubuntu took the great framework and package system done with Debian, and made it to be a great user experience, rather than a political statement.

      – MattG
      Jan 4 '12 at 23:18




      1




      1





      Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

      – tumbleweed
      Jan 9 '12 at 8:23





      Erm, I'm a Ubuntu and Debian developer, and have never seen contributions from Mint. They also don't seem to do anything to stop their users from sending us bugs :)

      – tumbleweed
      Jan 9 '12 at 8:23













      17














      Zack had a great diagram explaining it on his UDS-P Talk Slides



      Ubuntu's Source



      Basically, Every Ubuntu cycle, until Debian Import Freeze, source packages that aren't modified in Ubuntu are copied from Debian into Ubuntu, daily (the 74% branch). Packages that have been modified in both Debian & Ubuntu get manually merged (the Patch branch), usually by the developer who last touched the package in Ubuntu.



      Some core packages (kernel, much of the desktop, and other bits) doesn't come from Debian at all, and comes straight from Upstreams (the 11% branch)



      So, Ubuntu gets to maintain its own core set of packages and also get the benefit of the huge quantity of Debian packages.






      share|improve this answer




























        17














        Zack had a great diagram explaining it on his UDS-P Talk Slides



        Ubuntu's Source



        Basically, Every Ubuntu cycle, until Debian Import Freeze, source packages that aren't modified in Ubuntu are copied from Debian into Ubuntu, daily (the 74% branch). Packages that have been modified in both Debian & Ubuntu get manually merged (the Patch branch), usually by the developer who last touched the package in Ubuntu.



        Some core packages (kernel, much of the desktop, and other bits) doesn't come from Debian at all, and comes straight from Upstreams (the 11% branch)



        So, Ubuntu gets to maintain its own core set of packages and also get the benefit of the huge quantity of Debian packages.






        share|improve this answer


























          17












          17








          17







          Zack had a great diagram explaining it on his UDS-P Talk Slides



          Ubuntu's Source



          Basically, Every Ubuntu cycle, until Debian Import Freeze, source packages that aren't modified in Ubuntu are copied from Debian into Ubuntu, daily (the 74% branch). Packages that have been modified in both Debian & Ubuntu get manually merged (the Patch branch), usually by the developer who last touched the package in Ubuntu.



          Some core packages (kernel, much of the desktop, and other bits) doesn't come from Debian at all, and comes straight from Upstreams (the 11% branch)



          So, Ubuntu gets to maintain its own core set of packages and also get the benefit of the huge quantity of Debian packages.






          share|improve this answer













          Zack had a great diagram explaining it on his UDS-P Talk Slides



          Ubuntu's Source



          Basically, Every Ubuntu cycle, until Debian Import Freeze, source packages that aren't modified in Ubuntu are copied from Debian into Ubuntu, daily (the 74% branch). Packages that have been modified in both Debian & Ubuntu get manually merged (the Patch branch), usually by the developer who last touched the package in Ubuntu.



          Some core packages (kernel, much of the desktop, and other bits) doesn't come from Debian at all, and comes straight from Upstreams (the 11% branch)



          So, Ubuntu gets to maintain its own core set of packages and also get the benefit of the huge quantity of Debian packages.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Jan 6 '12 at 14:38









          tumbleweedtumbleweed

          29015




          29015























              10














              There are a number of things that define a distribution, apart from the name. Packaging system (deb, rpm, ...), standard environment (eg. the kind of "init" used as a standard), and a number of other things, like scheduling policy, main target users, etc. Notice that sharing certain core tools don't make two distributions "siblings". See the case for Red-Hat and SuSE, for example: on the graph linked by @Zenklys, you see that SuSE is an early derivative from Slackware, but they borrowed the RPM packaging system from Red-Hat, I guess not to reinvent the wheel.



              Most of those things are decisions that someone (a company, individual or a developing community) takes for you. Some distributions are quite different from each other and have almost nothing in common in their origins (Debian and Red-Hat are two examples from early times...), result of parallel efforts on achieving a working environment, but others are born just because a sizeable community agree that certain aspects of an existing distribution could be done in a different way, like having shorter (or larger!) release cycles, or maybe making the distribution less "general" and focusing on certain aspects, like media creation (you pre-install tools, try to have better/easier hardware config for specific things...); or when a company decides they can do business by tuning a distro for certain target audiences.



              Let's keep with Ubuntu from here on, but keep in mind that this process is similar all around.



              Of course, taking the "derivative" way means you start with a working system from day 0, where your work will focus on making the desired changes and on keeping up to date with the "parent" version.



              Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian in that sense: they took a working distribution and decided on a number of things: default (and officially supported) desktop environment and theming, putting emphasis on a non-root user being able to access all the restricted areas (hardware setup, for example), etc., and also integrating tools and, sometimes, also developing new ones, to achieve their goals. At some point, they started taking more fundamental decisions, like changing crucial subsystems (going for upstart, for example), or default version of tools, for example, the one for Python, in which Ubuntu depends heavily. Some of those changes may end up not taking place on the original distribution, or just taking longer time... or the opposite, where you don't like a change that has been made in the parent distro and you arrange things so that your distribution stays the same way as it was (like when Ubuntu moved to Gnome 3 as the default).



              Then again, at some point Ubuntu users decided they weren't happy with all the choices that are being taken for them, so you end up with derivatives like Kubuntu or Xbuntu that may (or may not) end up achieving a certain "official" status within the original project.



              Ubuntu has kept a certain level of feedback with Debian, making it easy to take your knowledge from one to the other (to a certain degree), but that doesn't need to be true for all derivative distros.



              And so on... but the answer is running long by now :P






              share|improve this answer






























                10














                There are a number of things that define a distribution, apart from the name. Packaging system (deb, rpm, ...), standard environment (eg. the kind of "init" used as a standard), and a number of other things, like scheduling policy, main target users, etc. Notice that sharing certain core tools don't make two distributions "siblings". See the case for Red-Hat and SuSE, for example: on the graph linked by @Zenklys, you see that SuSE is an early derivative from Slackware, but they borrowed the RPM packaging system from Red-Hat, I guess not to reinvent the wheel.



                Most of those things are decisions that someone (a company, individual or a developing community) takes for you. Some distributions are quite different from each other and have almost nothing in common in their origins (Debian and Red-Hat are two examples from early times...), result of parallel efforts on achieving a working environment, but others are born just because a sizeable community agree that certain aspects of an existing distribution could be done in a different way, like having shorter (or larger!) release cycles, or maybe making the distribution less "general" and focusing on certain aspects, like media creation (you pre-install tools, try to have better/easier hardware config for specific things...); or when a company decides they can do business by tuning a distro for certain target audiences.



                Let's keep with Ubuntu from here on, but keep in mind that this process is similar all around.



                Of course, taking the "derivative" way means you start with a working system from day 0, where your work will focus on making the desired changes and on keeping up to date with the "parent" version.



                Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian in that sense: they took a working distribution and decided on a number of things: default (and officially supported) desktop environment and theming, putting emphasis on a non-root user being able to access all the restricted areas (hardware setup, for example), etc., and also integrating tools and, sometimes, also developing new ones, to achieve their goals. At some point, they started taking more fundamental decisions, like changing crucial subsystems (going for upstart, for example), or default version of tools, for example, the one for Python, in which Ubuntu depends heavily. Some of those changes may end up not taking place on the original distribution, or just taking longer time... or the opposite, where you don't like a change that has been made in the parent distro and you arrange things so that your distribution stays the same way as it was (like when Ubuntu moved to Gnome 3 as the default).



                Then again, at some point Ubuntu users decided they weren't happy with all the choices that are being taken for them, so you end up with derivatives like Kubuntu or Xbuntu that may (or may not) end up achieving a certain "official" status within the original project.



                Ubuntu has kept a certain level of feedback with Debian, making it easy to take your knowledge from one to the other (to a certain degree), but that doesn't need to be true for all derivative distros.



                And so on... but the answer is running long by now :P






                share|improve this answer




























                  10












                  10








                  10







                  There are a number of things that define a distribution, apart from the name. Packaging system (deb, rpm, ...), standard environment (eg. the kind of "init" used as a standard), and a number of other things, like scheduling policy, main target users, etc. Notice that sharing certain core tools don't make two distributions "siblings". See the case for Red-Hat and SuSE, for example: on the graph linked by @Zenklys, you see that SuSE is an early derivative from Slackware, but they borrowed the RPM packaging system from Red-Hat, I guess not to reinvent the wheel.



                  Most of those things are decisions that someone (a company, individual or a developing community) takes for you. Some distributions are quite different from each other and have almost nothing in common in their origins (Debian and Red-Hat are two examples from early times...), result of parallel efforts on achieving a working environment, but others are born just because a sizeable community agree that certain aspects of an existing distribution could be done in a different way, like having shorter (or larger!) release cycles, or maybe making the distribution less "general" and focusing on certain aspects, like media creation (you pre-install tools, try to have better/easier hardware config for specific things...); or when a company decides they can do business by tuning a distro for certain target audiences.



                  Let's keep with Ubuntu from here on, but keep in mind that this process is similar all around.



                  Of course, taking the "derivative" way means you start with a working system from day 0, where your work will focus on making the desired changes and on keeping up to date with the "parent" version.



                  Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian in that sense: they took a working distribution and decided on a number of things: default (and officially supported) desktop environment and theming, putting emphasis on a non-root user being able to access all the restricted areas (hardware setup, for example), etc., and also integrating tools and, sometimes, also developing new ones, to achieve their goals. At some point, they started taking more fundamental decisions, like changing crucial subsystems (going for upstart, for example), or default version of tools, for example, the one for Python, in which Ubuntu depends heavily. Some of those changes may end up not taking place on the original distribution, or just taking longer time... or the opposite, where you don't like a change that has been made in the parent distro and you arrange things so that your distribution stays the same way as it was (like when Ubuntu moved to Gnome 3 as the default).



                  Then again, at some point Ubuntu users decided they weren't happy with all the choices that are being taken for them, so you end up with derivatives like Kubuntu or Xbuntu that may (or may not) end up achieving a certain "official" status within the original project.



                  Ubuntu has kept a certain level of feedback with Debian, making it easy to take your knowledge from one to the other (to a certain degree), but that doesn't need to be true for all derivative distros.



                  And so on... but the answer is running long by now :P






                  share|improve this answer















                  There are a number of things that define a distribution, apart from the name. Packaging system (deb, rpm, ...), standard environment (eg. the kind of "init" used as a standard), and a number of other things, like scheduling policy, main target users, etc. Notice that sharing certain core tools don't make two distributions "siblings". See the case for Red-Hat and SuSE, for example: on the graph linked by @Zenklys, you see that SuSE is an early derivative from Slackware, but they borrowed the RPM packaging system from Red-Hat, I guess not to reinvent the wheel.



                  Most of those things are decisions that someone (a company, individual or a developing community) takes for you. Some distributions are quite different from each other and have almost nothing in common in their origins (Debian and Red-Hat are two examples from early times...), result of parallel efforts on achieving a working environment, but others are born just because a sizeable community agree that certain aspects of an existing distribution could be done in a different way, like having shorter (or larger!) release cycles, or maybe making the distribution less "general" and focusing on certain aspects, like media creation (you pre-install tools, try to have better/easier hardware config for specific things...); or when a company decides they can do business by tuning a distro for certain target audiences.



                  Let's keep with Ubuntu from here on, but keep in mind that this process is similar all around.



                  Of course, taking the "derivative" way means you start with a working system from day 0, where your work will focus on making the desired changes and on keeping up to date with the "parent" version.



                  Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian in that sense: they took a working distribution and decided on a number of things: default (and officially supported) desktop environment and theming, putting emphasis on a non-root user being able to access all the restricted areas (hardware setup, for example), etc., and also integrating tools and, sometimes, also developing new ones, to achieve their goals. At some point, they started taking more fundamental decisions, like changing crucial subsystems (going for upstart, for example), or default version of tools, for example, the one for Python, in which Ubuntu depends heavily. Some of those changes may end up not taking place on the original distribution, or just taking longer time... or the opposite, where you don't like a change that has been made in the parent distro and you arrange things so that your distribution stays the same way as it was (like when Ubuntu moved to Gnome 3 as the default).



                  Then again, at some point Ubuntu users decided they weren't happy with all the choices that are being taken for them, so you end up with derivatives like Kubuntu or Xbuntu that may (or may not) end up achieving a certain "official" status within the original project.



                  Ubuntu has kept a certain level of feedback with Debian, making it easy to take your knowledge from one to the other (to a certain degree), but that doesn't need to be true for all derivative distros.



                  And so on... but the answer is running long by now :P







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 1 hour ago

























                  answered Jan 4 '12 at 19:04









                  Ricardo CárdenesRicardo Cárdenes

                  20115




                  20115























                      7














                      I always liked this little picture about linux distributions and their relations. :)



                      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Gldt.svg






                      share|improve this answer



















                      • 4





                        Now that's not really answering the question...

                        – levesque
                        Jan 4 '12 at 19:58






                      • 7





                        and it is not a little picture!

                        – Aditya Patawari
                        Jan 5 '12 at 4:53






                      • 3





                        Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

                        – Zenklys
                        Jan 5 '12 at 7:38











                      • Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

                        – Tyþë-Ø
                        Jun 8 at 0:09


















                      7














                      I always liked this little picture about linux distributions and their relations. :)



                      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Gldt.svg






                      share|improve this answer



















                      • 4





                        Now that's not really answering the question...

                        – levesque
                        Jan 4 '12 at 19:58






                      • 7





                        and it is not a little picture!

                        – Aditya Patawari
                        Jan 5 '12 at 4:53






                      • 3





                        Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

                        – Zenklys
                        Jan 5 '12 at 7:38











                      • Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

                        – Tyþë-Ø
                        Jun 8 at 0:09
















                      7












                      7








                      7







                      I always liked this little picture about linux distributions and their relations. :)



                      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Gldt.svg






                      share|improve this answer













                      I always liked this little picture about linux distributions and their relations. :)



                      http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:Gldt.svg







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Jan 4 '12 at 18:31









                      ZenklysZenklys

                      1783




                      1783








                      • 4





                        Now that's not really answering the question...

                        – levesque
                        Jan 4 '12 at 19:58






                      • 7





                        and it is not a little picture!

                        – Aditya Patawari
                        Jan 5 '12 at 4:53






                      • 3





                        Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

                        – Zenklys
                        Jan 5 '12 at 7:38











                      • Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

                        – Tyþë-Ø
                        Jun 8 at 0:09
















                      • 4





                        Now that's not really answering the question...

                        – levesque
                        Jan 4 '12 at 19:58






                      • 7





                        and it is not a little picture!

                        – Aditya Patawari
                        Jan 5 '12 at 4:53






                      • 3





                        Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

                        – Zenklys
                        Jan 5 '12 at 7:38











                      • Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

                        – Tyþë-Ø
                        Jun 8 at 0:09










                      4




                      4





                      Now that's not really answering the question...

                      – levesque
                      Jan 4 '12 at 19:58





                      Now that's not really answering the question...

                      – levesque
                      Jan 4 '12 at 19:58




                      7




                      7





                      and it is not a little picture!

                      – Aditya Patawari
                      Jan 5 '12 at 4:53





                      and it is not a little picture!

                      – Aditya Patawari
                      Jan 5 '12 at 4:53




                      3




                      3





                      Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

                      – Zenklys
                      Jan 5 '12 at 7:38





                      Indeed, but still an interesting graphical representation of linux dérivations. It is clearly not answering but it topic related ;)

                      – Zenklys
                      Jan 5 '12 at 7:38













                      Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

                      – Tyþë-Ø
                      Jun 8 at 0:09







                      Interesting Facts: about the picture, 1. If you click in any OS name it will be redirected to their official website 2. Note the 'Years' in timeline on the top and bottom. 3. Perceive GNU's logo in Tux's stomach. if you know more+plz share!

                      – Tyþë-Ø
                      Jun 8 at 0:09




















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f28324%2fhow-is-ubuntu-based-on-debian%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Hudson River Historic District Contents Geography History The district today Aesthetics Cultural...

                      The number designs the writing. Feandra Aversely Definition: The act of ingrafting a sprig or shoot of one...

                      Ayherre Geografie Demografie Externe links Navigatiemenu43° 23′ NB, 1° 15′ WL43° 23′ NB, 1°...