Bedrock Linux Combines Benefits of Other Linux Distros

First time accepted submitter Paradigm_Complex writes "From the distro's front page: 'Bedrock Linux is a Linux distribution created with the aim of making most of the (often seemingly mutually-exclusive) benefits of various other Linux distributions available simultaneously and transparently. If one would like a rock-solid stable base (for example, from Debian or a RHEL clone) yet still have easy access to cutting-edge packages (from, say, Arch Linux), automate compiling packages with Gentoo's portage, and ensure that software aimed only for the ever popular Ubuntu will run smoothly — all at the same time, in the same distribution — Bedrock Linux will provide a means to achieve this.' The timing of this release is particularly nice for those who were excited to hear that Valve was bringing Steam to Linux, but were disappointed that it was targeting Ubuntu as Ubuntu was not their distro of choice. If it works on Ubuntu, it should work fine on Bedrock Linux, while still ensuring the majority of the system feel very, very similar to Fedora or Slackware or whatever you prefer."

Minimal busybox LFS with chroots

[Anonymous Coward]

The tl;dr version is that this "distro" is just an installation manual for a linux-from-scratch style install of a kernel, busybox, and little else (think initrd-style minimal system) plus chroots under which you can install regular distros.

While a novel concept, this is clearly a niche idea. At best I could see it useful to the developer who wants to test his packages across multiple distros, but you can already do that with a standard "host" distro and chroots for "guest" distros. It also does nothing (at least yet) to deal with the fact that each "client" will want/expect its own daemons to be running, but lots of them will be system-exclusive (e.g. anything to do with devices or networking).

Re:Sloppiness

[Paradigm_Complex]

I apologize, I literally just learned HTML/CSS within the last week to create the website. I've had other people offer to create a website for me who actually know what they're doing with respect to website creation - once they're done I'll gladly switch it away from what I'm sure is a poor example of a proper website.

What I am knowledgeable about is the content discussed within the website. Don't judge the book by its cover here, as I'm reasonably confident there is something unique in there.

Re:Sounds familiar enough...

[Paradigm_Complex]

You're not the first one to point to that xkcd in respect to this project. However, I don't think it is complete apt. If anything, Bedrock Linux benefits from the large variety of Linux distributions out there, rather than adding to the mess. If that issue noted in the xkcd comic didn't exist, this distro would not have any point. Think of it as bringing value from what is traditionally seen as a weakness.

Re:Debian Testing

[Paradigm_Complex]

Then you misunderstood the advantages outlined above. It might be my fault for explaining them.

I really, really like Debian. I like the fact that, once released, it really doesn't change for well over a year. Once I have it set up I can just let it run. However, it becomes out of date fast - if I want some new toy that just came out and isn't in Debian backports. With Bedrock Linux, I can have 95% of the system be Debian except for that one package I want from Arch, which I will get from Arch. Take a look here for what may be better examples.

If you still feel Wheezy covers this, reply again and I'll try to explain it differently. This is really nothing like Wheezy at all. Unless you want it to be, of course, then it is almost exactly like Wheezy.

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this poses a wonderful opportunity to make Debian work well with systemd for those who want it. The interesting scenario this poses is that there are 3 or more competing init programs (sysvinit, upstart and systemd) which puts an extra burden on package maintainers. You wouldn't simply choose an arbitrary init using /etc/alternatives, because the system would have to boot up in order to do that. Therefore, the only logical solution would be to make it possible for all of them to coexist, perhaps using a root-init which manages them using cgroups. Systemd uses cgroups internally, which might pose a problem if cgroups doesn't support the required level of nesting.

Captcha: consults

Re:already exists. Its called Debian

[Paradigm_Complex]

I really, really like Debian. If Debian could do what Bedrock Linux can, I would have never tried to make Bedrock Linux. The issue is, however, that you can't install an arbitrary program from testing/unstable into stable.. Many of those packages are dependent on specific libraries which aren't available in stable. With Bedrock Linux, you can install and use packages from both, at the same time. I can run Squeeze's newsbeuter in Sid's X11 and have it open a window in Wheezy's iceweasel. It's all transparent and feels like one cohesive OS.

Re:Minimal busybox LFS with chroots

[MurukeshM]

I disagree that it is niche. With two (admittedly major) things, this could be the Linux distro to take over the desktop. A decent setup program and corporate backing. Seriously. If I could Google how to do X and be able to apply the solution for any distro on mine, just think about how much would that simplify things for grand mas and granddads. Corporate backing to push vendors to pre-install it and get companies to use it. I understand that it's a long way out. A unified front. That said, I wish you the best and I hope that I can get to contribute in some way in the future (too much of a n00b/scaredy-cat to venture into an open-source project now).