@scottalanmiller said:
@ajurek said:
Not sure if I completely agree with this. I would define a distro as an OS with a custom configuration and additional software installed. These are the things that make them unique.
The only issue is that there is no OS on which to build the distros. Each distro builds its own OS from the ground up, there is no common starting point.
The most basic distros like Debian, Slackware, Suse and Fedora build from nothing to full OS / distro. Then, it is true, other distros like Ubuntu and RHEL build on top of these or from these or whatever. But every OS build on Linux is a distro. So while it is potentially extra stuff that makes them different, there is no common OS on which they are built.
I agree that the "parent" distro's (Debian, Slackware & RedHat) should be classified as full OS's. They started the "original base". But then others branched them off into different look/feel/software variations that I call distros. They are modified version of the "parents", so the "parents" would be the OS that they are all based off of. Wouldn't they?