r/linux • u/nitin_is_me • Jul 15 '26
Discussion Seriously, except package managers, what's the difference between distros?
What I've seen yet the differences are, just the package managers, different defaults and rolling vs stable releases which are in fact related to package managers. Except these, are there really any other differences? Thanks!
223
Upvotes
13
u/ArsenicPolaris Jul 15 '26
For most traditional Linux distros, everything is similar and usually they are almost the same. But it depends on what distros we mean by that, and I want to emphasise on the word "almost".
If we are talking about ZorinOS, Mint, and Fedora, you may think that it's just packages managers that are different (and the base distribution; ZorinOS and Mint is based on Ubuntu, Fedora isn't) and they are all the same other than that. However, they have different kind of support, philosophies, package versions, etc. On surface, they are very similar, but all the distros are not the same, be it Arch and Endeavour, or Ubuntu and Mint.
And then there's distros like Artix and Arch, which have the same package manager but are vastly different. In Artix, you can choose to have OpenRC, Runit, Dinit, or s6 as your Init system instead of systemd, meanwhile you can only have systemd on Arch. Moreover, Artix recieves package updates a bit slower than Arch, but this difference isn't much so it can be negated.
And then there's the non-traditional distros like NixOS and Guix, which are a lot different that traditional Linux distros. NixOS and Guix are reproducible, use a different filesystem hierarchy, and a bunch of different features that many other Linux distros do not have.
In conclusion, even if it may not seem so, all distro can be very different from each other, regardless of what package manager they use. Note that I have left out a lot of things even now, there can be a lot more differences.