So… I’ve been looking at ‘returning’ to openSuSE after a long absence (parted ways back in the 7.x/8x time frame). One thing that kind of jumped out at me all of a sudden was that for a relatively popular ‘mainstream’ distro that has been around for a long time… I don’t believe I’ve ever heard of or seen any forks, spins or any other kind of distro based off of SuSE.
Any ideas as to why that might be?
On Sun 02 Dec 2012 07:06:02 PM CST, memilanuk wrote:
So… I’ve been looking at ‘returning’ to openSuSE after a long absence
(parted ways back in the 7.x/8x time frame). One thing that kind of
jumped out at me all of a sudden was that for a relatively ‘popular’
(http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity) ‘mainstream’
distro that has been around for a -long- time… I don’t believe I’ve
ever heard of or seen any forks, spins or any other kind of distro based
off of SuSE.
Any ideas as to why that might be?
Hi
Not had a look through the gallery at http://susestudio.com/ where you
can roll your own…
There are a few lurking on OBS;
http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/GNOME:/Medias/images/iso/
http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/KDE:/Medias/images/iso/
–
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
openSUSE 12.2 (x86_64) Kernel 3.4.11-2.16-desktop
up 5 days 3:51, 3 users, load average: 0.02, 0.04, 0.05
CPU Intel i5 CPU M520@2.40GHz | Intel Arrandale GPU
I think this one is (or at least was) based on openSUSE. Get Cr OS Linux - Chrome Plated OS
And no it is not google chrome os.
Distrowatch lists a few. But there is one very well known derivative:
SUSE Linux Enterprise.
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GTX 650 Ti
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.3 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 11.4 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | lamp server
I remember using SuSE ‘back in the day’ when I’d order it with the multi-CD set and the nice big thick manual… must have started using it around 5.0 or 5.1. Seemed like an absolute god-send compared to fighting with then-current versions of Slackware and FreeBSD. As such… I kind of view openSuSE as the derivative, not the other way around.
Kind of wish I’d stuck with it through the early Novell days - I wasted so much time distro-hopping (including a few years w/ Mac OS X) that I wish I had back… to learn doing new things rather than how to do the same thing on umpteen different distros and desktops.
Where are you seeing distros based off of SuSE listed on Distrowatch? I looked at this page and didn’t see any mentioned…
Where are you seeing distros based off of SuSE listed on Distrowatch? I looked at this page and didn’t see any mentioned…
Disregard that last… found the right search page that includes options for distros based off other distros…
Interestingly… I did a manual search as well and found at least a couple other variants - an Iranian version of openSuSE, and one design for audio processing. Kind of cool, but I thought SuSE was pretty good about the foreign language support out of the box?
On 2012-12-02 21:46, memilanuk wrote:
> As
> such… I kind of view openSuSE as the derivative, not the other way
> around.
No, currently SUSE is derived from openSUSE. In our local parlance,
openSUSE is the upstream project of SUSE.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
Am 02.12.2012 22:36, schrieb memilanuk:
> Kind of cool, but I thought SuSE was pretty good
> about the foreign language support out of the box?
Wrong, while openSUSE gets some sponsoring it is in no way derived from
SLES/SLED or takes something from it. SLED/SLES takes from openSUSE and
customizes it for its enterprise needs and ads additional things (a
little bit similar to Ubuntu and Debian where Debian is kind of an
upstream).
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GTX 650 Ti
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.3 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 11.4 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | lamp server
You’re presumption is inaccurate: Why 20 Years of Linux Expertise is Good for Supercomputing | SUSE Communities
Not exactly what I was talking about… and I think you know that. :sarcastic:
I’ve asked the same question to myself. Most new distros introduced at distrowatch are based on Debian/Ubuntu. So what are the advantages of Debian/Ubuntu to use it as a base for a new distribution compared to others? What are the points that makes openSUSE not as suitable as Debian/Ubuntu? Or is openSUSE (or susestudio) so perfect and flexible that there is no need for another distro/spin? 
Am 03.12.2012 10:16, schrieb zerum:
> Or is openSUSE (or susestudio) so perfect and flexible
> that there is no need for another distro/spin?
I would not say it is perfect, but it is a very clever tool and the
gazillion of individual respins there in studio can very well be seen as
an equivalent of the gazillion of ubuntu/debian respins which appear and
disappear.
They are just not listed as derivatives on their own in distrowatch.
Also sometimes the policy what a variant of the base distro is differs.
If you install an ubuntu with kde it is “marketed” on its own as
kubuntu, with xfce it’s xubuntu and so on and so on.
In openSUSE it is still openSUSE whatever desktop environment you
choose, same for server vs. workstation (it is just a tick in the
installer).
I know this is not exactly the same as a respin/derivative, but this way
to have differently named variants of the base distro may be one of the
reasons others continue with that and give their respin a name even if
they only change the default wallpaper and some appearance stuff.
Just my 2 ct. Your mileage may vary.
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GTX 650 Ti
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.3 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 11.4 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | lamp server
I think it’s a question of both demand as well as supply. For example, the different spins of Ubuntu (including Mint) arose from the demand for different desktop environments. Unusually for a Linux distribution, openSUSE is ambivalent to different desktop environments, and so it would make no sense to have a GNOME fork or KDE fork. This, I believe, is a strength. On the supply side, a potential niche' market distro based on openSUSE would be to have a spin-off distribution with batteries included’ (e.g. proprietary drivers, codes, etc…).
However you have to remember that many newcomers leaping onto the Ubuntu bandwagon would inevitably less familiar with Linux then the more experienced openSUSE user, who is generally quite happy to put the batteries in themselves. This would necessarily require a large amount of marketing and the provision of a large-scale support structure, that in the case of Ubuntu could be funded by a single individual. Unless there is a similarly wealthy, generous, and philanthropic individual among the openSUSE userbase, this niche is unlikely to be explored.
Good points. openSUSE doesn’t really need a spinoff, other than some highly specialized variants. 
That highlights the key point wrt distro forks or spin-offs. For whatever reason they happen, they won’t get very far without maintaining added value, and it’s the added value that will drive a real demand for it. Then there is the question of funding for the split resources. There’s a bit more to it than just doing re-spins with a different DE, as Kubuntu has experienced during the last couple of years.
As an example, there was an openSUSE 10.2 based audio distro called JackLab, created for music production, with its own website, forum, and repo. The value add was that it included a real-time kernel for low-latency recording, and the latest linux music software integrated with a choice of desktops (IIRC KDE or Enlightenment). Unfortunately it eventually ran out of money, developers and time.
to the OP: I notice one thing, you still write SuSE, where the names are now openSUSE and SUSE.
And, IMHO distrowatch’s stats are valued far too high. I’ve seen figures in blogposts based not on page hits, but on downloads, package downloads from update repos, related to IP’s downloaded to, where the ranking was completely different than distrowatch’s. IIRC Jos Poortvliet posted some numbers on one of openSUSE’s releases, comparing them to Ubuntu’s published ones, which could be read that openSUSE had a bigger userbase.
Maybe indeed openSUSE, it’s friendly community, active developpers, infrastructure are the reasons for the lack of forks/spin-offs. Most of these do not come from creativity, but from conflict situations, where developpers leave and start their own fork. There is room for KDE, GNOME, Ayatana, MATE, Xfce, LXDE, RazorQt, Plasma Active, no need to fork openSUSE because it won’t support it…
On 2012-12-03 22:46, Knurpht wrote:
> Maybe indeed openSUSE, it’s friendly community, active developpers,
> infrastructure are the reasons for the lack of forks/spin-offs. Most of
> these do not come from creativity, but from conflict situations, where
> developpers leave and start their own fork. There is room for KDE,
> GNOME, Ayatana, MATE, Xfce, LXDE, RazorQt, Plasma Active, no need to
> fork openSUSE because it won’t support it…
Also, we have repositories that add functionality. Science repo,
education… you install the main distro with different collection of
packages.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
Just think: any of us could have started kopenSUSE, SciopenSUSE, GnopenSUSE, LXDopenSUSE and so on, and no one does. The more I think about it the more I like it :D.
Sorry can’t help it, my December screenshot is KDEXfCEopenSUSE.
Am 03.12.2012 23:36, schrieb conram:
> KDEXfCEopenSUSE.
Knurpht wrote:
> kopenSUSE, SciopenSUSE, GnopenSUSE, LXDopenSUSE and so on
I understand now why we have no derivatives - with that kind of names it
is impossible 
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GTX 650 Ti
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.3 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 11.4 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | lamp server