ian vs.

Fedora
A point by point comparison between the Debian and Fedora Linux distros: which offers a
better user experience?

Email Article
Print Article
Comment on this article
Share Articles

Posted December 14, 2016

By
Bruce Byfield, Matt Hartley

Submit Feedback
More Articles

(Page 1 of 2)

See an alternate opinion: Debian vs. Fedora

by Bruce Byfield

Debian Linux and the Fedora Project are among the most influential Linux distributions of
all time. Not only are both Debian and Fedora among the top ten for page hits on
Distrowatch, but many of the other top ten are derived from them. But why would you pick
one over another?

To be honest, the differences are fewer than they were fifteen years ago. In 2003, when
Fedora began, Debian was the main representative of the .deb package format, and Red
Hat, Fedora's predecessor, represented the .rpm format, and your Linux experience was
very different depending on which you chose. Since then, the differences have diminished,
but there are still subtle differences that might influence your choice.

However, those differences no longer include package management. Around the turn of the
millennium,.debs were alone in resolving package dependencies, but .rpms added the
feature long ago. Today, contrary to old myths that refuse to die, using Fedora's dnf
command to install packages is roughly equivalent to installing packages with Debian's apt-
get. Even the comparative slowness of yum, dnf's predecessor, has become irrelevant as the
change of tools becomes complete.

Where differences do exist is in the organization, governance, available system

architectures, package repositories, and default installations. These differences may affect
your choice, or simply be necessary to know to avoid uncertainty.
Debian vs. Fedora: Organization of Projects
Debian is a self-contained community-based distribution, while Fedora acts as a testing
ground for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and CentOS. Although much of Fedora's governance
is community-based, Red Hat appoints some positions on the Fedora Council, including the
Project Leader.

By contrast, the Debian Project Leader is voted on yearly by Debian maintainers, and
decisions about Debian are referred to a technical committee, as well various groups such
as the mirror managers. Large policy decisions may be set by referendum. In general,
Debian is known for its innovative governance, including voting by a Condorcet method,
which compares the votes for each possible result against every other result. Whether
Fedora or Debian is more difficult to say, given that Fedora is partly controlled by Red Hat,
while Debian is a meritocracy in which only official package maintainers have a vote.

Debian vs. Fedora: Hardware Architecture and Software

Releases
Versions of Debian include ten different hardware architectures, including 32 and 64 bit
Intel chips (called i386 and amd64 for historic reasons), Apple, and two different ARM
ports that support everything from singleboards like the Raspberry Pi to main frames. By
contrast, Fedora focuses on 32 and 64 bit Intel. However, a search will uncover versions for
Apple and ARM (including Raspberry Pi). Recently, too, Fedora has started offering as a
standard download Atomic, a version designed for working with containers.

All Fedora releases are maintained for about 15 months, while Debian usually offers partial
support for the previous release under the name of oldstable. Debian also has a project
whose goal is to ensure support for each new release for five years, in imitation of Ubuntu's
long-term support policy.

The main difference is that Fedora releases on an average of every six months, except for
the occasional delay. Debian, though, places a far greater emphasis on quality, refusing to
release until its high standards are met. Often, Debian has grown seriously out of date by
the time a new version is released.

Debian vs. Fedora: Package Repositories

The use and relationship of package repositories can be obscure in both Debian and Fedora.
Core Debian for each release is maintained in a repository called Stable, which is generally
the choice for servers. However, because the interval between stable releases can be as long
as two or three years, many users prefer to use the Testing or Unstable releases. These
names are relative; Ubuntu, for example, is based on packages from Testing or Unstable,
and many home users dip regularly into them as well. Still, problems can occur, such as
when Debian is making a major technological change such as the switch to Systemd.
Other Debian repositories exist to keep the Stable release patched and current, such as
Updates and Backports. There is also Experimental, whose packages are uploaded by way
of introduction and can sometimes be unreliable.

The core of all these repositories is called Main. However, Stable, Testing, and Unstable
also contain Contrib for software that is free- licensed, but requires proprietary software to
run, and Non-free, which contains proprietary packages such as Flash or some video
drivers. Of all these, only Main is tested for a release, although in the process Contrib and
Non-free are generally improved, as well.

In Fedora, development is done in Rawhide, a repository roughly equivalent to Debian

Experimental. From Rawhide, versions for workstations, servers, and containers are
produced. A branch of Rawhide becomes the fedora repository, the approximate equivalent
of Debian Unstable, or perhaps Debian Testing. Updates patches and maintains fedora, and
is developed in updates-testing.

All these repositories contain only free-licensed software. Unlike Debian, Fedora has no
semi-official provision for other software. This arrangement suits those who restrict
themselves to free software, but can be inconvenient for others. Consequently, a number of
third party repositories have emerged, including RPM Fusion, and RPM Livna. These
repositories sometimes conflict with each other or the official Fedora release, and should be
used cautiously, and apart perhaps from Fusion and Livna, should not be mixed.

Even with the emphasis on free-licenses, the software selection in both Debian and Fedora
is immense. Fedora includes just under 20,000 packages, while Debian is frequently
estimated to have 40-50,000 packages. But whether that estimate includes duplicates for
different architectures is never stated.

At any rate, neither Debian nor Fedora users are likely to run out of packages in a hurry.
You might, find that Fedora has more recent packages, but, after twenty-five years of Linux
development, the difference between an older and latest package is not as great as it used to
be.

Debian vs. Fedora: Default Installations

Myths about the difficulty of installing Debian long ago ceased to be true. The modern
Debian installer is more detailed than the installers of some distributions, and a little rough
looking, but no more difficult to use. A graphical version is available, but offers no
advantages over the text or speech-based installer. However, the expert installer is ideal for
difficult installs, offering detailed choices that can sometimes make the difference between
failure and successful installs.

In comparison, Fedora's Anaconda installer has become so minimalistic that I sometimes

have difficulty in knowing what to click next. Unlike Debian's installer it requires a
minimum of user input -- which is fine, except when you run into problems and need more
options.
Fedora 25, the latest version, is distinguished by being the first major distribution to use
Wayland, the replacement for the ancient X Window System that manages Linux's
graphical interfaces. However, this is more of a technological triumph than anything a user
is likely to notice, except for an apparent increase in speed.

What users are more likely to notice more is that Fedora defaults to a GNOME desktop. For
years, GNOME was also the default for Debian, but in version 8, the latest version, the
installer offers half a dozen desktop choices. You can get the same choices in Fedora after
doing the main install, but Debian's choice during installation is more convenient, as well
as more in keeping with the preferences of modern users.

Debian vs. Fedora: Making a choice

Debian and Fedora do many things differently. Yet once the average user deciphers these
differences, most can be satisfied with either one.

Sometimes, an unexpected situation might make your choice obvious. A difficult install, for
example, will lead you to Debian. Yet more often, the choice between these two popular
distributions depends on what you value. On the one hand, if you require stability, then
Debian might be your choice -- although you might, instead, find a more polished version
of Fedora in Red Hat Enterprise Linux or CentOS. On the other hand, if you want the latest
releases and innovations, then Fedora might serve you better.

Similarly, if you want to use proprietary software, Debian's Contrib and Non-Free
repositories should cause fewer problems than the third party repositories that surround
Fedora. Or perhaps a distribution like Debian that is free of corporate influence is more to
your taste, or a minimalist installer like Fedora's.

Still, no matter which you choose, you can be reasonably confident that you can't go too far
wrong. Admittedly, Debian can look somewhat rougher fresh from the install, but,
functionally, the differences today between the two distros are few, and growing fewer.
Both are mature operating systems, polished by a long series of releases, and well-suited to
most users' needs and preferences.

Next page: an alternate viewpoint on Debian vs. Fedora

bian vs. Fedora

A point by point comparison between the Debian and Fedora Linux distros: which offers a
better user experience?

Email Article
Print Article
Comment on this article
 Share Articles

Posted December 14, 2016

By
Bruce Byfield, Matt Hartley

Submit Feedback
More Articles

(Page 1 of 2)

by Matt Hartley

Debian and Fedora both offer a lot to those who want to learn more about Linux. Both
distros are considered to be more advanced than newbie friendly distributions, however,
they also target completely different types of users. This article offers a contrast between
the two distributions.

Debian stable, unstable and testing

One of the first things that makes Debian different from Fedora is that it's broken up into
three release branches: Stable, Testing and Unstable. Debian stable is suitable for mission
critical tasks that need to work, period. The Stable branch is great for some server tasks that
can get by with modern security patches, yet have older versions of software.

Debian can also be used for desktop PCs using the Testing branch. This provides users with
packages from the Unstable branch, but the packages have been tested as suitable for
Debian Testing. This leaves us with Debian Unstable. This branch of Debian is where
packages go to receive testing end up. It's not really suitable for anything other than testing
and upstream development into other Debian branches.

Fedora Workstation, Server and Atomic

Fedora is a very popular Linux solution among those who work in IT. The reason for this of
course, is its Red Hat roots and cutting edge approach to providing tools for developers.

Fedora Workstation is often the first choice among those in Linux IT. It's reliable, yet offers
access to bleeding edge packages and a first class Linux community. Fedora Server is a
popular choice for those needing an environment with a more cutting edge base than say,
CentOS/Red Hat, while still offering many of the same tools and work flows as found in a
typical Red Hat environment.

Then we have Fedora Atomic. This is where those looking to utilize containers go in
Fedora. If this is you, then this is the Fedora release for you. It's entire purpose is to run
containerized applications well and it does this quite reliably.
Debian vs Fedora: packages
At first pass, the easiest comparison is that Fedora has bleeding edge packages while
Debian wins in terms of the number of those available. Digging into this issue deeper, you
can install packages into both operating systems using the command line or a GUI option.

Fedora uses DNF to install, remove and maintain packages on your installation. Some of
the commands available with DNF include: install, remove, update, upgrade, autoremove,
clean, reinstall, distro-sync, makecache, plus many more options. DNF is available by
default for modern Fedora installations and is widely considered a "replacement" for the
YUM command.

Debian's APT command makes use of dpkgfor managing packages. APT also has options
for CLI and GUI usage. Some of the common APT commands include: install, remove, -f
install (fix install), autoclean, check, update, upgrade, apt-cache, search, among a number
of others.

So why use APT vs dpkg? The most straight forward answer is because APT handles
dependency management well. That said, there are occasions where running "dpkg-
reconfigure foo" is necessary after something went wrong somewhere with a package setup.

There are always going to be software titles missing from the default provided Fedora
repos. In cases like this, you might find yourself using Fedora's COPR repositories.
Basically, they're very similar to Ubuntu PPAs. Adding them to your Fedora installation
will allow you to install and maintain updates for software provided by each COPR
repository. Debian differs here as they don't provide PPAs or COPR-like repositories. In
most cases, you'll either have to add a special repo or instead, install the deb package itself.

Fedora and Debian both support individual package types. These packages are known as
Fedora RPMs and Debian deb packages. What's neat about both of these package types is
you can use conversion tools like "alien" to turn packages from one type to another. So
using alien, one can take a Debian deb package and convert it into a RPM package.

In terms of software availability, Debian has the most overall packages that can be
installed. In terms of choosing an RPM vs a deb package, I honestly don't see much of a
difference here. So long as the package meets its dependency needs, I can't really say one is
better than the other. I will say however that software repositories are preferred over
individual packages. This goes for both Fedora and Debian. The reason for this, is
functionality upgrades that are usually provided and keep things secure with said updates.

Fedora and Debian: security

Fedora was one of the earliest adopters of a kernel feature called SELinux (Security-
Enhanced Linux). While Debian also offers support for it, Fedora provides it enabled by
default. This security feature was initially created by the US government and later on, Red
Hat jumped into the project to provide further development.

Unless you're in IT, odds are this isn't a security feature that's really something you're going
to be that interested in. So the best security is to keep iptables setup correctly, use a non-
root user and keep up with this security list. Setting aside the fact that SELInux is enabled
by default, I think security comparisons between the two distributions are matters of
opinion. Generally, most people will point to Fedora as being the most hardened, secure of
the two distros. I'd counter with Debian being far more stable. Even if you choose Debian
Unstable I've found it to be more stable simply because packages are being tested far longer
and with greater focus. That's not my opinion, that's my personal experience with both
distros.

So to be completely fair, I will give most secure ranking to Fedora overall. But I do so only
because of SELinux and the enterprise minded approach to the distro setup.

Choosing Debian vs Fedora

I like both distributions of Linux. Both Debian and Fedora have a ton to offer anyone
willing to take off the "training wheels" and really explore what these distributions can do.
Based on my experience, Fedora generally makes for a better desktop. Let me say this
again, with a disclaimer:

As someone who has primarily used Debian-based distros for must of his Linux enthusiast
years, I feel out of these two distros that Fedora makes more sense overall for someone
serious about running an up-to-date Linux desktop.

I feel strongly that Debian's shining light is that it's a great base for Debian-based operating
systems. Debian by itself can leave something to be desired in terms of package age. Don't
get me wrong, I'm perfectly happy to run Ubuntu or Debian Testing as a daily driver. But
most of you reading this, are probably looking more for something that is crazy stable
then Debian is a great choice.

What say you? You might be wondering why I couldn't work Arch or Mint into this
comparison, right? Kidding aside, I'd be interested in hearing which distro you prefer
between Fedora and Debian. Hit the Comments, let's talk about it.