Defining the GNU/Linux distribution

If you are here, we can safely assume that you already know what a GNU/Linux software distribution is, but for completion’s sake, let’s just define so we all have the same context.

A GNU/Linux distribution is a collection of system and application software, packaged together by the distribution’s developers, so that they are distributed in a nicely integrated bundle, ready to be used by users and developers alike. Software typically included in such a distribution ranges from a compiler toolchain, to the C library, to filesystem utilities to text editors.

As you can imagine, from the existence of several different GNU/Linux distributions, there are multiple ways that you could possibly combine all these different applications and their respective configurations, not to mention that you could include even more specialised software, depending on the target audience of the distribution (such as multimedia software for a distribution like Ubuntu Studio or penetration testing tools for a distribution such as Kali Linux)

The “f” word

But even with such a great number of different software collections and their respective configurations there still may not be one that appeals to your specific needs. That’s ok though, as you can still customize each and every distribution to your specific liking. Extensive customization is known to create a differentiation point known as a potential forking point.

Forking is a term that has been known to carry negative connotations. As wikipedia puts it,

the term often implies not merely a development branch, but a split in the developer community a form of schism.

Historically, it has also been used as a leverage to coerce a project’s developers into merging code into their master branches that they didn’t originally want to, or otherwise take a decision that they wouldn’t have taken if not under the pressure of a “fork”. But why is it so?

You see, traditionally, forking a project meant a couple of things: For starters, there were now two, identical projects, competing in the same solution space. Those two projects had different development hours and features or bug fixes going into them, and eventually, one of the two ended up being obsolete. Apart from that forking also created an atmosphere of intense competition among the two projects.

However, in 2014, and the advent of the distributed version control systems such as git and mercurial and of the social coding websites such as Github and Bitbucket, the term is finally taking on a more lax meaning, as just another code repository that may or may not enjoy major (or even minor, for that matter) development.

Forking a GNU/Linux distribution

So, up until now we have discussed what a GNU/Linux distribution is, and what a fork is. However, we haven’t discussed yet what it means to fork a GNU/Linux distribution.

You see, what differentiates each distro from the other ones, apart from the software collection that they contain, is the way in which they provide (and deploy) that software. Yes, we are talking about software packages and their respective package managers. Distributions from the Debian (.deb) family are using dpkg along with apt or synaptic or aptitude or some other higher level tool. RPM (.rpm) based distributions may use rpm with yum or dnf or zypper or another higher level tool. Other distributions, not based on the aforementioned may choose to roll their own configuration of packages and package managers, with Arch Linux using its own pacman, Sabayon uses its entropy package manager, etc.

Now, naturally, if you want to customize an application to your liking, you have many ways in which you could do that. One of them is downloading the tarball from the upstream’s website or ftp server, ./configure it and then make and make install it. But if you do start customizing lots of applications this way, it can become tedious and unwieldy too soon. After all, what did that make install install exactly? Will the new update replace those files? What were your configuration options? Did they replace the files the package manager installed?

In this case, it really pays off to learn packaging software for your distribution of choice. What this means is to learn the format of packages your distribution’s package manager accepts as well as how you could produce them. This way, instead of the ./configure && make && make install cycle, you just have beautiful software packages, that you can control more tightly, you can update more easily and you can also distribute them to your friends if you so desire. As an added bonus, now the package manager also knows about those files, and you can install, remove or update them much more easily. What’s not to like?

After you have created some custom packages, you may also wish to create a repository to contain them and update straight from that. Congratulations, you have created your custom distribution, and a potential fork. While you are at it, if you really want to fork the distribution, you could as well take the distribution’s base packages, customize them, rebuild them, and then distribute them. Congratulations again, now you have your true GNU/Linux distribution fork.

That seems easy. More specifically?

Yes of course. Let’s take a look at how you might want to go about forking some well known GNU/Linux distribution.


In Debian, your usual procedure if you wish to customize a package is the below:

  • First, you make sure you have the essential building software installed. apt-get install build-essential devscripts debhelper
  • Then you need to download the package’s build dependencies. apt-get build-dep $package_name
  • Now it’s time to download it’s sources, via apt-get source $package_name
  • Proceed with customizing it to your liking (update it, patch the sources, etc)
  • Now it’s time to rebuild it. debuild -us -uc

Assuming all went fine, you should now have an $package_name.deb file in your current directory ready to be installed with dpkg -i $package_name.deb.

Please take note that the above is not an extensive treatise into debian packaging by any means. If you want to build custom debian packages, here are some links:

Now that you have your custom packages, it’s time to build a repository to contain them. There are many tools you can use to do that, including the official debian package archiving tool known as dak, but if you want a personal repository without too much hassle, it’s better if you use reprepro. I won’t go to full length on that here, but instead I will lead you to a very good guide to do so if you so desire


Building packages for fedora is a procedure similar to the debian one. Fedora however is more convenient in one aspect: It allows you to download a DVD image with all the sources in .rpm form ready for you to customize and rebuild to your tastes.

Apart from that, the usual procedure is the following:

  • Download the SRPM (source RPM) via any means. You could do that using the yumdownloader utility, likewise yumdownloader $package_name. To use yumdownloader, you need to have yum-utils installed.
  • After you have downloaded the SRPM, next you have to unpack it: rpm -i $package_name
  • Next up, you customize the package to your liking (patch the sources, etc)
  • Finally, you cd to the SPECS folder, and then rpmbuild -ba $package.spec

Again the above mentioned steps may not be 100% correct. If you want to go down this route, see the following links for more information:

Next up, is the repository creation step.

  • To create a yum repository, you need to yum install createrepo. After that you need to create a directory to use as the repository, likewise mkdir /var/ftp/repo/Fedora/19/{SRPMS, i386,x86_64).
  • After that you move your i386 packages to /var/ftp/repo/Fedora/19/i386, and the rest of the packages to their respective folders.
  • Next step is adding a configuration file to /etc/yum.repos.d/ that describes your repository to yum.

Again, not definitive, and for more information, take a look at these links:

Arch Linux

Arch Linux, at least in comparison to .deb and .rpm package distribution families is very easy to customize to your liking. That’s to be expected though as Arch Linux is a distribution that sells itself of the customization capabilities it offers to its user.

In essence, if you want to customize a package, the general process is this:

  • Download Arch tarball that contains the PKGBUILD file
  • untar the tarball
  • (Optional) download the upstream tarball referenced in the PKGBUILD, and modify it to your liking
  • run makepkg in the folder containing the PKGBUILD
  • install (using pacman) the .xz file produced after the whole process is finished.

In order to download the official {core | extra | community} packages, you need to run as root abs. This will create a directory tree that contains the files required for building any package in the official repositories.

Next up, you can create a custom local repository with the repo-add tool, and then proceeding with editing /etc/pacman.conf and adding an entry for your repository there. For more information:

To fork or not to fork?

Well, that’s not an easy question to answer. My opinion is that it’s extremely educational to do a soft fork, clone the distribution’s core repository, and for some time maintain your own distribution based on it, that is, update and customize all the repositories. Do that for some months, then go back to using your distribution of choice now that you are enlightened with how it works under the hood. The reason this is very educational is that it will teach you the ins and outs of your distribution, teach you about all the software in it, how it integrates, what its role is. It will teach you packaging which is a tremendously undervalued skill, as you can customize your experience to your liking, and it will make you appreciate the effort going into maintaining the distribution.

As for doing a hard fork, that is creating your own distribution, that you commit to maintaining it for a long time, my opinion is that it’s simply not worth it. Maintaining a distribution, be it by yourself, or with your friends, is a tremendous amount of work, that’s not worth it unless you have other goals you want to achieve by that. If all you want to do is to customize your distribution of choice to your liking, then go ahead, learn packaging for it, customize-package the applications you want, then create your own repo - but always track the upstream. Diverging too much from the upstream is not worth the hassle, as you will end up spending more time maintaining than using the distribution in the end.


If you want to do a small scale, private fork in order to see what’s under the hood of your Linux distro; by all means go ahead.

If you want to do a large scale, public fork, then take your time to calculate the effort, if it’s worth it, and if you could just help the upstream distribution implement the features you want.

How the Compiler, the Library and the Kernel work - Part 3

In the last part of this series, we talked about the compiler’s composition, including the assemblerand the linker. We showed what happen...… Continue reading