Likely debuan came up for consideration in this context. That if it is the case can be handled easily. Rather than real or true original would better fit in this case since debuan is a fork of debian.
Jude <jdashiel at panix dot com> "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940) . On Mon, 13 Mar 2023, cor...@free.fr wrote: > On 13/03/2023 10:12, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 9:02?PM <cor...@free.fr> wrote: > >> > >> When such a debian (the digital product) is authentic, should we say it > >> "real debian" or "true debian"? > >> > >> I am not sure about this statement. > > > > I am having trouble parsing what you are asking... What is the context? > > > > Debian provides distribution media, and it has Debian packages and > > installs a Debian system. If it is not a Debian system, then it is not > > a Debian installer and does not have Debian packages. > > > > I'm not sure what "true" and "authentic" have to do with things. > > > > Maybe you are talking about the signature? > > > > No. I meant, some people pre-installed some packages on debian and release it, > which is declared as xxx-debian. > > I am just not sure about the two words "true" and "real". which is suitable > for description of the "official" debian? > > Thanks > Corey > >
