Slackware

string · 2008-12-10 10:11:06

Having read about the upcomming 12.2 version I've started pondering about Slackware again. I'm curious if there are readers who use Slackware and would like to share with me (us) their reasons for doing so.

[Notes:
[ -> I'm taking a day off from my normal activities and as such, out of pure curiosity for this subject -- I started this thread
[ -> Should this thread get any replies at all, I'm hoping it won't turn into a flame fest
[ -> I didn't post in "Off-Topic" because it *is* Linux related .. and I can't start a thread in "Topics going nowhere"

Last edited by string (2008-12-10 10:11:49)

fumbles · 2008-12-10 10:28:25

Slackware is a good distrobution but the lack of a package manager among other things is why I'm not using it. Arch Linux and Slackware are very similar. I see no reason to move to Slack.

ArchArael · 2008-12-10 10:49:45

I used Slackware before Archlinux. Slackware is really great if you want to learn about gnu/linux structure. You learn a lot about packages and why are they there just by reading the famous Changelog.

Well, what bothered me in the end was the lack of the dependency management.

I also missed Gnome although there are alternatives like Dropline Gnome. Today I'm not a Gnome user anymore so this wouldn't be a problem anymore.

Pacman and abs IMHO are the major motivation to switch from Slackware to Archlinux today.

I still think that Slackware matters, I loved it in the past and still I think it's a great distro for people that want to learn and know better gnu/linux structure.

It's just not my cup of tea anymore. I'm to lazy to do everything by myself.

==========================================================================

By the way. Rolling system is great. Install once and update forever. Never needed to reinstall.
That's another motivation to not switch to Slackware IMHO.

Last edited by ArchArael (2008-12-10 11:02:21)

string · 2008-12-10 11:19:00

I'm not suggesting that anyone should move to Slackware.

fumbles wrote:

Slackware is a good distrobution

Since you're not a Slackware user, I guess my question to you is: by what criteria is Slackware a good distribution? [btw: Slackware -does- have a package manager]

ArchArael wrote:

I still think that Slackware matters

Likewise, why does it still matter? Alas, for those that have already "learnt the lessons" of Slackware, the "educational" argument can be dropped -- which leaves us with .. well, what, exactly?

ArchArael wrote:

Rolling system is great

I believe you get that if you track slackware-current [which is a relatively simple task]

Last edited by string (2008-12-10 11:20:03)

ArchArael · 2008-12-10 13:08:42

string wrote:

I'm not suggesting that anyone should move to Slackware.

That's right. Sorry for my OT but I just imagined if I would switch and expressed why I wouldn't.

string wrote:

Likewise, why does it still matter? Alas, for those that have already "learnt the lessons" of Slackware, the "educational" argument can be dropped -- which leaves us with .. well, what, exactly?
I believe you get that if you track slackware-current [which is a relatively simple task]

Well IMHO the main motivation is that one I expressed in the previous post. If you have the habbit to read the slackware's Changelog often than time by time you will learn a lot about your system. You are obligated to do this way because the Changelog in Slackware is really important. Just like RSS in Archlinux.

Nowadays the package managers are designed very well so demanding the dependency management to human beings is waste of time IMHO. Still many slackers prefer manage the dependencies them selves. Many of them claim that this is a feature and not a lack.
If you support this point of view this can be another motivation to use Slackware.

One other motivation is that Slackware is a rock solid distribution.

Then let not forget the fact that Slackware doesn't change that much so is really predictable. Learned once is always the same old system. Period.

The last point i think is the matter of feeling. I called Slackware home for many years and I'm sure that if I try to install Slackware one more time I will find myself comfortable at first. I will feel myself at home. Unfortunately the problems IMHO emerge later. Well, as I said before I'm kinda lazy.

Last edited by ArchArael (2008-12-10 13:19:35)

vinegaroon · 2008-12-10 15:09:58

I used slackware for a while, still do on one machine. It's great.
I actually like the lack of dependency resolution, but it's annoying having to search around for slackbuilds/packages outside of the distribution that are just a pacman -S away or in the AUR when using arch.

bgc1954 · 2008-12-10 16:02:24

I still have Slackware 12.1 installed on a partition of my hard drive that I use or update from time to time. I burned new 1st and 2nd 12.1 install cd's last month as I had messed up my old installation and didn't want to go through the hassle--yes, it's not that easy--of upgrading from my old 11.0 install cd's.

I used to use openbox and pypanel on Slack but this time got reaquainted with fluxbox as it's one of the minimal wm's included in the install cd's--I kinda like fluxbox now. I tend to use slapt-get for package mgmnt and several sources for pkg's in Slack but there are still pkg's that aren't readily available so it's not really my cup of tea either anymore. I still like to experiment with it--especially trying to upgrade and figuring out how to make it run again--but it isn't a distro that I'd run full time. I'm stuck on Arch.

sokuban · 2008-12-10 16:58:34

I've recently switched to Slackware on my old computer. (It used to run debian) If an update it coming up soon, looks like I'll have to install it again though. Do you know when the new version is coming out or is it not known yet?

It is a very interesting experiance, and it feels like going back in time. I actually used fdisk to partition my hard drive just for fun. (Was following the guide) Lilo is still a pain though, I really prefer grub. It also made me really appreciate pacman a lot more, because I've never known what it was like without a good package manager before.

I installed slapt-get (it took me a while to understand that I needed to manually download this and installpkg locally, no package manager doing the dirty work for you) and am using that to update my system, and I used the slackbuilds website to install things like openoffice and mplayer. But I really wonder where people find the dependancies for things. In the slackbuilds website they ussually tell you the non slackware dependancies, but that isn't that useful if you didn't do a full install. I was tempted to not do a full install, becuase I'm used to Arch-style, but I figured it would be easiest to just do what the docs say, and I had hard drive space so I did it anyways. (Well, I didn't install KDE and KDEI)

Hopefully I'll be able to get everything my second computer needs (not much) with those, because I really don't trust 3rd party repos. (I had bad experiances with rpm before.) Yea, I'm a hypocrite, I used 3rd party repos for slapt-get.

I like it because of its long release cycles and stability. I wouldn't want to install Arch on my old computer, because I can't keep up with the rolling release on it since I barely ever use it. I like it more than debian because there are less distro specific changes etc. Also it feels more responsive than debian for some reason.

string · 2008-12-10 18:17:33

I don't think there's an "announced" date for Slackware 12.2 but by the looks of it -- soon. `fdisk` never seemed like a hard to use application to me (I pref. it over cfdisk), I'm not "down" with LILO though. From what I can remember from my Slackware days, tools like slapt-get, swaret (and such) are looked down upon by a certain percentage (majority?) of experienced Slackware users, as the tools tend to mess with the system in some bad ways. SlackBuilds are considered "ok", as I remember it. Alas, tracking down dependencies can be a task but not the hardest task. The hassle for me was keeping manually-created packages + their dependenices up-to-date.

I can understand that a package manager which doesn't handle dependencies works (and works well) for many Slackware users (it worked quite well for me) -- but this can make the installation process a hassle, especially if you're the minimalist type, who simply refuses to perform "full" installs.

-- Conclusions atm: thus far it seems I had overestimated the number of Slackware users that are reading these forums and would be willing to share their opinions. Also, it seems that those who *do* reply, aren't as enthusiastic about the distribution as I would have assumed Looking forward to more replies, thanks!

A question that's been asked time and time again (and will possibly spark things up): Do you think the future is bright for Slackware, or is it slowly but surely reaching its end?

Last edited by string (2008-12-10 18:20:05)

Gullible Jones · 2008-12-11 00:07:47

I like Slackware, but I'm afraid it's destined for an obscure end. Now that swaret is dead, the lack of package metadata will probably be a death warrant.

This is sadly compounded by the fact that most Slackware-based distros out there are either dead or suck... Hopefully, though, Arch and its descendents will continue Slackware's philosophy of simplicity and elegance.

anrxc · 2008-12-11 00:55:28

There was a nice article a while back, still relevant, always will be as Slackware will always matter :^)
http://www.linuxquestions.org/linux/art … AYS_MATTER

ozar · 2008-12-11 01:27:00

string wrote:

I don't think there's an "announced" date for Slackware 12.2 but by the looks of it -- soon.

Slackware 12.2 was officially released earlier today.

xaiviax · 2008-12-11 01:46:11

Gullible Jones wrote:

This is sadly compounded by the fact that most Slackware-based distros out there are either dead or suck... Hopefully, though, Arch and its descendents will continue Slackware's philosophy of simplicity and elegance.

Zenwalk seems to be going strong, and well liked by many.

Gullible Jones · 2008-12-11 01:51:49

True, I forgot about Zenwalk.

cardinals_fan · 2008-12-11 02:38:48

I use Slackware. It's the only distro I've seen (with the exception of CentOS and the BSDs) that I can truly depend on no matter what. My Slackware system is completely controlled by me. While slackpkg is decent, I find that manually handling dependencies gives me more control and awareness of my system. I think there will be a future for Slackware as long as people use it. I see no time when that will stop.

EDIT: One reason new Slackware releases are greeted quietly is that many users stick with older releases for a while. They are stable and supported for a long time

Last edited by cardinals_fan (2008-12-11 02:41:08)

.:B:. · 2008-12-11 03:01:12

Slack's main weak point is package management. The only words I can think of when I hear Slackware and package manager/management in one sentence are ancient and deprecated. Being a former Zenwalk user I think I can speak from experience. While Zenwalk does try to remedy the problems of Slack's package 'management' I still think it's not fixing it. Imho the package management does not need fixing, it needs replacing alltogether.

Slack is an excellent distribution in the sense that it is low-fat (packages with few dependencies), no-nonsense, and allows you to 'operate' on it directly. No tons of GUIs to plough through before you get to the core. It's quite bare-bones and I like that. Compared to Slack Arch's packages are quite bulky.

Arch imho is a lot more elegant than Slack though. Leaner package management, more thought-out separation between services/daemons and regular programs when it comes to configuration, more streamlined and centralised configuration, and of course AUR.

Last edited by B (2008-12-11 03:02:29)

sokuban · 2008-12-11 16:10:22

They made a new version right after I installed it. >_< I guess I'll try to upgrade on the weekend soon.

But if slapt-get isn't reccomended, how exactly are we supposed to upgrade our system? Is there some news site that tells you of all the upgraded packages and then you manually download each one and use pkgtools to upgrade it? Wouldn't this take forever? You'd also have to be careful to upgrade certain packages first because of dependancy issues etc. (And I have no clue where one gets this dependancy information, becuase the main site doesn't have it.)

I'm sure there has got to be an easier way to inform the user of updates etc that I am missing.

Last edited by sokuban (2008-12-11 16:11:46)

string · 2008-12-11 16:27:22

sokuban: If you plan to use Slackware I recommend you become really good friends with these: http://slackware.com/changelog/ . Alas: I believe you should be able to find upgrade instructions, but if you've not made any major modifications to your system as of yet -- go for a new install.

Indeed, Slackware 12.2 was released. I normally don't visit slashdot but I thought: what the heck. I was curious to see if this Slackware release made the linux-related page -- it did. Also took some minutes to skim through the comments, seems like the general opinion is clear: Slackware is slowly but surely comming to a halt. (Digg - another website I don't usually visit - or rather, its users, seem to not care about Slackware that much - was to be expected)

Regrettable.

ArchArael · 2008-12-11 17:17:01

string wrote:

seems like the general opinion is clear: Slackware is slowly but surely comming to a halt.
Regrettable.

I don't like that perspective that much but it's hard to ignore the competitors in the gnu/linux panorama. Slackware is not a distro for masses and that's ok. But the package managers are really stable nowadays, no more dependency hells, and this makes the Slackware's package manager a waste of time IMHO. As you pointed in one of your previous posts:

string wrote:

The hassle for me was keeping manually-created packages + their dependenices up-to-date.

That's an huge disadvantage for Slackware.
Actually I must admit, this is what made me change distro.
There are many non official repositories but you cannot be sure about the package quality like in the official repositories.

It's hard to tell if Slackware will survive or not. I hope so much it will survive. Patrick Volkerding is a smart guy and he loves his job.

I don't think he will let Slackware die easily.

Last edited by ArchArael (2008-12-11 18:33:21)

anrxc · 2008-12-11 17:31:31

sokuban wrote:

But if slapt-get isn't reccomended, how exactly are we supposed to upgrade our system?

The UPGRADE.txt file is distributed with every release, you will find everything you need to know in there.
If you want to go third-party, I don't know about slapt-get but swaret does automated updates for years, supporting both official and user repos (Linuxpackages, Slacky).

Last edited by anrxc (2008-12-11 17:34:20)

Aprz · 2008-12-11 17:54:50

I've never used Slackware, but has anybody attempted to compile pacman on Slackware?

http://www.archlinux.org/pacman/

Bring one of the greatest quality of Archlinux into Slackware to have both a good distribution and a great package manager (notice that I didn't say "great" distribution, leave a lil' room for Archlinux, hehe - no love lost I hope). If pacman doesn't work on Slack, I was under the impression that the folks in pacman-dev goal was to make pacman portable and workable under most, if not all, distros.

Personally, I am really minimal so the things I tend to use do not have much dependencies if they do have any, and I regularly check the official websites/keep copies of my own. It's a great way to keep my programming skills active/fresh (I know a lot of programmers who have lost their ability to program, think, and keep to date with things because they do not program on a regular bases), it keeps me active in the Linux community, and I prefer to not be one of those folks who say "Oh, I study this and that", but say "I helped develop this and that" instead. So it sounds like Slackware wouldn't be an issue for me and I may give it a try. I don't think it could compare to (B)LFS as in "knowing your system" though.

string · 2008-12-11 18:10:29

Once you get to have your own projects you tend to want to be left to do what you like best: program. One day you might find that you're writing code and you need access to some utility (which is not present on your system) for just a bit (maybe you need some sort of unzip or unrar or somesuch -- just to use Once and then possibly remove it) -- think about having to interrupt your programming process so that you can: fetch the source, solve dependencies, make packages.. An unobtrusive system such as Arch Linux is perfect from this point of view.

Last edited by string (2008-12-11 18:11:17)

dhave · 2008-12-11 18:12:41

xaiviax wrote:

Gullible Jones wrote:
This is sadly compounded by the fact that most Slackware-based distros out there are either dead or suck... Hopefully, though, Arch and its descendents will continue Slackware's philosophy of simplicity and elegance.
Zenwalk seems to be going strong, and well liked by many.

Vector Linux and Absolute Linux are also two nice Slackware derivatives that are kept up to date and have pretty loyal users, I believe.

dhave · 2008-12-11 18:18:59

I can imagine that if I were maintaining a bunch of servers and weren't interested in always updating my system, but rather keeping things stable, I would perhaps go with Slackware. What I remember most about Slackware is how transparent things are -- in other words, the inner workings are there to see and do with what you please. Slack's not the only distro that has this philosophy, but it was the first and most prominent. There's a large, loyal, very competent user base, and I found them friendly, helpful and patient during my 2-3 years of using Slack.

Also, the Slackware changelog is a treasure trove of info about system stability and security. Most all updates are well documented, with details of testing and reasons for decision regarding moving ahead or staying the course with a particular version.

For desktop use and for people who like to keep really current as far as software goes, Arch provides the best of both worlds -- you can tweak to your heart's content, and still have smooth package management, frequent updates, etc.

sokuban · 2008-12-11 20:10:13

My post was a little vague, sorry about that. I am aware about how to upgrade from releases (etc 12.1 to 12.2, though I'm still probbably going to install again because it will be a cleaner process) but I do not know how to upgrade packages individually. (I'm going to assume that slackware has security updates and such, becuase when I first ran "slapt-get --update && slapt-get --upgrade", there were about 30 or so packages to be upgraded.)

So people look at the changelogs everyday and then go on ftp to download the updated packages and manually install them? Phew that would be... time consuming. (I'm still missing something aren't I? People don't actually do this right?) I mean, what if you miss the changelogs for a couple of months? You could spend a day upgrading packages.

Well now that I think about it if they only do security updates, there won't be any dependancy worries. My mistake. I'm too used to a rolling release. But people following --current would have problems. Or do the --current changelogs tell you the order to install stuff? (I guess they do)

Last edited by sokuban (2008-12-11 20:19:50)

Arch Linux

#1 2008-12-10 10:11:06

Slackware

#2 2008-12-10 10:28:25

Re: Slackware

#3 2008-12-10 10:49:45

Re: Slackware

#4 2008-12-10 11:19:00

Re: Slackware

#5 2008-12-10 13:08:42

Re: Slackware

#6 2008-12-10 15:09:58

Re: Slackware

#7 2008-12-10 16:02:24

Re: Slackware

#8 2008-12-10 16:58:34

Re: Slackware

#9 2008-12-10 18:17:33

Re: Slackware

#10 2008-12-11 00:07:47

Re: Slackware

#11 2008-12-11 00:55:28

Re: Slackware

#12 2008-12-11 01:27:00

Re: Slackware

#13 2008-12-11 01:46:11

Re: Slackware

#14 2008-12-11 01:51:49

Re: Slackware

#15 2008-12-11 02:38:48

Re: Slackware

#16 2008-12-11 03:01:12

Re: Slackware

#17 2008-12-11 16:10:22

Re: Slackware

#18 2008-12-11 16:27:22

Re: Slackware

#19 2008-12-11 17:17:01

Re: Slackware

#20 2008-12-11 17:31:31

Re: Slackware

#21 2008-12-11 17:54:50

Re: Slackware

#22 2008-12-11 18:10:29

Re: Slackware

#23 2008-12-11 18:12:41

Re: Slackware

#24 2008-12-11 18:18:59

Re: Slackware

#25 2008-12-11 20:10:13

Re: Slackware

Board footer