I will vote Slackware each and every Year it serves us flawless here.

I'm still convinced I made a clever choice by using it as a server (3x upgraded flawlessly - upgraded not just updated!)

I'm generally a CentOS man when it comes to servers, but this year is a tossup between CentOS and Ubuntu.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I'm surprised more people don't bring this up. Major upgrades with no problems is normal on Slackware. I always do it. The only exception being the transition from 32 bit to 64 bit. That was explicitly documented as "not supported" though. So I was prepared and I restored my data from backups.

Updates are now easier than ever. You get on their mailing list for security updates so you know what's coming. Then you pick your favorite mirror in /etc/slackpkg/mirrors. Execute "slackpkg update" and "slackpkg upgrade-all" and you are done.

I can't say this about other distributions. They don't always upgrade or even update cleanly. I maintain 6 computers like this and it's so damn easy and infrequent I can hardly believe it! The only time I ever restart my systems is to test a new initialization script or to perform a kernel upgrade. Slackware doesn't need to be shutdown for any other reason in my experience. "Rock Solid" doesn't even convey my appreciation for its stability.

I don't actually differentiate between a desktop and a server. I run a laptop the same as a server. Slackware does this very well. I have some installs that are only colocated servers, some that are both a desktop and a server, and some that run on a laptop. But I pretty much treat them all the same.

Only Slackware can run a Database and Webserver, run my desktop that I don't even bother to ever shutdown, and still go into suspend/resume countless times with nothing more than a network restart required to pick up the new IP on the laptop, as I carry it between work and home.

No other distro does all that. None. It is truly amazing.

meetscot?

You surely mean "Slackware solid" :^) ?

I compare this to how VCR where used:
1. get's put
2. Get's plugged
3. Get's used for Years "as is"
4. Once worn down of flawless use, hits the attic

Update firmware? "unknown word" back then

This is how I perceive Slackware deployed in the field.

I would not say that Slackware and Debian are unstable, and I don't think that is what Oracle is implying.

While I do not know what the parameters were surrounding Oracle's decisions on what distros to support, I would imagine it centered somewhat on what was being used in enterprise level environments. This is the list of supported operating systems for their latest database:

2.3.1 Operating System Requirements

The following or later versions of the operating systems are required for Oracle Database 11g Release 2 (11.2):

On Linux x86:

Asianux 2 Update 7

Asianux 3

Oracle Enterprise Linux 4 Update 7

Oracle Enterprise Linux 5 Update 2

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Update 7

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Update 2

SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10 SP2

SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11

On Linux x86-64

Asianux 2

Asianux 3

Oracle Enterprise Linux 4 Update 7

Oracle Enterprise Linux 5 Update 2

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Update 7

Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Update 2

SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 10 SP2

SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11

There are three operating systems, and possibly two, as I don't know whether Asianux is a derivative of RHEL or SUSE or not.

If you want Oracle support to help you when you call them for a problem with a 11gR2 database instance, you need to be running one of the above operating systems. Otherwise they will politely inform you that they do not support other operating systems, and cannot help you. I'm sure that 11gR2 would run perfectly well on other operating systems, but for the amount of money it cost to utilize Oracle products, I'd play by their rules. Running Oracle products without the possibility of support isn't a good idea.

The operating systems I use typically are dictated by what sort of application/server is going to be used on it, and whether it is supported. Well, that is at work. At home I don't really care that much. It's possible to beat just about anything into submission. Slackware comes up often for me, as I've been using it for a long time. It isn't often I have a requirement for an actual server. I can typically just fire up whatever I need on a workstation/laptop.

Too funny. Well put. I wasn't thinking of Rock Linux.

As for the replies regarding Oracle:
I would also add that Oracle can be run on Slackware and other Linux distros. You just have to fake out its installer. The installer is not very sophisticated and I've never had a problem doing this. But like devwatchdog is suggesting: why do this if you are already going to pay for something? Use what will get you their support. After all, you are paying for it!

How about runnig a RHEL in a VM on a Slackware server?

This way one can reproduce the problem on the supported platform and still have it run production wise on a "contained" OS (eg. Slackware)

Slackware is great.
I still use it on a portable.
Been using it since before there was a RED HAT!
This machine is a CentOS-5.4. My mail server is same.
My software backup server is CentOS-.4 with four SATA 750Gb RAID-10 with one spare Luks encrypted dual processor 4GB ram.
We do 15 minute rsyncs from several machines.
Using compression and rsync is a bit processor intensive.
Mother boards and SATA are cheap so that is why we use it as a backup.
At night we do a full backup to a usb hd that is off site every day/night.
The drive is exchanged daily.
Actually we use four USB drives. Two are backed up each night while two are off site. Two because two people in different areas and methods of transportation take one bring one in and return home each day.
All are locked down with LUKS.
We also use use IPCop firewalling, a CentOS based iptables firewall.
Using a few dozen Linksys wireless routers with OpenWRT and a mesh software for a mesh wireless network.
All data on the wireless is encrypted.
My personal machines at home are CentOS 5.4 for desktop, webserver, SMTP and my backup server is again a RAID 10 with spare.
Each night one of the USB work backup drives is syncked to my machine.
No my backup server is not on the internet.
Don't plan for it to be.
MicroSnot security is an Oxymoron
Linux is UNIX on Steriods
MicroSnot is UNIX on LSD

Don't mean to be rude but no I do not give out our configurations.
Good luck, be secure!

[snip lots of blah, blah, blah...]
Linux may be great for lots of things but doesn't even come close to being "UNIX on Steriods".

But hey, don't let me stop you from dreaming...

this obviously explains why unix went from top dog to bargain basement, and linux went from unheard of to 3rd most popular

Uhmm... nope, not even close to explaining, and your response goes further towards illuminating your lack of large enterprise sysadmin/engineering experience than any indictment of big iron commercial unices inferior feature sets.

The popularity of Linux has everything to do with low cost and the proliferation of low cost white box i386, and in more recent years, x86 based servers. Which isn't a bad thing. But let's tell it like it is, AIX, HP-UX and Solaris do things that Linux (and the FOSS *BSD's) can only dream of. At least at this juncture. As time goes on I see that gap continuing to narrow. But they're not the holy grail. Yet.

Debian Lenny