LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Bluewhite64
User Name
Password
Bluewhite64 This forum is for the discussion of Bluewhite64 Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-13-2008, 01:28 PM   #1
lumak
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Location: Phoenix
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 799
Blog Entries: 32

Rep: Reputation: 109Reputation: 109
BlueWhite64 stigma


What is the 'moral' stigma that I see referenced with regard to BlueWhite64 on slackware forums? I've never seen it explained. And as far as i can tell, it clearly states on the website it is a slackware port designed to meet the slackware porting standards.

After messing around with slamd64 and the multi-lib distribution, it seems to me that a pure 64 slackware would be the better option... but... it's not worth it if slackware (or creators) has been offended in some way.
 
Old 11-13-2008, 01:53 PM   #2
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Lubuntu
Posts: 19,174
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428
I suspect it's because the distro is seen as taking from the source without giving back or doing something new. My view, in this case, is that Pat hasn't released an official 64bit version so the field is wide open - if someone porting Slack to 64bit gets more people using it then all power to them. Potentially, further down the line, Pat will want to go 64 bit or release a 32 and 64 bit distro in parallel, in which case I would hope that BW either steps away or offers to work with him.
 
Old 11-14-2008, 05:08 PM   #3
Kenjiro_Tanaka
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: 0
I don't think so

Xavier, wouldn't it be better if Patrick would have accepted Fred (Slamd64) and Arny's (Bluewhite64) help to start making a 64bit version of slackware YEARS ago? As far as I remember BW64 is around since 2006.

I don't see it as a "nice route" to just "step away" WHEN slackware-64 (or whatever it will be called) shows up.
 
Old 11-24-2008, 05:46 PM   #4
kr4ey
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Slackware64 14.0
Posts: 58

Rep: Reputation: 17
How many Slackware based distros are there? Debian based? Fedora based?
How many give back? Probably very very little.

And everybody seems totally ticked off about this post.

http://slackadelic.com/2006/09/22/i-...ke-it-anymore/

Slamd64 also took from Slackware, or is it an illusion.


If Pat will ever release a 64 bit Slackware I hope Bluewhite64 is not the only one that steps aside. Slamd64 should too (they are no different). It would be very unfair for only one to step aside, and not both.
After using both for a long time I feel Bluewhite64 is much easier to work with and way more up to date.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 10:12 AM   #5
kenjiro
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Brazil
Distribution: Slackware Linux
Posts: 16

Rep: Reputation: 1
I ask again: why they should step aside?

They (slamd64 and bluewhite64) have been around since 2006 (perhaps earlier). So, about that time, did Patrick had plans to release a 64bit (x86_64) port/version of slackware? I don't think so, otherwise we would have it already, right?

I don't see it as fair to just hope those who spent loads of time (and money too) on maintaining their ports/forks to "step aside". Remember, they were not "stealing" a space from Slackware. No, they were not (and still aren't) competing with slackware on the x86_64 front. They began by filling a "blank space" slackware was not up to fill. Yes, slamd64 and bluewhite64 compete between then (I am disregarding other 64bit distros on porpuse). When slack64 comes to life... then it will be competing with them, not the other way around. And remember, Slamd64 or BW64 aren't trying to compete with slackware on the 32bit front.

So, slackware is nice and dandy on its natural environment (intel/amd 32bits).

Would you guys expect those porting slackware to other architectures to "step aside" if patrick decide to go for those other archs (i.e. Slackintosh)?

That's not wise, IMHO.

I really don't know about other forks (I do see as forks those who are based on Slackware and "work" on the same architecture). But I think Slamd64 and BW64 wouldn't be able to contribute to slackware, since so far it has only aimed for intel/amd 32bit. Then I ask: would patrick accept help/contribution from Fred (slamd64) or arny (BW64) when he starts working on slack64 (if he hasn't already)?

As far as I know, when arny began his project on the x86_64 front, he contacted Patrick to see if he would accept that, bla bla bla (and I guess Fred did quite the same). Why hasn't Patrick asked them for help on the 64bit architecture then? In my opinion, that's because Patrick most likely thought 64bit PC were not worth spending energy by then. But now that they are getting more share (more people buying them), then Slack aims for it... and some people think those who have spent many hours of work and some good ammount of money working on something Patrick didn't want to work with... SHOULD STEP ASIDE?

Last time I checked we were living on Earth, not on the land of the Magic of Oz, so people, stop fantasizing.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 10:25 AM   #6
SqdnGuns
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Location: Fountain Valley, CA / Thailand
Distribution: Slackware64 14.0
Posts: 981

Rep: Reputation: 88
64bit Relevant?

I see 64bit OS as a waste unless you are running a server. Maybe they will become relevant for a desktop OS when all apps are 64bit as well.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 10:46 AM   #7
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by SqdnGuns View Post
I see 64bit OS as a waste unless you are running a server. Maybe they will become relevant for a desktop OS when all apps are 64bit as well.
Do not have install it yet but runs the LIVE CD and as CD it is fast if I compare it with my other LIVE CD's
 
Old 11-25-2008, 12:23 PM   #8
mostlyharmless
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Distribution: Slackware -current (multilib) with kernel 3.15.5
Posts: 1,500
Blog Entries: 12

Rep: Reputation: 155Reputation: 155
Quote:
How many Slackware based distros are there? Debian based? Fedora based?
How many give back? Probably very very little.
Probably not a relevant comparison; from what I understand, and I could be totally wrong, in which I'll eat humble pie with crow, but Debian, Fedora and so forth have a life of their own and their own development independent of their origin, whereas the development of slamd64 and BW64 are tied to porting over each version of the active Slackware; hence the term "parasitic". But please let's not have yet another "parasitic distro thread"; I'm not trying to even go there. Or maybe we should put them together in a All New Parasitic Mega Thread.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 01:35 PM   #9
kr4ey
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Slackware64 14.0
Posts: 58

Rep: Reputation: 17
They should not step aside. I'm all for Bluewhite64 and Slamd64 hanging around. Andy and Fred have done excellent work on there releases. But it seems like not everyone agrees, and I hate to put you on the spot XavierP but why do you want Bluewhite64 to step aside? Why not Slamd64 too? Your the one that brought it up.
I'm not trying to bring up a parasitic distro thread here. Just some people have deep rooted stigma against Bluewhite64. And I see Slamd64 as being no different.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 01:57 PM   #10
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Lubuntu
Posts: 19,174
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428
I brought up BW64 and not Slamd64 because I had completely forgotten about Slamd64. I don't have a 64 bit PC or distro so have no axe to grind over any of them. Should Pat go 64bit it is possible, likely even, that Slackers will want to switch back. At which point you will have 3 distros offering the same thing - if Slackware wins the 64 bit battle there would be little point in having 3 distros doing the same thing and I would hope that the "losers" (an emotive word and possibly not the right one) would offer their help with the "winning" distro.

Of course, Pat may never go 64bit in which case no harm no foul. But if he does it is his distro and I doubt he would want to give up the field that he has spent so long preparing.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 04:46 PM   #11
kenjiro
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Brazil
Distribution: Slackware Linux
Posts: 16

Rep: Reputation: 1
OK XavierP, WHEN patrick admits they are working on a slack64 (rworkman doesn't admit that)... why not trying to contact arny and/or Fred about their achievements? Why not tryint to pull they work-force to slackware(64) instead of competing with them?

Remember, so far, in terms of a "64bit slackware" (I put it in quotes because those distros are not officialy linked to slackware) Slamd64 and BW64 got here first. Slackware is the one following (quite late I'd say). Yes, they use knowledge from what Patrick (and his contributors) have done so far on the 32bit front. But they haven't brought anything to the 64bit step.

Slamd64 works one way (with multilib, etc), BW64 works another way (pure 64bit). So I guess, just guess, the so called slack64 will have to chose one of these two approaches, right? Instead of a "step away" there could be a "welcome to the team" from slackware to bw64/slamd64, don't you think?

And about the parasitic comments? Well, they are working on different architectures and as I see, Arny and Fred try to keep their distro as "slack like" as possible. Why? Well, ask them, not me. But I would say they would like to see their distros "turn to official". OK, by what we know of Slackware's dev guys this is VERY unlikely but... oh well.

Perhaps all this discussion is a huge waste of time for all of us.

Last edited by kenjiro; 11-25-2008 at 04:51 PM.
 
Old 11-25-2008, 05:11 PM   #12
SqdnGuns
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Location: Fountain Valley, CA / Thailand
Distribution: Slackware64 14.0
Posts: 981

Rep: Reputation: 88
Someone explain to me the advantage of a standard desktop OS that is 64bit?

Is something going to load a millisecond faster?
 
Old 11-25-2008, 05:32 PM   #13
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Lubuntu
Posts: 19,174
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428Reputation: 428
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenjiro View Post
OK XavierP, WHEN patrick admits they are working on a slack64 (rworkman doesn't admit that)... why not trying to contact arny and/or Fred about their achievements? Why not tryint to pull they work-force to slackware(64) instead of competing with them?

Remember, so far, in terms of a "64bit slackware" (I put it in quotes because those distros are not officialy linked to slackware) Slamd64 and BW64 got here first. Slackware is the one following (quite late I'd say). Yes, they use knowledge from what Patrick (and his contributors) have done so far on the 32bit front. But they haven't brought anything to the 64bit step.

Slamd64 works one way (with multilib, etc), BW64 works another way (pure 64bit). So I guess, just guess, the so called slack64 will have to chose one of these two approaches, right? Instead of a "step away" there could be a "welcome to the team" from slackware to bw64/slamd64, don't you think?

And about the parasitic comments? Well, they are working on different architectures and as I see, Arny and Fred try to keep their distro as "slack like" as possible. Why? Well, ask them, not me. But I would say they would like to see their distros "turn to official". OK, by what we know of Slackware's dev guys this is VERY unlikely but... oh well.

Perhaps all this discussion is a huge waste of time for all of us.
That last line is probably the most pertinent. Look, I was offering an opinion. As a non-64bit distro user, I have no preference for any 64bit distro, let alone a version of Slackware for that platform. It really has no effect on me. This is an opinion thread and you appeared to want opinions. Personally, I like variations on distros and right now both those distros offer that - they have a niche. As time goes on and 64bit becomes the norm, distro darwinism will kick in, maybe they will survive, maybe they won't.
 
Old 11-29-2008, 02:42 AM   #14
tpreitzel
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2007
Posts: 253

Rep: Reputation: 28
Pat has already stated that if current 64 bit distributions meet his standards, he'll likely adopt portions of those distributions when he's ready to release a 64 bit version of Slackware. I fully expect Pat to respect the excellent work of his peers and ask for assistance as he sees fit. None of us in this business for any length of time, e.g. 15 years, are under 30 anymore so we should have matured a bit over the years. We'll see when the time finally arrives. When Pat finally releases his own 64 bit version of Slackware, the other 64 bit clones will have to add additional value in order to survive and the developers already know it. Personally, I appreciate arny's work on Bluewhite64, an excellent 64 bit clone of Slackware, and Pat's persistent work on Slackware for more than a decade.

Last edited by tpreitzel; 11-29-2008 at 03:13 AM.
 
Old 12-22-2008, 12:21 AM   #15
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 784

Rep: Reputation: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by SqdnGuns View Post
I see 64bit OS as a waste unless you are running a server. Maybe they will become relevant for a desktop OS when all apps are 64bit as well.
as a slacker you should d know that almost the only way of installing any
thing not included in the distro is to build it from source

now if the rest of the system is 64bit why would someone even want to build anything for 32bits on such a system

of cource all the apps will be 64bit
 
  


Reply

Tags
bluewhite64, slackware


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KDE 4.1 for Bluewhite64 12.1 arny Bluewhite64 2 08-23-2008 01:01 PM
Bluewhite64 12.1 is Released arny Bluewhite64 5 06-12-2008 12:43 PM
Bluewhite64 12.1-rc1 arny Bluewhite64 0 04-03-2008 03:08 PM
Bluewhite64 12.0 released! BW64User Slackware 14 08-17-2007 01:08 PM
Slamd64 vs BlueWhite64 drewhead Slackware 4 10-06-2006 04:31 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:19 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration