Which Linux distro will keep original Unix tradition (X11, SysV,...) ?
 

Hello,

This thread is quite simple. Linux has nicely evolved, and visibly many things are changing. It is likely that some code will no longer work in future. X11 will not be in future, so, all those work on WMs will be wasted.

Anyhow, this is how free sofware get more "modern".

Which Linux distro will always keep the original Unix tradition (X11, gcc, libx11-dev, xmotif (or gtk2.0), Alsa, SysV,...)?

Best regards

My guess is that Slackware will hold out the longest.

Slackware of course

I can't disagree with the above posters.

AntiX - http://antix.mepis.org/index.php?title=Main_Page

Slackware will go to Wayland as well. SystemD soon or later.

Linux is completely doomed by programmers/testers, that make the rules, without concerning fun and research on X11.

Is there any distro that will not go to wayland?

GENTOO?

exactly.
after all it's them that write the code and create the applications - and not the forever-ranting "yesterday was better than today" fanbois.

don't get me wrong, i, too have an opinion, but i know that i don't have the coding prowess to do sth about it (or only at a very, very humble level).

but, fortunately gnu/linux has always been about choice and configurability, and i don't see that going away.

Distros that are Unix-like and derivatives. Some or all may change over time. As Jimi Hendrix said, "who knows!"

The BSDs tend to follow the Unix tradition much better than Linux. However, even Unix changed over time. SystemV was at one time a new thing, there was no init.d and there were only the rc#.d directories. There weren't any package managers, and everything was built by hand. Not only that, there weren't these combined packages like Coreutils and Util-Linux.

Tradition is good. Stagnation is not... If some of the current "new thing" projects end up creating more trouble than they are worth, people will gravitate away and someone will make something better. Until then, it's a game of wait and see. One thing is for certain though: complaining about this project or that project won't make people stop using it nor will it make those projects go away.

How do you figure? They will continue, if nothing else, to run in Wayland's X support layer. You may doubt that this is feasible, but grandfathering legacy technology is common in the POSIX world. Look at Qt3 still running on KDE5, or GTK 1 apps still running.

@ondohohehehehe... yesterday was a beast.
It's actually an engineering problem, you don't have to write the code, you just have to get the right software stack under the code you want. If you can figure that out, you actually do get a choice, if you don't figure it out you become a hostage of whoever is sitting upstream.
Just like windows.
Also, coding isn't nearly as hard as it looks. If you can write a functional script in bash, you posses 70% (roughly) of what you need to know. You understand logic and flow control, the rest is primarily syntax and data structures (and libraries.. based on which language you're coding in their called modules/gems/libraries etc. You just have to read the directions for each one you want to use and tinker with it until it does what you expect, it's kinda fun).
Then why did you just call me a fanboi because I'm exercising a choice? You celebrate choice but don't seem to be able to tolerate people who make one. Th'e man who talks glowingly and endlessly about "Freedom" is often the man who has none and resents yours...
Or at least that has been my experience.
@PatrickThe code will still work if you know what it's requirements and dependencies are. Additionally, building things for your window manager should be portable assuming wayland (btw, wayland is a display manager, not a window manager) can render QT/GTK widgets, so no worries, eh? Good news all around.
One question though.... why do you think the Gnu compiler collection is going way? Is their a better way to compile object oriented C ?

Crux will probably stay with the old technology. It still uses LILO to boot! The init is BSD because it's simpler and faster than Sysv. The officially supported desktop is openbox. You can have other desktops, even gnome and kde if you want them, but only from unofficial repositories.

The Crux USP is simplicity, making for speed. I doubt if it will ever accommodate itself to systemd or even GRUB.

All of which is negated by newcons in FreeBSD 11. That vga/kms console is so slow, especially if booted from an EFI platform, that I have to wonder if they didn't deliberately put a sleep(0.2) between printf()'s. :D