Should slackware get modernized for today's computers?

Greetings,

This is my first poll on this forum.

I am a big fan of slackware and Arch. And, I believe it's time for slackware to get modernized. Packages are either optimize for i386 and i486. It's time to get i686 optimized for better performance.

Secondly, it's time for slackware to start doing package dependency handling. I don't mind handling the dependencies myself, but there are times when it gets to much when those dependencies requires their own dependencies to be resolved.

C'mon, It's 2011 and not the nineties. I don't believe there are that many people using i386 and i486 desktops and/or laptops.

In summary, slackware is a great distro and can do even better if optimized like the i686 distros.

It's time for slackware to get modernized.

You'll probably guessed my vote is yes and it is.

- later

Slackware has been modernized in form of some really good and close derivatives like Salix.
(I don't use Slackware full time but I use Salix occasionally.)

My 2 cents.

Regards.
Prince.

Originally Posted by Frank111 Secondly, it's time for slackware to start doing package dependency handling. I don't mind handling the dependencies myself, but there are times when it gets to much when those dependencies requires their own dependencies to be resolved.

No it's not. Slackware users are happy with the package management as it is. I have no need for dependency resolution. Slackware comes with most of the packages I need and anything else I want, I get from SlackBuilds.org and really don't have dependency problems.

I don't think the Slackware team aren't concerned with getting new users; they're happy with the current user base and the user base is happy with the distribution as it is .

As for optimising for better performance: does it really make that much difference? Perhaps for some packages, but I suppose you can always rebuild them for your system if you want. Even though I'm using 32-bit Slackware (with most packages built for i486) on a triple core AMD Phenom CPU, there really aren't performance issues with any of the software I use (general desktop stuff, really). I doubt optimising for i686 or otherwise would make a noticeable difference (to me, at least).

The 32-bit version of Slackware (and there is a 64-bit version...) is optimized to take advantage of every feature that a modern 32-bit CPU has. The fact that it will run on an older CPU does not change this.

Originally Posted by Frank111 I am a big fan of slackware

If you're such a "big fan", why do you want to make such radical changes to it?

Originally Posted by Frank111 Packages are either optimize for i386 and i486. It's time to get i686 optimized for better performance. Secondly, it's time for slackware to start doing package dependency handling.

These points have been made and dealt with quite a few times in the Slackware forum. Do a forum search to find out what reception they got.
If you haven't already guessed, I voted NO, NO, NO!!!, but only once.

I don't use Slackware (Arch here ), but I thought I'd contribute my , since in a way, it can/does apply to Linux distros in general:

Originally Posted by dugan The 32-bit version of Slackware (and there is a 64-bit version...) is optimized to take advantage of every feature that a modern 32-bit CPU has. The fact that it will run on an older CPU does not change this.

I always thought that compiling a program for a lower/earlier-model CPU (e.g. 486, early Pentium, etc.) would limit instruction generation to only those that were available on the CPUs of that time (i.e. no MMX/SSE, etc.). I could be wrong, though. :-\

The CFLAGS used to build (most of) Slackware's 32-bit packages are:

-O2 -march=i486 -mtune=i686

That's i486-compatible, i686-optimized.

Moved: This thread is more suitable in Slackware and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

I am not a Slackware user, but this question (which seems to pop up at about 30Hz) seems analogous ot asking Debian users when Debian will stop all that silly package management.

If you want package management, Slackware may not be your best choice. If you don't want package management, maybe Debian isn't for you.

Find the features you want, then pick a distribution. It is senseless to pick a popular distribution for some arbitrary reason then start lecturing it's devotees on what's wrong with it.

I resent the suggestion that it isn't modern. But based on your personal definition of modern, I'll answer no.

sorry if I answer with a short movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s

The way you put it, no.

Originally Posted by ordinary If you want package management, Slackware may not be your best choice.

Slackware does have package management tools. Very nice ones in my opinion. Perhaps the best ones in terms of ease of creation or adjusting packages.

They only thing the native tools don't do is handle dependencies. Though if a user wants that and still wants Slackware because they enjoy other aspects of the distro, there are good third party solutions. Or they can use a derivative distro that has dependency management baked in, again there are several good ones.

I'd suggest to the original poster to take a look at Salix, which is very close to Slackware but uses slapt-get. Perhaps he should choose the x86_64 variant, since he is concerned about compilation being best optimized for the processor.

In fact, this whole poll is kinda stupid. What he wants already exists in related distros. They just aren't called Slackware.

Originally Posted by ponce sorry if I answer with a short movie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s

Funny!

I saw another good response in the related videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDr0mPuyQc

Looking around a bit more, this is also good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgI2ZQVyrBo

proper too, but I like epicness