LinuxQuestions.org
View the Most Wanted LQ Wiki articles.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 04-14-2013, 02:01 AM   #46
TL_CLD
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2006
Posts: 342

Rep: Reputation: 34

1. Agree.
2. Agree.
3. Agree.

Stable 14.1 > "unstable" 1.50.

I would though like if some of new shinys could be found in extra/
 
Old 04-14-2013, 04:43 AM   #47
rg3
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Distribution: Slackware Linux
Posts: 507

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL View Post
For me, the 1.14.0 XServer, 3.8 kernel and nvidia 310.44 blob have been working together better than they have in a good while. Do what you feel you have to, but I'll be keeping a copy of the current versions for my own use as I'm loath to go back when it's all working this well.

if you do decide to revert them and you can spare the space, perhaps you could drop the current versions into testing/ to give folks the option?

I have no preference on gcc. Either is good for me.
Hey, glad I don't need to type this whole thing myself. Seconded.
 
Old 04-14-2013, 05:23 AM   #48
BroX
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Sweden
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 745

Rep: Reputation: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
1. I would be fine with kernel 3.4, after all we are Slackers and if one needs a newer kernel it shouldn't be a problem to just compile a new one.
2. Not enough knowledge to comment on this one.
3. I would appreciate the step back to 1.13, I am a gamer and (sadly, should have known better) owner of AMD video hardware. The step to the older version would mean that I can use the proprietary driver again.
+1

I'm not a gamer but recently started this TF2 malarky...
 
Old 04-14-2013, 08:20 AM   #49
mudherm
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: BC, Canada.
Distribution: Slackware64 - current
Posts: 20
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 0
I'm getting a bit confused here. I run -current and understand that its effectively a beta test for the next release. If this is true then there's no real option but than to go back to whatever the next stable release will look like. I guess this would be 14.1 in the making.

I would be disappointed to go back as I have new machines that appear to be better supported by newer kernels. Optimus for example. However, I have to admit that I don't really know if moving back to 3.4 (LTS) is going to change much for me because I haven't got a clue what the difference is and I suspect that there may be a few like me who are in the same position. I use -current because I find it fun but I do have a sever that I haven't upgraded for a while because I'm concerned that I'll break it, which sounds like I would benefit from a more stable release.

Working through this - is there a possibility of having a -stable, -testing and -current release or is this just too much work?

You could rename then -stable, -sane and -insane

just a thought.
 
Old 04-14-2013, 09:22 AM   #50
tronayne
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Northeastern Michigan, where Carhartt is a Designer Label
Distribution: Slackware 32- & 64-bit Stable
Posts: 3,030

Rep: Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749
Given my propensity for adhering (as strictly as possible) to Doug McIlroy's philosophy for anything I write, and my belief that Slackware appears to do the same (and that's why I've been sticking with Slackware since, oh, I don't really remember but it did come on CD-ROM's and it was in the early 1990's sometime), I hope that the opinions offered here don't tread too heavily on anybody's toes... but here goes anyway for what it's worth.
  1. A lot of the problems I see in the Slackware forum at LinuxQuestions.org (LQ) seem to be with proprietary video drivers. Just seems to be a lot of 'em. I purposely do not order machines that have those cards -- gimme the stock Intel graphics and I'm a happy camper, don't play games, don't give a hoot about fancy-schmancy 3-D video or any of the rest of that stuff. Obviously, it's important that AMD, nVidia and who-know-what-else are supported and it's important that the kernel incorporate support; but, the 3.4 kernel seems to be stable and the 3.8 kernel is a little (well, maybe more than a little) glitchy, so, leave well enough alone for now? Don't know how else to say that.
  2. For the life of me I cannot understand why folks have to screw with software until they break it -- especially a compiler. Sheesh. GNU's fiddling and twiddling just looks to me like somebody needs to get a real job and I'm sorely tempted to buy the Intel compiler and see how that will work (from what I hear here and there seems to be pretty solid). I have nothing whatsoever against improvements in technology, faster, better, easier is a good thing -- but I do wait for technology to settle down before I jump in (lessons learned during a wasted youth, mostly). The first Unix system I owned ran on a Motorola 68K processor with 1M (yes, MEG) of RAM and a 50M (ditto) disk drive; we've come a long way, baby. Full-blown System 3. Thing still works (and I can heat a couple of rooms with it). It just seems like we get further away from the Standard Library -- adding extensions is a horror that will always come back and byte you in the butt -- we start stumbling over our own feet. I will always -- always! -- vote for stable and reliable.
  3. Xorg-server? Like you, I'm not using any proprietary drivers; I had to go look up RandR at Wikipedia: "The X Resize, Rotate and Reflect Extension (RandR)[2] is an X Window System extension, which allows clients to dynamically change X screens, so as to resize, rotate and reflect the root window of a screen." Oh.
I've been doing this for... well, too damn long. Starting in 1961 with IBM punch-card stuff, on and off through Honeywell mainframes, Z-80 microcomputers running Digital Research and Cromemco DOS, System 3, System V, Sun Solaris and, finally, Slackware. There were a couple of Microsoft things in there (couldn't help it, got paid to do it), taught a Unix course, got Slackware somewhere in there and haven't looked back (or gone astray for very long, either). My data base servers sit in a closet mumbling to themselves for months (the record is a 12.1 box that ran for 13 months before the power went off one day); I keep everything up-to-date with patches and stuff just works. Those data base servers, Dell Dimension 8400's, came with Radeon cards (royal pain in the ass, long since disabled), run headless via ssh, one runs MySQL the other runs PostgreSQL and they just keep, you know, doing their respective thing and not bothering me.

Slackware works. Slackware is stable and reliable. I vote for that and let the hairy edge wait a while.

Hope this helps some.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-14-2013, 09:37 AM   #51
comet.berkeley
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware current
Posts: 148

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
  1. Greg Kroah-Hartman supports the 3.0 and 3.4 long term kernels.
    He says that he will stop support of 3.8 when 3.9.0 is released.
    So the only real choice for a "long term" kernel is 3.4 or wait for 3.9.0 whenever that might be.

    But will he then support 3.9 long term too?

    http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/3.8-i...rm_stable.html

    I'm running 3.8.7 on my machine with no problems.

  2. 3.8 might be a bit "ripe". Grub 2.00 would not compile until passing --disable-werror to ./configure

    But is werror uncovering bugs in the code that should be fixed?

    Fixing new code is probably a good idea, but nobody wants to fix/support old code...

  3. No opinion, no problems.

Last edited by comet.berkeley; 04-14-2013 at 09:41 AM. Reason: spacing
 
Old 04-14-2013, 02:55 PM   #52
Didier Spaier
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slackware{,64}-{14.1,current} on a Lenovo Thinkpad T61 6457-4XG
Posts: 4,149

Rep: Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008
1. If 3.9 is released soon enough and is tagged LTS, include it, else include 3.4. But in the latter case, maybe propose in /patches the next LTS kernel when it will be released, possibly in addition to configs files in /testing?
 
Old 04-14-2013, 03:02 PM   #53
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,497
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017Reputation: 4017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
1. If 3.9 is released soon enough and is tagged LTS, include it, else include 3.4. But in the latter case, maybe propose in /patches the next LTS kernel when it will be released, possibly in addition to configs files in /testing?
I would rather like to see the next LTS kernel in /extra instead of patches, putting in in /patches would mean that it is an official kernel update, which usually does not happen Slackware (and shouldn't happen in a "stable" 14.1 release).
 
Old 04-14-2013, 03:48 PM   #54
the_penguinator
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Distribution: slackware -current, OpenBSD, OSX
Posts: 161

Rep: Reputation: 20
I'm just an inspired amateur who runs -current on a bunch of old laptops for the kids in my class. Surprisingly huge-3.8.4 has run flawlessly on Compaq N600C's, Dell D600's, Dell C840's, IBM R51's and huge-smp3.8.4 has been a hit on Dell D610's and a Compaq V5000 so I haven't had any issues in that respect, but this is your toy, so if you want to rollback to 3.4, then so be it.

Thanks for all your work, Pat.
 
Old 04-14-2013, 03:52 PM   #55
Didier Spaier
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slackware{,64}-{14.1,current} on a Lenovo Thinkpad T61 6457-4XG
Posts: 4,149

Rep: Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008Reputation: 1008
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
I would rather like to see the next LTS kernel in /extra instead of patches, putting in in /patches would mean that it is an official kernel update, which usually does not happen Slackware (and shouldn't happen in a "stable" 14.1 release).
I disagree as IIRC /extra's content is "frozen" in a -stable release.

And I already see some upgrades in the Stable ChangeLog for my architecture: tagged "Upgraded", but not (*Security Fix*) and with no explicit indication of a bug correction.

Only caveat would be for people blindly running "slackpkg update && slackpkg upgrade-all", but we are supposed to look at the ChangeLog before upgrading, and kernel upgrades with slackpkg can be blacklisted.

Only MHO, of course
 
Old 04-14-2013, 10:06 PM   #56
Erik_FL
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Boynton Beach, FL
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 797

Rep: Reputation: 247Reputation: 247Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by tronayne View Post
For the life of me I cannot understand why folks have to screw with software until they break it -- especially a compiler. Sheesh. GNU's fiddling and twiddling just looks to me like somebody needs to get a real job and I'm sorely tempted to buy the Intel compiler and see how that will work (from what I hear here and there seems to be pretty solid).
You will probably find that you can't use the Intel compiler. Some of the "fiddling and twiddling" is to add extensions to the ANSI C language. Source for some Linux software requires those extensions to the C language. Hopefully Linus has resisted the temptation to use non-ANSI language extensions in the kernel and discouraged that for other people doing kernel development.

One that has bitten me a few times is the "?" operator. Syntax like this is not ANSI C compatible.

Code:
x = y ? : z;
The GNU compiler accepts the above syntax and it is equivalent to this in ANSI C.

Code:
x = y ? y : z;
I am always leery of language extensions designed to save typing. They generally give up error detection in favor of convenience. What if the programmer just forgot to type in the variable name that they really wanted to use and didn't want "y"?

I also notice that a lot of C programs are really C++ in disguise. The programs are intended to be C but will only compile using C++ because they have C++ syntax in some places. Compiler developers should resist the urge to "fix" C compilers to allow using C++ syntax.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-15-2013, 02:15 AM   #57
ruario
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Location: Oslo, Norway
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,811

Rep: Reputation: 816Reputation: 816Reputation: 816Reputation: 816Reputation: 816Reputation: 816Reputation: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrinceCruise View Post
At risk of being the odd one out, I'd rather opt waiting for another good long time for a super stable Slackware 15.0.
Two things:
  • There are still many nice improvements in what is being lined up as 14.1. Many could benefit from these now, rather than waiting for 15 at some significantly later date.
  • New releases are a revenue stream for our BDFL, so waiting too long could punish him financially.

As long as the quality is good (and you can see by his thought process that this is exactly what he intends), I see no problem with having smaller but more frequent updates, like the proposed 14.1. So yeah, I am in favour of making the proposed changes.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-15-2013, 03:04 AM   #58
astrogeek
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2008
Distribution: Slackware: 12.1, 13.1, 14.1, 64-14.1, -current, FreeBSD-10
Posts: 1,738

Rep: Reputation: 596Reputation: 596Reputation: 596Reputation: 596Reputation: 596Reputation: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario View Post
There are still many nice improvements in what is being lined up as 14.1. Many could benefit from these now, rather than waiting for 15 at some significantly later date.
Besides, a solid Slackware 14.1 Post-Apocalypse Edition would do much to reassure those of us who still remain undecided as to whether the Mayans were indeed right! It would be a clear sign of continuity and stability as the new cycle begins, whereas waiting for a later 15.0 release might cause some to lose their faith!

Last edited by astrogeek; 04-15-2013 at 03:05 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-15-2013, 03:46 AM   #59
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
1. If 3.9 is released soon enough and is tagged LTS, include it, else include 3.4. But in the latter case, maybe propose in /patches the next LTS kernel when it will be released, possibly in addition to configs files in /testing?
It's not even released yet. I'm not sure when the next version of Slackware is due to be released, but there may not be enough time and testing. 3.4 has had much more testing and is a better choice. Users can compile newer kernels if they feel they need them.
 
Old 04-15-2013, 05:15 AM   #60
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,160

Rep: Reputation: 525Reputation: 525Reputation: 525Reputation: 525Reputation: 525Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario View Post
  • There are still many nice improvements in what is being lined up as 14.1. Many could benefit from these now, rather than waiting for 15 at some significantly later date.
  • New releases are a revenue stream for our BDFL, so waiting too long could punish him financially.
Agreed. I am very much in favour of the improvements as laid out by PV. Slackware is legendary for being a robust, secure, and stable distribution. I am looking forward to Slackware 14.1! If you have not done so I encourage you to consider signing up for a Slackware subscription. A subscription is a way to support PV and ensure that Slackware continues its tradition of excellence.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
  


Reply


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 Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
modversions.h and my sanity! stcinifeic Mandriva 1 05-28-2004 05:12 PM
samba sanity skywaterhulk Linux - Software 0 04-22-2004 08:13 PM
Question of sanity ch4s3r Linux - Newbie 3 02-29-2004 07:22 PM
I guess a simple backtracking problem spank Programming 15 08-27-2003 11:21 AM
in the name of a musicians sanity! leprechaun Linux - Newbie 3 02-17-2002 01:34 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:50 AM.

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