For busy slackers who don't want to build packages Salix OS has Sourcery
 

Salix OS running Slackware 14 is available. So far easy install as well as hundreds of favorite packages available for easy installation.

Slim. Fast. Ease of use. The spirit of Slackware.

BEGONE, DEMON! I cast ye OUT!

Could not resist. Should have, but didn't.

I've played with Salix. It ok, but I prefer my own customizations. All the extra stuff is nice but does hide what is happening under the hood. As for busy, I just pick software once and if it works I don't tend to upgrade unless absolutely necessary. Slackware comes with so many tools etc that I usually don't need much else.

I've played with Salix 13.37 a bit, and I must say, it's the most convincing Slackware-made-easy out there. I almost made it my distro of choice, but then I'm not a "lazy Slacker" and went for the original Slackware.

Kudos to Salix.

Geez, distro spam. Salix works fairly well but it is NOT Slackware.

It is distro spam, but I don't mind it horribly. I used to install ubuntu on friend's computers, who weren't linux savvy. Now I throw Salix on those systems. It's like slack with someone else's tweaks already bolted in. I think the choices were tasteful for what it is.

For my own system I use slack, with all my tweaks of course.

d

I don't quite agree. For total Linux newbies, Salix has a learning curve that's less steep than the mother distro. More importantly, I've learned quite some things taking a peek at their SlackBuild scripts. Unlike some other Slackware derivatives (Vector, Zenwalk, ...) Salix has a strict policy of publishing all sources.

I have played with Salix in the past, it would be a good distro who wants to eventually move on to Slackware to cut their teeth on.

I do use Salix but not for myself. I use it for less computer knowledgeable people like family and friends. I think it is a great distro, not as great as Slackware of course, but great in its own right. It's not just a rip of Slackware like some distros are, it actually does improve some things. I really like the installer for example, and the increased setup speed. I can install it faster and it is ready faster than Slackware ... perfect for family and friends. Then when they know their computer better they can switch to Slackware. I think it will help Slackware in the end.

It also has LXDE, which is the one I usually install for other people.

Salix OS is in essence Slackware tailored for simplicity and speed. Yet, Gslapt and Sourcery is there for all other applications to be installed at will.

It cannot substitute her mother, but Salix OS is a good way to start on to Slackware. The installation process is indeed very surprisingly simple and fast, yet the system is already complete for the basic use (apart from idiosyncrasies) --you can feel the comfort of not over-eating the meal.

So far, Gslapt has the ability to resolve simple dependencies; but not quite the Sourcery, you still need to consult the procedures as directed in the SlackBuild.org.

I occasionally use single Salix packages on my Slackware installations. Now that I have moved to ARM I wish Salix had more custom packages for this architecture, ideally Chromium and its dependencies.

Salix works great for me !
 

3 months ago I installed the 13.37 version, 32 bit and I am completely satisfied. Does everything I need. I'm not bold enough to try the mother Slackware installation yet I have to have the KDE desktop. I've had perfect results with the Gslapt package manager, Soucery is neat but I've had several package errors from them. I use VLC for all my multimedia needs, I use all of LibreOffice, digiKam for all my photo work. Salix did not do a good job on the automatic partitioning of my hard drive, I had to go back with PartedMagic and optimize the HD. Otherwise, a good distro, very fast even with KDE and rock steady stable. Good job Salix !

I'm looking forward to trying Salix 14 Mate Edition.

It is still NOT Slackware. Anymore that Ubuntu/Kbuntu/Funbuntu/whateverbuntu are Debian.

WRONG!

If you had said:
I would have agreed with you.

If you had said:
I would have agreed with you.

But it is clear you don't know what Salix is and what it represents. Salix makes a point that everything in it is compatible with Slackware and that compatibility goes both ways. It's not just loosely "based on Slackware" like others are. And one of the primary goals of Salix is to function as an extra binary package repository for Slackware users. This is out of respect for Slackware. It doesn't leech off Slackware. What it gives back is the largest extra binary package repository for Slackware that exists.

Ubuntu is not at all compatible with Debian, it never was and that never was a goal of ubuntu. It just borrows debian technology. There was never any guarantee that any ubuntu specific package would work on Debian. So, your comment is completely out of place.

I tried Salix some time ago. I used it on my secondary/test PC for several months. I don't have it installed anymore, but I think it's a nice distribution and does what it claims. I recommended it several times to newbies. For some, it was the first step into the Slackware world. Luckily Salix makes that transition pretty painless. But it's still Slackware enough for me to feel at home when it gets to solving problems.

Kudos to Salix team for the great job. :)

IIRK, Salix is meant to be fully backward compatible with its parent, Slackware. Therefore, Slackware users could benefit from Salix' package repositories. I've tried Salix in the past and it was quite neat.

In past, I installed Slackware and I tried using Salix repository on Slackware with slapt-get, gslapt and sourcery.
I face problem which exist in all dependency base package management system.

When I tried install packages with slapt-get, it tries to install unneccessry packages to resolve dependency.
If I want to install one package then few packages get added in required package list.
And if I want to install more packages then few more packages get added into the list.
And package management system will not allow you to install package without installing these packages.

I use slackpkg to install packages from slackware mirror.
And I use sbopkg to install packges from slackbuilds.org.
Both package management tools are very good.

sbopkg made installing and maintaining packages from slackbuild -- very very easy.
Dependency management with sbopkg is also very simple.

So I don't have any problem with slackpkg and sbopkg.

Slackware installation process is very simple and fast.

Best way to start on to Slackware is use Slackware.


Salix is based on Slackware.
Salix is backward compatible with Slackware.
But Salix is NOT completely Slackware.

Not really. I don't know of too many people whose first distro was Slackware and that stayed with it. Most people start with more popular GUI-based distros and then move to Slackware. In the past I used to recommend Zenwalk as an intermediate, but Salix is much better now.

I agree.

But, you are getting me wrong.

If someone is completely new to the Linux.
Then it is little bit difficult to start with Slackware.
I start with Debian.

"Best way to start on to Slackware is use Slackware."
It means, somebody wants to learn Slackware then use ONLY Slackware.

Well in that case it's true.

@ gapan

Not completely backwards compatible. A very minor bug. I just downloaded Oolite plus dependencies, and it runs fine but not from the menu or from the command line (unless completely specified).

I guess it just needs a link from /usr/lib64/GNUstep/Applications/oolite.app/oolite to something in the standard $PATH.

Just so that this fits in with the thread. SalixOS offers a great set of packages that work with Slackware and the dependency information is useful as well.

samac

Just a point of clarification, though not for argumentation: Can you point us where Salix NECESSARILY CEASES from being a Slackware? Why?

For through out the years of my driving either or both I can hardly distinguish SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE between the two. The hacks I made with Slackware work 100% with Salix vice versa: in short --take away Slackware and Salix ceases to exist; or boot up Salix and you are driving but Slackware (save probably if you are talking only about wallpapers and lipsticks) :)

In salix 13.37 I did not experience this on simple application software under Gslapt, but frequently under Sourcery. If you want to you may use 'sbopkg' a native fetching to SlackBuilds repository.

I decided to give Salix a try in vbox. It is a very nice distro for a new Linux user. I do prefer and use Slackware, but this is a viable alternative for people who don't want a hands-on experience.
Salix running in vbox on my Slackware-current box.

It is obvious now that you have not installed Salix OS from a liveCD. You should know the difference from this point if you are comparing with Slackware version 'all' --installation-wise Salix LiveCD is EVIDENTLY faster by less than half the time you need through installing basic Slack: (all-things-equal == same kernel == same Xfce4 DE)

Also, you should give a moment of pondering over my adjectives: 'light' and 'fast' for these attributes of Slackware are tailored ready by install under Salix. I mean: you have to tune up first your Slackware FULL installation, to run as fast as (same version and same "kernel.smp") under Salix preconfigurations. I have compared this already under the same machine. Quicker response is attained "ready" at first boot under Salix 13.37, but the same kernel of Slackware I still have to tune it up. This is one important achievement of Salix over basic Slackware. Of course, being aware, that the reason for this is the Salix philosophy.

The 'buntus are derived from Debian, Salix is derived from Slackware. Neither are their parent distoros. That was my point and if you chose to extrapolate it at tangents feel free. It doesn't change anything.

Hmm... no that's not a matter of incompatibility. It's an idiosyncracy of gnustep applications. You can't run them only by calling their name, as with any other app (unless you specifically hack it to). You run gnustep apps by running:
so in oolite's case, you should run:
and that should work. However it should also work from the menu, because that is exactly what the menu item launches. It's working fine here in both Salix and a full Slack installation + oolite installed with slapt-get from salix repos.

You're probably missing a gnustep-base dependency and openapp doesn't work.

Why do you think they were unnecessary? They are not. Otherwise they wouldn't be dependencies

That's the general idea of what should happen if that one package has dependencies on other packages that you don't have installed. Otherwise that one package wouldn't work after you have installed it.

Whatever...

What? This doesn't make any sense at all.

Nope. I have gnustep-base installed but I don't have openapp on my system. I have downloaded and installed gnustep-make-2.6.2-x86_64-2gv.txz and the problem is sorted. I guess that you should add that package to the deps list.

samac

Ah, right. Thanks for that. I somehow thought that openapp was in gnustep-base instead. Fixed!

I use Slackware, because Slackware is very simple OS.
Simple to learn.
Simple to understand
Simple to tweak.
And if some problem occur, then it is very SIMPLE to resolve the problem.

netconfig is sufficient to configure network.
slackpkg is sufficient to install new package, update packages or upgrade full system.
sbopkg is sufficient to deal with slackbuilds.

Then what is need of graphical tools to configure hostname.
Glslapt, sourcery tools for package management.

Slackware is very simple OS.
Salix team wants to add some user friendly touch to Slackware.
It is also good.

In terms of philosophy, some difference exist between Slackware and Salix.
Becase of this Salix is NOT Slackware.

NOT an argument, just discussion.

You are right,
I have not installed Salix on hard drive.
I just tried Salix Live CD.
I installed Slackware and tried to configure Salix repository on Slackware.

While installing Slackware,
it is not compulsory to choose full installation mode.
I prefer XFCE so I skiped kde directory and few packages, few sever related packages, which I don't need.

Slackware installation consist of,
prepare partition,
choose packages,
after that just extract tarballs and run package configuration script (doinst.sh).
And few postinstallation steps.
It is very simple.

Because of this,
I wrote, "Slackware installation process is very simple and fast".

Some difference exist between Slackware and Salix.
After Slackware installation some configuration is required,
On Slackware, you have to configure system as per your need.

During Slackware Installation,
I had not choosen full installation mode.

I don't how I skip CUPS package.
May be, because of I don't have printer.
After that I install slapt-get, Gslapt.
I configured Salix repository.
When I tries to install epdfview,
that time Gslapt adds CUPS as dependency for epdfview.
I download epdfview from Slackbuilds.Org,
compile it and installed.
And epdfview is running properly, without CUPS.

I know CUPS is standard package.
But this is good example.

On server system, I did minimal Slackware installtion.
Around 380 installed packages.
When I first time tried to run vim editor it fails,
because two missing liberies, libperl*, and libpython*.
I want to maintain less packages on system,
so I just copied two missing libries from another Slackware system.

On typical dependency management system.
To install vim, Perl and Python two scripting languages get added into required packages list.
And to satisfy Perl and Python dependency few more packages get added into the list.
You can't install vim without installing all these packages

On dependency-based package management system,
they breaks packages into small units,
if one package need a file which is part of another package,
then that package automatically get added into required package list.

Sometimes to help user, they add few packages as dependency,
So less commands or less no's of package name agrument is required
to do the installation.

If you don't want certain feacture which distributor provides,
you can't uninstall it, because it is hard-coded into package management system.

This is disadvantages of dependency-base package management system.
Sometimes, it become difficult to handle package conflit problem.


Lack of dependency resolution is ONE IMPORTANT FEATURE of Slackware package management system.


Confusion occur, because I used wrong word "unnecessary" to express the meaning.

I don't think that is a good idea, especially on server systems. Now you have to keep track yourself if there are any fixed vulnerabilities in those libraries and have to upgrade those libraries if so. If you would just have installed the packages then you could easily use slackpkg to upgrade the whole system.

Back on-topic: While I usually use Slackware on all my machines I maintain a few system where I didn't want to hassle with the configuration, for example the jukebox in our party room. Since this is a rather old system I just put a base install of Salix LXDE on it, installed Audacious on it and gave it access to the file server. Done, very fast, very easy.
On any system I really work with I use Slackware, but Salix is a good distro if I need a fast deployment for a special purpose.

Other than a minor typo, what is hard to understand?

The Ubuntu is derived from Debian (by extension so are KBuntu, Xbuntu etc).

Salix is derived from Slackware.

However Ubuntu is NOT Debian and Salix is NOT Slackware.

Hard to make it any clearer than that.

I agree.
It is difficult, but it is possible.
Just need to write some shell script.

It means it is possible to handle dependency by own method.

I completely agree.
Every system having its own advantages.

It's hard to understand something that is not written clearly and it's not about the typo. What you wrote:
could easily mean "ubuntu is derived from debian but debian is not the parent distro of ubuntu" and that's how I read it. And that doesn't make any sense. Please try to express you thoughts more clearly next time.

Once again I'm going to reply with exactly the same post. Seems that you didn't read it the first time around: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...3/#post4840944

No, you got it right the second time. Not that hard after all, was it?

No, it isn't a good example. You seem to be misunderstanding things on several different levels.

I don't see you complaining about okular depending on cups. Try installing okular without cups. See if it works. How is epdfview depending on cups any different than okular depending on cups?

You seem to be confusing prebuilt packages with software that you compile yourself. When you compile epdfview yourself, you can leave out any of the optional dependencies. Cups is an optional dependency for epdfview, but without it a very common task of a pdf viewer doesn't work at all (printing). That's why the epdfview package in salix is built with cups support. Same reason that okular in slackware is built with cups support.

Compile time package dependency is also important.

Thanks, for your reply.

Using Salix OS one good practice is to search first what libraries and dependencies are needed, just the usual Slacker way of knowing them first, then consult Sourcery or Gslapt if these are available, install accordingly. For example, installing 'Gparted' in Slackware demands a list of about five (5) dependencies not preinstalled in its base, this is inherited also and occurs under Salix; but in the latter case meeting these dependencies, building and installing them, are easier and faster by way of repositories. Same manner, Slackware does not pre-install all commonly used codecs out of copyright inhibitions, yet, under Salix though equal discipline is inherited and observed, there is a conspicuous offer to the user to automatically install them or not along the main Menu. Salix was born out of Slackers basic desktop experience.

Of all Slackware derivatives Salix OS is not there .... :) (Joke) Just to make a point that Salix OS is more faithful to Slackware than what ubuntu did to Debian; and that Salix OS is a soundly "customized" Slackware, not a mere derivative.

@ gapan,

I hope you stay long with Salix, you can certainly make it a great Slacker's option.

Congratulations and more power to your team.

BTW, before I forget:

Thank you for bringing us Salix OS.

malekmustaq

Please, Ubuntu takes Debian unstable at a given time and recompiles everything.
There are packages that even not imported, but driven by Ubuntu itself (Gnome for example).
There is no plan at Ubuntu that a final repository can/will/must be compatible with any version of Debian. In simple words Ubuntu is a brand new package set (not compatible with its base), and extra configuration.

On the opposite, Salix takes Slackware as a base, does not recompile the whole Slackware repo, but add packages which are by design/plan compatible with Slackware (not counting accidental mistakes). In simple words Salix is an extra repo for Slack plus some extra configuration.

You can say that Salix is based on Slackware, and Ubuntu is based on Debian, but this is a huge over-simplification, and really confusing. Ubuntu has a bad reputation in some circles, so suggesting that Salix is the Ubuntu of Slackware is not nice for Salix :-)

fdeak

In total agreement with gapan. I am a devoted Slack user but find Salix the most true to the mother. I proudly use it on a couple of lappys and try to recommend it to somewhat tech savvy linux converts.

I got it right the first time too, for those not choosing to be deliberately obtuse.

It's not an oversimplification it is a simple basic fact; irregardless of how good, bad or indifferent the derivative is with respect to the parent or their respective reputations. How that is confusing I have no idea.