Ohh and if Pat is reading thanks for the 2.6 kernel boot disks man makes things 100 times eazier when your running that kernel

I have come back to Slackware so many times that - now I just feel stupid when I consider trying something new...
When I installed Suse 9.2, 9.3 and 10.0, I thought 'wow, the wireless and the battery stuff works better than ever'. But there were issues, annoyances, and *swoosh* Slack-in-the-box. I know how to do what I want to do.
There is no doubt that a great Slackware strength is in the use of standard packages. Debian's "there's a right way, a wrong way and a Debian way" approach with customizing every package just for the fun of it (or whatever) was really driving me up the wall. Of course, they have Apt to compensate, but unnecessary complexity is just not a good thing in an operating system.
Still, Debian can be customized to a large extent by others, too. I see a very clear indication of Slackware's and Debian's advantages in the fact that they are the most applied when it comes to customized special distributions. Others can only really run well on the machines they are intended for, for the purposes they were intended for.
As for stability, I have had some issues with KDE. I run Slackware with Freerock at the moment. It is very nice to look at. It is no Fluxbox in speed, but - there is a price for everything.
Discussing the younger generation of the Slackware user base is quite abstract, since not very many people use Slackware from the beginning. Slackware was my 3rd long-time installed distribution (and 5th, and 7th...n'th), and it impressed me when I discovered the clean simplicity of the boot scripts. Once I start thinking of a GUI as a front-end for a not too complex set of commands, I started feeling stupid about wasting the resources a GUI takes up. Also, why have a limited set of features incorporated in a needlessly complex interface, if I could have every feature at my fingertips (I mean that. Keyboard shortcuts are brilliant).

Well "most" of the time its pretty easy to do. Sometimes you get a source that requires 5 or 6 different packages that in any other setting you'd have no use for. So now instead of just 1 source install.. you end up doing 5 other source installs complete with they're own dependencies to resolve.

Bottom line is some source packeges are not as easy to compile as say the linux kernel or apache. Source compiles and installs can be kinda sloppy too, as most of them don't provide an easy way to uninstall something.

Still a lazy man can do pretty well doing everything from source. There have been a few times I downloaded a package from linux packages ripped out the slack.Build file, got new sources and made my own slack "installpkg" package

Someday I may learn how to build my own slack.Build's.

it is definitely not the distro of choice for new generation/newbie.

I'm a Linux newbie, and once I got the 'lowdown' on the various distros, Slack was for me. I think many newcomers to Linux will pick Slack for much the same reasons I did, because it is very much Linux. Lots of people say it is 'stuck in the past' but that just means it's 'Un-Windows like'-still true to it's roots. I use Red Hat and Slack, and have Suse on a machine I never touch, unless I'm doing something I think might break the machine; I prefer Slack. Maybe that's why people have been calling me a 'Slacker' my whole life.

Well, This is not a true afirmation, who does it its because have to litle acknoledge to keep everything update... its not because slackware doesnt have apt-get or yum (up2date? dont know, a lot of time without using fc) that you are in the past... my slackware system makes bluetooth, wireless 802.11b/g, GPRS, the latests WindowsManagers, Xorg, OpenOffice2.0, kernel 2.6.12.3 and many other things.... and for those who realy want something like apt-get you can always search for alternatives like swaret. Other things like libraries, apps and everything else I think is very update in slackware, much more them debian.

Dependencies you have more with RedHat (Fedora), Suse then with slackware installing from source, its realy nice how its full of everything you need.

EDITED: Forgot... about the easy tools I dont think you are stuck if you dont use them, most server today even having big firepower you still connect and make configs through ssh in a CLI, maybe stuck in past for users who know nothing about linux, but if they are getting to the linux world so they must first learn the basis or try something more windows-like (maybe back to windows and keep lazy with his brain)

I just installed slackware 10.2 I thank it great and its far from dead

Hello!

Okay, might as well add in my two sense about the future of slackware.

As most of you have probably have seen, laptops now sport the new anti-reflective "Trubrite", "ViewBright", whatever kind of LCD screen. True, they are more vivid, but tag on a lot of glare - it's almost like looking into a mirror.

With Slacky, we do a lot of CLI work that usually has a black background and gives crisp reflection that you're really going to enjoy it if you have a huge ego. It seems that the screens are now specifically being manufactured for GUI environments. That's obviously expected, but it does show that CLI is trying to be ignored.

But Slackware will be alive for a long long time. The reason I see it is that releases of other distros seem like jumps of technology. Slackware, on the other hand, provides a slow logical almost seamless progression for its releases - you almost feel you could compile a new release yourself!

However, I can't say it will ever catch on as the standard desktop for layman users. Your average computer user is too lazy (or too busy) to learn anything. They want it to work and that's all. Also, they still think that computer hackers have some magical powers and its doesn't even occur to them that it may be because Microsoft enjoys operating systems with holes in it. If you tell them that Linux is rock solid secure and has virtually no viruses, they will just think it's a better Windows without understanding that it's power is actually because it has a totally different approach to operating systems than Windows.

If it's hard for most people to appreciate Linux, it will be very hard to convince them of robustness and stability of Slackware. If you understand a bit of programming and how OS work, Slackware is like finding a diamond among limestones.

The true is that there is more apprehension with Slackware entering a musuem than other distros. I never have seen discussions about Debian or Red Hat going into oblivion - and I don't think it's because those are run by large teams as opposed to slackware which is a one man job. The reason for this apprehension, I feel, is a simple a psychological illusion. We see around us technology moving so fast. Slackware provides so much power, that you don't have this thirst for all this new technology as much as other distros or OSs. Like I went to purchase a laptop and found out that they don't even supply 3.5 disks anymore. Ok, so they only fit 1.44 mg, but they are great for booting, testing, maintenance, etc. But we think that if Slackware doesn't take advantage of the new stuff immediately, it must be outdated or archiac, when the truth is on the contrary - it is somewhat above current petty advances.

We really don't know how many Slackware users are really out there, because IMHO, Slackers are more mature and don't make as much noise as users of other distros. It's like walking into a Best Buy and thinking Linux is not used because they are not sold on any of the systems.

Take Care!
Murdock

I think you may be right in some points and of course I disagree in some others... but this part you said slack users make much less noise is a very truth. I think slack users are concern about making it and not getting it already done and this makes slack be considered the most solid linux distro with the most pro users that realy know how to fix things when something goes wrong.

[ ]'s

Just some thoughts for whatever it is worth: Slackware and Slackware users are quite different from others. Slackware Linux is just a build of vanilla GNU/Linux software with some handy scripts to make life a bit easier. This has implications for both Slackware Linux Inc. and Slackware Linux users:

- Slackware Linux Inc. do not need a lot of manpower: technically Slackware Linux has always been maintained by just one person, Pat (with the exception of the years that David Cantrell and others worked for Slackware). Add some manpower to handle orders, and that's it.

- Slackware Linux users have learnt GNU/Linux, not a particular distribution. The Slackware distribution is just a comfort for them. If Pat wants to retire some day, most users are perfectly able to 1. maintain their own systems packagewise, 2. form a group of people that maintain packages, or 3. switch to another distribution that has a comparable philosophy (for instance, Crux).

Relatively the share of Slackware Linux users is probably shrinking, but I guess that is not the case in absolute numbers. The world is not doomed, young kids are learning the basic principles Kernighan, Pike, Ritchie, McIlroy and others laid out. I see it everywhere.

I'm a new slackware user 23, all the kids who are quitting with the video games (Job,kids, etc) will port over, widows is becoming a bigger mess everyday.. especially if you have an older PC. Imagine todays internet on Win98.. my god you wouldnt last a week..

anything that isnt open source is a scam, the video card manufactures and Direct X are pulling a fast one on the lumber masses. Mulit-platform is the future, open source video games, dont let your kids atrophy and the hands of Bill, get them writing code today!

PS: ubunto is a free os for schools in africa, these ex-gamers will be serious, slackware is in good hands.

if you think that running the internet on windowz 98 is bad, try using ME!!!!
at least 98 comes close (as close as M$ ever gets) to being stable! even if it does suffer form alshimers (you have to reinsatll it ever year or so otehrwise it goes senile!)

as a matter of fact i am wriing this on 98 (not through choice) (while my slack machine is going through a reinsall!)
as on my only other box (also slack) i havent got enough memory to run a GUI browser faster than it woudl run on 12k dial up!

though links and lynx work fine!

It will. I start to panic when I think Slackware will not be around. Seriously, I would go into a deep depression. Slackware is what Linux says Linux should be.

lol, I am deffinently going to use that one. It says it all.

I thought I was the only one that felt that way. I also kick myself in the butt anytime I do.

I bought my first PC in 1997 (got a TSR80 for Christmas once) and I started using open source in 1998. I started with FreeBSD and found it a little confusing. Then I bought (no broadband at that time) Mandrake and found it buggy. Then bought a Red Hat book with a CD and installed it. Then I sat down on a long weekend and went through the book. I learned a lot about Linux, but found Red Hat buggy and sluggish. I continued my experiments with the RPM distros and was not really all that satified.

Then in late 2001 I found linuxquestions. I started reading the Slackware forum and decided to give it a try. I fell in love with Slackware the first day or two using it. It was fast and stable. Once I learned where things where at and what they do, I really had no desire to use another distro. I think this is what most users find in Slackware.

I learned so much about Linux using Slackware. I believe that if I kept using the other distros, I would not know half as much.

I think as long as Pat is kicking Slackware will be. Pat takes great pride in his work and it shows. I have used Slackware since 8.0 and have yet to install it and find it sluggish, buggy or just an annoyance to use. Slackware brings all that along with a 10 year history.

I do not want to see Slackware end, that is why when I see a post like, "which distro should I use", I almost always point them towards Slackware.

I rambled enough.

My

I have tried numerous distros - Mandrake & Redhat back in the day, SuSe, Ubuntu (I think this is a good distro for the end user that knows to bash their head on a keyboard and that's about it), but I have been messing with Slackware on and off since 9.0.

I must say, if you combine 4 years of using other distros/dual-booting (I'm a hardcore gamer at heart), I have managed to be 100% M$ free for 4 months now, and abandon myself to Slackware. I am running 10.2 now, and it is just rock solid. I learned most of Slackware through man pages and this site.

If you want to learn Linux, then use Slackware...a bit of a steep learning curve if you've been using Windows for a long time, but if you are open and willing to learn. You will be able to solve problems that would normally cost you a fortune.

Pretty much it here...Slack will never die, as I will try to actively develop with the community. The only thing (computer-wise) that would be worse if there was no Slackware, is if there was no INTERNET. What a scary thought.

Oh, as a side note, it's fun pwning geek squad.

For what it's worth, not all newbies are "scared" or whatever of Slackware. This is my first foray {sp?!} into Linux, and since I'm into making my life more miserable (or at least a dilly of a lot more difficult than need be,) I went with Slackware, precicesly {sp?} BECAUSE "once you know Slackware, you know Linux," and I'd then have a better chance of making sense out of another distro thrown my way.

I hope it doesn't die out, because it definatly serves a purpose, especially for someone looking for a "minimal frills" distro who's not exactly up for Linux from Scratch. :P

Note to self: no more posting at 4AM. I can't spell.

Since you asked, "foray" was spelled correctly, while "precisely" and "definitely" were not. ;}