It is written in Distrowatch about Slackware:

"Slackware Linux, created by Patrick Volkerding in 1992, is the oldest surviving Linux distribution. Forked from the now-discontinued SLS project, Slackware 1.0 came on 24 floppy disks and was built on top of Linux kernel version 0.99pl11-alpha. It quickly became the most popular Linux distribution, with some estimates putting its market share to as much as 80% of all Linux installations in 1995. Its popularity decreased dramatically with the arrival of Red Hat Linux and other, more user-friendly distributions, but Slackware Linux still remains a much-appreciated operating system among the more technically-oriented system administrators and desktop users.

Slackware Linux is a highly technical, clean distribution, with only a very limited number of custom utilities. It uses a simple, text-based system installer and a comparatively primitive package management system that does not resolve software dependencies. As a result, Slackware is considered one of the cleanest and least buggy distributions available today - the lack of Slackware-specific enhancements reduces the likelihood of new bugs being introduced into the system. All configuration is done by editing text files. There is a saying in the Linux community that if you learn Red Hat, you'll know Red Hat, but if you learn Slackware, you'll know Linux. This is particularly true today when many other Linux distributions keep developing heavily customised products to meet the needs of less technical Linux users.

While this philosophy of simplicity has its fans, the fact is that in today's world, Slackware Linux is increasingly becoming a "core system" upon which new, custom solutions are built, rather than a complete distribution with a wide variety of supported software. The only exception is the server market, where Slackware remains popular, though even here, the distribution's complex upgrade procedure and lack of officially supported automated tools for security updates makes it increasingly uncompetitive. Slackware's conservative attitude towards the system's base components means that it requires much manual post-installation work before it can be tuned into a modern desktop system.

Pros: Considered highly stable, clean and largely bug-free, strong adherence to UNIX principles
Cons: Limited number of officially supported applications; conservative in terms of base package selection; complex upgrade procedure
Software package management: "pkgtool" using TXZ packages
Available editions: Installation CDs and DVD for 32-bit (i486) and 64-bit (x86_64) processors
Suggested Slackware-based alternatives: Zenwalk Linux (desktop), Salix (desktop, live CD), Porteus (live CD with KDE, LXDE, MATE, Razor-qt or Xfce), VectorLinux (desktop)
Other distributions with similar philosophies: Arch Linux, Frugalware Linux"

Reference: https://distrowatch.com/dwres-mobile.php?resource=major

It is true that the Slackware uses a simple, text-based system installer and a comparatively primitive package management system that does not resolve software dependencies?

It is true that the on Slackware all configuration is done by editing text files?


It is true that the upgrade procedure of Slackware is complex?

Yes. The installer is still a "wizard" and just asks you a few questions and it will then install everything. However, you'll need to partition the disk on your own (easily done using cfdisk).

And yes, Slackware's package management software is relatively uncomplex. You can install, upgrade, and remove packages, but it won't resolve any dependencies. But, that isn't an issue, because if you install all of Slackware, all dependencies will be met and if you use https://slackbuilds.org (commonly called SBo), it will let you know of any additional dependencies these programs may have. There are many community tools that help automate this process.

Not all configuration, however, Slackware doesn't develop custom programs to handle configuration. That means you'll configure programs based on how the developer intended you to configure them. You still get "System Settings" in KDE, but you will need to dive into /etc/httpd/httpd.conf if you want to configure apache.

Upgrading can be a difficult term. If you just want to keep your version up-to-date with the latest patches, that's pretty straightforward using slackpkg. However, it is recommended you check the changelog before upgrading just to see if there's any "gotchas". They are rare, but do need to happen occasionally.

If you're talking about upgrading from one version to another, it might be a bit more complex than other distros (although, I don't know how other distros handle it, so it is strictly speculation on my part), but I don't think it is difficult. Pat will cover how to upgrade on your install media in the UPGRADE.TXT file and possibly CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT. However, many people, even if not recommended, will not read those documents and still upgrade using slackpkg, which is pretty simple.

5 members found this post helpful.

Yes.

Yes, for the most part. You can also make adjustments within the DE/WM of your choice.


The procedure is well documented. Slackware will not hold your hand. It is expected that newcomers to Slackware will read all provided documentation.

2 members found this post helpful.

In my opinion, it is not that difficult. My main system has been upgraded from 13.2 one release at a time, to 14.2. Pat provides an easy to follow UPRRADE.TXT file, as previously stated. For me, I cut and paste the commands into a terminal, and press enter. If you can handle that, you are good to go. Just so you know, you can only upgrade one release to the next release at a time. Skipping releases is not supported. Since a full install takes about 20 minutes, and if you want to skip releases, this is much faster, and will work without problems. It helps if you have a basic understanding of using a shell.

1 members found this post helpful.

There was no release called 13.2. There was Slackware 13.37, a hilarious designation in my opinion.
I love Slackware.

Hitest, you are correct, I guess old himers is getting to me. I meant to say 13.1...

1 members found this post helpful.

installation is not difficult, partitioning the drive is the only real hurdle which is easily overcome by reading instructions before starting and making notes or printing them...you can also "cheat" and use a liveCD that has gparted or another program to partition the drive then reboot into Slackware installer and it will pick up the partitions, just select how to mount/label them (ie: /root, /home etc...).

You can watch quite a few youtube tutorials regarding installation, perhaps even practice on a VM first.

It really is not as bad as all the naysayers say.....If anything I find it to be quite the opposite.

If you are timid after all this, then get your feet wet with SalixOS then either just run that or after you are Slackblessed, then install Slackware.

1 members found this post helpful.

It would have been nice of you to post the link...

Top Ten Distributions: An overview of today's top distributions

1 members found this post helpful.

AND do a full/complete install.

2 members found this post helpful.

I wouldn't use "primitive" to describe pkgtool since that has a connotation of something akin to a less than directly effective Rube Goldberg "solution. I'd call it "fundamental" since it does one very important job extremely effectively without risking the base install and no more. The frosting on that cake is that any problems are extremely minor and trivial and immediate to troubleshoot.

I don't consider the upgrade process particularly complicated especially compared to figuring out what went wrong if anything does in an automatic system. THAT is a bloody nightmare. I don't hold it against those who do (much) but I don't use slackpkg now and never will. Convenience makes us weak and I'll choose strong any day given the choice and slackware is one of the very few still offering such a choice.

The only real downside I see in Slackware dependency is mine. I honestly don't know what I would do if Slackware were to cease to exist. AFAIK there is nothing quite like it.

10 members found this post helpful.

Yes, this

-- kjh

2 members found this post helpful.

Exactly. I always come home to Slackware. From time to time I test drive other distros(most recently Debian), but, there is no substitute for Slackware.

2 members found this post helpful.

All slackpkg does is compare ChangeLogs and offer upgrades or install packages, depending on the command line options. Once packages have been selected, slackpkg still uses pkgtools to perform its duties. Automation is what I like about owning a computer, and while I agree that system administration is a task best left to the user, some automation doesn't make us weak. It merely gives us more time to do other tasks. Not a bad trade-off, IMO.

Happy Slacking!

1 members found this post helpful.

What is the opinion of Patrick Volkerding and of official Slackware developers?

What is the opinion of Patrick Volkerding and of official Slackware developers?

You just had a thread locked. A suggestion. Perhaps you should not annoy the moderators.

5 members found this post helpful.