Should slackware get modernized for today's computers?
SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
View Poll Results: Should slackware get modernized for today's computers?
Anyway, I was just reflecting my early experiences with slackware from version 8.x to 10.x. I am planning to revisit slackware again soon.
Version 10.0 came out in 2004 and even 10.2 is from 2005. Your experiences are probably about 6 years out of date and yet you suggest to people running recent versions of Slackware that there system is not modern? Come on!?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank111
I know I still have to download the packages myself but at least I don't have to go to many websites as before.
This just demonstrates how out of touch you are. Solutions already exist for the areas you consider to be a problem. For example, if you use sbopkg to access Slackbuilds (as many Slackers do these days), you won't not have to manually go to sites to download, it'll do all this for you. So you didn't know this, you just thought this based on old experiences and assumed it was still true. It isn't.
Similarly regarding one of your other perceived problems, dependency management, when sbopkg is used in combination with queue files you don't necessarily have to think about dependencies and build orders.
Next time before suggesting a distribution changes its ways I would advise experimenting with it first. And sorry but experiences from half a decade or more ago don't count. Try the latest version for a few weeks and find out more about how modern Slackers use their systems before passing judgement.
I know how to use slackware. Just haven't used it for a long, long time. The last time I used slackware was version 10.x
So your poll is based on past experience and lack of understanding for a unique Gnu/Linux. If you really understood things then the suggestion for modernizing would be moot and not even suggested.
As other LQ members have stated: Why not just move on to something that makes you happy. A new version such as Slackware 13.37 to hopefully enlighten would be my choice.
Hopefully you take our suggestions & mindfully make a decision based on fact(s).
I voted NO because I don't want dependencies management: it introduces too much complexity if you do it right and you spend a lot of time struggling with the package manager. And dependencies change depending on how you compile a package (what options/features you enable).
But I would really like to have a dependency graph of the standard Slackware install: it would be really helpful, for example, to install Slackware in small embedded devices.
The question on this one should be changed to "Should slackware look, act and feel just like all the top major distributions?". Choice is a wonderful thing.
I'm shamelessly stealing this response (hope it hasn't already been used, I don't want to go back through everything on my temp P3 setup).
The short answer is no.
The long answer is noooooooooooooo!
I voted NO because I don't want dependencies management: it introduces too much complexity if you do it right and you spend a lot of time struggling with the package manager. And dependencies change depending on how you compile a package (what options/features you enable).
And because it becomes a severe struggle when a machine is without internet. That was my main reason for switching.
No. I prefer the Slackware way of dependency resolution, that is, the system administrator (that's you) resolves dependencies. Dependency resolving package managers are a fine thing *when* they work. I like Slackware just the way it is, thank you very much.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.