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

View Poll Results: Should slackware get modernized for today's computers?
Yes 11 7.01%
No 146 92.99%
Voters: 157. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 09-09-2011, 03:09 PM   #91
sycamorex
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: London
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 5,564
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann View Post
The OPs next suggestion would probably be dropping support for 32-bit.
Probably, but what difference would it make for the OP? Nobody forces him/her to install the 32-bit version. Slackware64 has been available for over 2 years now. I really fail to understand the rationale behind the OP's first post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dizzy
"Raaatid" - to quote some of my Jamaican friends. Reading most of the posts here, one may get the impression that the pollster has desecrated a sacrosanct object, personally challenged the respondents to a duel or has threatened to banished them or their beloved distro to oblivion.
No sacred object has been desecrated in this thread. The pollster is just talking utter rubbish As any distro, Slackware should be and is open to criticism as long as someone provides some valid arguments.

How should Slackware be modernised?
It works well with modern hardware. Package versions tend to be higher than in some other "big" distributions like Debian or Red Hat.
So what on earth is he/she talking about?

I doubt that he's referring to the "optimisations" that BrianL once suggested, ie. lap dancers should be included with each Slackware release. If that's what he meant, he should have been more explicit about it. I fully support such additions, even if they are in /testing or /extra for the time being
 
Click here to see the post LQ members have rated as the most helpful post in this thread.
Old 09-09-2011, 04:12 PM   #92
Frank111
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2011
Posts: 16

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 10
Still busting my balls about this? huh

I admit it. I should have install slackware 13.37 first before making vague judgement about how modern it is.

Second, after thinking about it the idea of slackware doing package dependency resolving is a bad idea too. In fact, one way for Patrick Volkerding to mess up slackware roots is implementing this.

Now that I am familiar with sites like slackbuilds, alien BOB and tools like shoopkg, I no longer have to go from site to site to get packages and libraries as I done in the early years between slackware 8.x and 10.x.

Of course, I may occasionally compile stuff myself without the aid of scripts. Can't blame me. Just an old school linux user.

Arch will still be my main OS. Slackware will be either on a free partition or a VM within Arch.

Last edited by Frank111; 09-09-2011 at 04:18 PM.
 
Old 09-09-2011, 04:14 PM   #93
altor31
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2010
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 12

Rep: Reputation: 5
A lap dance during installation instead of boring line of description ! I vote yes in this case

I am even willing to reinstall my Slack.
 
Old 09-09-2011, 04:57 PM   #94
sycamorex
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: London
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 5,564
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024Reputation: 1024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank111 View Post
Of course, I may occasionally compile stuff myself without the aid of scripts. Can't blame me. Just an old school linux user.
Why don't you write your own slackbuild scripts for the software you want to compile? This way slackpkg can handle the packages that you compiled as well. Have a look at this:
http://slackwiki.org/Writing_A_SlackBuild_Script

This way all all the packages will be installed in a uniform and consistent way.

Alternatively, there's an excellent tool src2pkg
As you can guess from the name, it creates a slackpkg from a source code.
It's very handy.
 
Old 09-09-2011, 06:23 PM   #95
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,029
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by sycamorex View Post
I doubt that he's referring to the "optimisations" that BrianL once suggested, ie. lap dancers should be included with each Slackware release. If that's what he meant, he should have been more explicit about it. I fully support such additions, even if they are in /testing or /extra for the time being

Quote:
Originally Posted by altor31 View Post
A lap dance during installation instead of boring line of description ! I vote yes in this case

I am even willing to reinstall my Slack.
So that's three of us (at least) who want lap dancers. Great. Fingers crossed for the next release...
 
Old 09-09-2011, 06:37 PM   #96
mRgOBLIN
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: New Zealand
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 999

Rep: Reputation: 227Reputation: 227Reputation: 227
Ok I'll break out the bikini and the heels....

Today's lesson: Be careful what you wish for...
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-09-2011, 06:43 PM   #97
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,029
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled

Yeah, on second thoughts...forget the lap dancers.
 
Old 09-09-2011, 07:38 PM   #98
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,170

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by mRgOBLIN View Post
Ok I'll break out the bikini and the heels....

Today's lesson: Be careful what you wish for...
Oh great.....now that image is seared into my soul, heh-heh.
 
Old 09-10-2011, 03:04 AM   #99
psionl0
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Distribution: slackware_64 14.0
Posts: 557
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 73
Quote:
Should slackware get modernized for today's computers?
What? A 2011 OS that can be optimized for a 2011 computer is not modern enough?
 
Old 09-11-2011, 06:03 AM   #100
ReaperX7
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Distribution: LFS-SVN, FreeBSD 10.0
Posts: 3,188
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 826Reputation: 826Reputation: 826Reputation: 826Reputation: 826Reputation: 826Reputation: 826
Slackware's current tree is "bleeding edge" as it is by definition, but even then, -current is far more stable than most other distros out there because -current while being somewhat bleeding edge doesn't also try to jump ahead of itself and become something it's not, which is a constantly updated non-mainstream Slackware distro.

Which brings to mind one question... why have set versions of Slackware when Patrick could just do a built-on-date distro of Current that could be updated ever 6 to 12 months like: Slackware64_2011-12-31 that would always be in continual update and not tied to a specific version and release?
 
Old 09-11-2011, 06:21 AM   #101
NoStressHQ
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Lausanne - Switzerland ( Bordeaux - France / Montreal - QC - Canada)
Distribution: Slackware Leet - 32/64bit
Posts: 279

Rep: Reputation: 94
For what I understand Slackware "versions" are more or less a kind of number tag and must not be taken seriously, as it has already been funky many times (the jump of several numbers in the 90s, the "1337" one)... It's just to be able to refer easily about one 'tag' in a friendly name. A bit easier that just the date, but I agree with you, the version number doesn't really mean anything. Although the major number increase should means something huge has changed (new big change in the kernel, completely different WMs, etc.)... In fact '-stables' are just some kind of snapshots from the -current repo.

And yes, -current is often stable, although I was sometimes to quick updating it on my server at just the bad time . So now, I just run the stable one, and stopped bleeding edge updates as the install tons of things every two days... It's some kind of compulsive behavior we tend to have when we discover something new, but with time, we realize that things work so no need to upgrade or install too many things. Now I run with almost only stock slackware tools, but some tiny utilities (like tig).

Btw: of course security updates are important, I'm just talking about the usual updates.
 
Old 09-11-2011, 07:41 AM   #102
gauchao
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: SLACKWARE 14.1 64bit
Posts: 160

Rep: Reputation: 24
I run slackware in approximately 10 different desktop/notebook machines since 1996; some are "old" (PIII 450, celeron 900, duron 450) and others are rather new (e.g. Phenom II X6 with radeon HD6870 BE). No other OS beats Slackware in every thread: stability, simplicity, speed, security. It is the most modern OS you can find. What do you want? What do you mean when you say slackware is not modern? Eye-candies? Automatic-dependencies-resolving(-ruins-your-whole-system) package management? I guess you are very unhappy with such a great distro. Pat, Eric and RW's work, together with every contributor's in this forum, is very appreciated for me and the others who voted NO for your thread. I can only thank each one who works really hard to make and keep Slack the best OS in the world. And for you I can only give you an advice: get yourself another "modern" (as you name it) distro and ...


DON'T MESS WITH SLACK!
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-11-2011, 08:16 AM   #103
Bindestreck
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 310

Rep: Reputation: 54
I think we need a new game like "Age of Empires", maybe "Age of Distributions". There one can have some war against other distros with your fan distro as race. I personally think Slackware would replace "The Huns" which was a favorite against 1v1 wars with the superior Knights as the most effective unit in Castle age.

Last edited by Bindestreck; 09-11-2011 at 08:17 AM.
 
Old 09-11-2011, 08:18 AM   #104
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,170

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post

Which brings to mind one question... why have set versions of Slackware when Patrick could just do a built-on-date distro of Current that could be updated ever 6 to 12 months like: Slackware64_2011-12-31 that would always be in continual update and not tied to a specific version and release?
Good question. Mr. Volkerding does not release Slackware on a set schedule as he prefers to release a new version of the stable branch when it is ready. A new stable release of Slackware may be ready in six months....or later depending if the new version meets the Slackware standard of stability, reliabity, and quality. There is a reason our distro is legendary. Mr. Volkerding does not feel the pressure of an artificially imposed release schedule. I appreciate this strategy as I know that when the next stable release comes out everything will work properly.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 09-16-2011, 06:21 AM   #105
colinetsegers
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: Brussels, Belgium, Europe
Distribution: Debian 6 and 7, PCLinuxOS
Posts: 60

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Hello. What I wanna say is not only related to Slackware, but to all distributions in
general. There are many good old machines, to put a reasonnable and liveable Linux limit,
let's say from Pentiums 3 on. Considering the economic, ecological and political context
has the time not come to stop throwing away machines that can still prove very useful in
many ways? Thanks God many Linux distributions still consider running on old hardware a
feature to maintain, while also developping new versions for newer machines.
Something to keep in mind is that in many countries all over the world, there are many
more old, and still used, machines than we imagine, and if Microsoft drops those, let
Linux take over and "Win" the game...
So, my answer to this topic is: having an updated and supported distribution running on
old machines does not exclude udated versions for the modern up to date computers, and
the correct answer to this poll should not be "yes" neither "no" ;o)
Best Wishes to all.
 
  


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
Look at what I managed to do today with slackware! cereal83 Slackware 22 04-01-2006 02:41 AM
"computers that are thousands of times more powerful than those that exist today." rksprst General 12 02-03-2005 07:25 PM
Slackware 10.0 RC1 Today Released!!!! cHarOn99 Slackware 4 06-16-2004 01:21 PM
Slackware Quirks -- What do you want to see today? Astro Slackware 75 10-24-2003 09:38 AM
Slackware turns 10 years old today! Noryungi Slackware 16 07-20-2003 09:13 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 PM.

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