LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 09-25-2009, 11:09 PM   #31
BrZ
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 490

Rep: Reputation: 79

Is like if you have a very good server, giving you root privileges, skinned like a smooth and cool desktop... And build a lot of things =]
 
Old 09-25-2009, 11:53 PM   #32
Josh000
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Distribution: Slackware 13 64bit
Posts: 534

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by vik View Post
What about SUSE with it's "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE" stuff? They're explicitly discouraging you from editing files manually. You can still do it of course, since it is Linux, just it might screw up the GUI or the GUI might screw it up if you ever ran it. And with Debian it seems like there's the "Debian way" or your way, but it's always harder to do things your own way.
I have not used SUSE recently enough to know...is it only on certain files? Would it be on every file? If it is on files that their tools look after, I can understand and accept that.

You should not expect to be able to hand edit and rely on tools. It's one or the other. I think if you were to only edit by hand, it would be fine, but then why use SUSE in the first place?

As for the Debian way.....yeah. They definitely have a lot of strong guidelines. But, Ubuntu or Debian, won't stop you from installing your own packages and editing your own files. I can kind of see it being reasonable to follow a methodology that works best with the system you are using. It makes sense to urge this for new users, and sense it is not enforced, it does not prevent advanced users.
 
Old 09-26-2009, 12:23 AM   #33
vik
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 225
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: 50
My experience with SUSE is very outdated, but I believe it was only for files their GUIs touched. I also remember the updater was always nagging you: kind of like Windows these days.

Agree with your Debian comments.
 
Old 09-26-2009, 02:35 AM   #34
gargamel
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Distribution: Slackware, SLAX, OpenSuSE
Posts: 1,593

Rep: Reputation: 142Reputation: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by manwithaplan View Post
[...]

As a side note SUSE ... is just right around the corner from my place, and I have to say I used to work for Novell, it was plagued with constant strife, and back stabbing management. I swore that I would boycott there software for the way they treated me, and others. I saw that they would washout good people out of favoritism for others, very cliche'. I jumped ship from Novell sometime ago, and haven't looked back
Sorry to hear that. SuSE was voted the "best employer" in Germany, before the Novell deal. Really a sad story, what has happened in the meantime with this formerly proud company, despite being small, was able to impact on the whole industry.

gargamel

Last edited by gargamel; 09-26-2009 at 02:45 AM.
 
Old 09-26-2009, 02:44 AM   #35
gargamel
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Distribution: Slackware, SLAX, OpenSuSE
Posts: 1,593

Rep: Reputation: 142Reputation: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh000 View Post
[...]
You should not expect to be able to hand edit and rely on tools. It's one or the other. I think if you were to only edit by hand, it would be fine, but then why use SUSE in the first place?
Exactly.

Just want to note, that usually you break the automatism for the context to which the file belongs, that you modify. In the example of the web server I described, it would mean that after editing httpd.conf or something, for upgrades there would be no automatic conversion, anymore. But other things, like Email configuration, would, of course, continue to work.

However, sometimes there are dependencies. Modifying one file in such a chain would break the whole chain. From that point on you'd have to edit all the config files in the chain, not just one, by hand.
[/QUOTE]
 
Old 09-26-2009, 02:56 AM   #36
samac
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Westray, Orkney
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1 (multi-lib) KDE 4.11.4
Posts: 1,422

Rep: Reputation: 137Reputation: 137
Quote:
If it is on files that their tools look after, I can understand and accept that.
I cannot accept that, it is my computer, they are my programs, it is my data, why should their tools look after that in their way. You seem to forget that a computer is just a tool and it should do as it is told. You should not have to accept something because it is the "Distribution's Way". How many times have you contacted a companies customer service desk and been told "Sorry, I can't do that!", by some poor soul who's life is controlled by their computer and every ounce of their ability to think for themselves is leached daily from their body.

Perhaps it is just a symptom of society that all people are taught to accept, that they have to conform, be part of a team, not rock the boat etc. etc. but I for one am glad that some Linux distributions don't try to be smarter than you and allow you to do you want.

It may be that their are misconceptions that other distributions don't allow you to edit system files, but as you have, yourself, said, you may have to jump through hoops to do it.

I ask one simple question, if a computer is a tool why should the operating system not serve you in the way that you want?

I think that is the reason that people say, "if you know Slackware, you know Linux" is, because you don't just know what the distribution allows you to know, you are allowed to think freely and allowed to break your system if you want to. You are allowed to have a stripped down speed machine, a boated desktop, a multimedia machine, a server, a toy, whatever you want and all the bits will just work. If some guru hasn't compiled a specific piece of software into a package, you can do it and it will work more often, in my experience, with Slackware.

Linux is all about choice and if you, or others, choose to be told how their computer should do stuff, then that is your/their choice, not one I would make but then again that's just me.

Oh and I am always right. IMHO.

Rant over.

samac

Last edited by samac; 09-26-2009 at 03:00 AM.
 
Old 09-26-2009, 03:42 AM   #37
Josh000
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Distribution: Slackware 13 64bit
Posts: 534

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
I cannot accept that, it is my computer, they are my programs, it is my data, why should their tools look after that in their way. You seem to forget that a computer is just a tool and it should do as it is told. You should not have to accept something because it is the "Distribution's Way".
What?

I think your rant is missing the point entirely.

You are not forfeiting control or choice by choosing to use software that automates some tasks.

If you make a choice to use redhat, than that choice is probably made in part because it has helper gui tools and wrappers.

Now, you don't have to use those tools or wrappers, and you can still edit config files and such without a problem. Unless you want to use those tools.

If you want to be able to use those tools, then you can't edit things manually anymore. This is just common sense. The tools will overwrite the file with the settings you choose through the tools, only after you have made the choice to use the tools.

If distributions forced you to use their gui tools for managment and prevented you from editing things by hand, then you may have a point. As they don't, you don't.

Quote:
Perhaps it is just a symptom of society that all people are taught to accept, that they have to conform, be part of a team, not rock the boat etc. etc. but I for one am glad that some Linux distributions don't try to be smarter than you and allow you to do you want.
I'm sick of the lack of people ability to think critically as well, but this is not the case for that. Not everyone wants to control every aspect of their computer manually, or for some situations it may be a far too cumbersome.

It is not that distributions are trying to be smarter than you, it is that they want to make it easier for people. Obviously, a lot of people prefer the work they have done. This is not for us, and that is fine...

Quote:
It may be that their are misconceptions that other distributions don't allow you to edit system files, but as you have, yourself, said, you may have to jump through hoops to do it.
Well, no. Not for editing config files. It seems it would be harder to install your own packages sometimes, for example on debian, but this is acceptable.

The reason this is acceptable, is because it is well known that this is how debian works, that all software is in repositories. If you don't like that you should not install debian. It makes no sense to complain after the fact.

No distribution will prevent you from editing config files, although many may discourage it if gui tools are the preferred method for a distribution.

Quote:
I ask one simple question, if a computer is a tool why should the operating system not serve you in the way that you want?
For many people, having the computer do as much as it can automatically and be transparent is exactly what they want.

Quote:
You are allowed to have a stripped down speed machine, a boated desktop, a multimedia machine, a server, a toy, whatever you want and all the bits will just work. If some guru hasn't compiled a specific piece of software into a package, you can do it and it will work more often, in my experience, with Slackware.
This is true for many distros.

The thing that sets slackware apart for me, is that everything is vanilla, it is just a system, no extra wrappers or gui stuff, package management is close to ideal, and yes, you gain an excellent understanding of your system by using it.
 
Old 09-26-2009, 04:06 AM   #38
BrZ
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 490

Rep: Reputation: 79
Slackware can be sided with those popcorporate commercial distros and still don't throw even a simple logo on your face. Wait when all those standards compliant start breaking the desktop...

Last edited by BrZ; 09-26-2009 at 05:49 AM.
 
Old 09-26-2009, 07:04 AM   #39
gargamel
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Distribution: Slackware, SLAX, OpenSuSE
Posts: 1,593

Rep: Reputation: 142Reputation: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
I cannot accept that, it is my computer, they are my programs, it is my data, why should their tools look after that in their way. You seem to forget that a computer is just a tool and it should do as it is told.[...]
Sorry, but I agree with Josh000: You are entirely missing the point here. If you want really full control, then DON'T use a computer, at all. Because it always will do things without having explicitly told to do by you.
What you say sounds to me like you want to move the cylinders of an engine by hand, when you drive a car, and rather not having an electronic motor management. Because this is automatic and not under your control. It works the way the car maker has designed it to work. Does this mean, you prefer walking?

Because this is the logical consequence of what you say.
Sorry for being a bit ironic, don't take this as an offense, but really: You missed the point, here.

BUT: There ARE reasons, why I prefer Slackware over all other distros I know. That just doesn't mean, that the others are completely dull and stubborn. In fact, their success allowed the continued development of Linux. Slackware is, in fact, a parasite. It uses and packages components developed and sponsored by others. The result is brilliant, and the crew is doing the best job in the industry, but there's no reason for bashing others who have sponsored Linux to the benefit of all of us.

gargamel
 
Old 09-26-2009, 07:18 AM   #40
samac
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Westray, Orkney
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1 (multi-lib) KDE 4.11.4
Posts: 1,422

Rep: Reputation: 137Reputation: 137
Josh000 and gargamel

Fortunately you are allowed to not get the point, often people are under the impression that there is no other way because the computer program doesn't allow them the opportunity to have the choice. After all just because there is a gui component doesn't mean that the command line backend should be hidden, or just because you shouldn't run as root, root should be hidden.

Your analogy with the car falls down as I choose to use to use either my legs or a bicycle or some other mode of transport, I don't have to use the car just because the car manufacturers make cars.

I don't need full control and I could not control fully as I never got round to programming in machine code, however my point was simply that programs should not determine how you use your computer, you should.

samac
 
Old 09-26-2009, 08:45 AM   #41
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: SlackwareŽ
Posts: 11,046
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371Reputation: 1371
Hi,

I believe in looking at treating the OS as a 'tool'. That tool should get the task at hand done without trouble or harm. If you are wanting to tighten a bolt and nut you have choices. If the hardware is SAE then you would not use a Metric tool. Sure some may fit but you won't be able to safely complete the task.

Distributions are just that a 'tool'. A user should use the tool that will safely complete or enable that same user to work with the desired hardware. Hopefully, the chosen tool will enable the user to work efficiently and proficiently to complete tasks. Some people should use hold your hand distributions while others are comfortable with a system that allows you too tweak or manage the system in a manner that suits their need(s).

I like the way 'PV' has the mindset to setup a distribution that allow you to have a OS that will not get in the way.
 
Old 09-27-2009, 01:00 AM   #42
Josh000
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Distribution: Slackware 13 64bit
Posts: 534

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
Fortunately you are allowed to not get the point, often people are under the impression that there is no other way because the computer program doesn't allow them the opportunity to have the choice. After all just because there is a gui component doesn't mean that the command line backend should be hidden, or just because you shouldn't run as root, root should be hidden.
But, that is the point. It isn't hidden. It is just suggested that if you are using a distro that is known for having gui tools, and wish to use them, you cannot expect to still have manual control.

This is completely reasonable, as otherwise, using both the gui tools and manual editing config files, those choices contradict each other.

You are in no way prevented from manually editing and configuring everything and never using the distro specific tools.

Quote:
I don't need full control and I could not control fully as I never got round to programming in machine code, however my point was simply that programs should not determine how you use your computer, you should.
Yes, and some people choose to use gui software to handle config files rather than edit those files directly. This is their choice, and choice is not being infringed on or being taken away from.

If you use xorgsetup in slack to generate an X file automatically, do you feel that control is being taken away from you, and that the computer is doing thing automatically? xorgsetup is quite similar to tools from other distributions, in the level of control it removes.
 
Old 09-27-2009, 03:54 AM   #43
samac
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Westray, Orkney
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1 (multi-lib) KDE 4.11.4
Posts: 1,422

Rep: Reputation: 137Reputation: 137
JoshOOO I'm sorry if you don't get this, but your implication that I am saying that you should just use gui tools or cli tools, is just frankly wrong. All I have said is that I should be able to determine what happens on my computer. I use both gui and cli to do that. I just do not want the computer program/OS writers to make that determination for me, and that the specific case was where I made a modification to a configuration file and the OS wrote it back on the next boot.

I can and do expect to be able to use both gui and cli and not have them contradict each other as more often than not the gui is just using the command line as the backend, therefore they should in no way contradict each other as they are to all intents the same program acting upon the same configuration file.

In Slackware you can do this, that is why I use Slackware, in some other Linux distributions it is more problematic that is why I do not use them. In Slackware the designer (Pat Volkerding) has designed it so that everyone has the choice and control over their computer, some other distributions try to impose "their way".

I hope this clarifies my thoughts in response to your actual question
Quote:
What would be the different between a bare minimum ubuntu install and a slack install, aside from vendor patches?
I would guess rather a lot, system V init, deb package management, etc. but more importantly the fact that right at the core Mr Shuttleworth is telling you that you shouldn't know about the root user and sudo is how things are done, but we know different don't we, after all we learned Slackware so we know linux.

samac
 
Old 09-27-2009, 04:57 AM   #44
gargamel
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Distribution: Slackware, SLAX, OpenSuSE
Posts: 1,593

Rep: Reputation: 142Reputation: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
Josh000 and gargamel

Fortunately you are allowed to not get the point, often people are under the impression that there is no other way because the computer program doesn't allow them the opportunity to have the choice.
Again, it would help if you would read more carefully, and it becomes clear to me that you referring to only one other family of distros, but make your statements general. Which is not fair.
Only the *buntus try to "hide" the CLI, but the philosophy behind it is anything but stupid. Exploit the capabilities of Linux, expose its flexibility to end-users, but don't allow or motivate them to screw up their system all too easily.
Personally the end-product is not to my likings, but there's nothing wrong with it. Users who have "the impression" that there is no CLI should really NOT be confronted with it. Because they would not be able to use it reasonably.

Let me add, that there is a big difference, if you are talking about your own, personal computer, or if you are in professional (or corporate, if you prefer) environment. There are reasons, why the *buntus are so much more popular on corporate desktops than other distros: They cause less effort in the support department (at least, that's one of Canonical's selling points).


Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
After all just because there is a gui component doesn't mean that the command line backend should be hidden, or just because you shouldn't run as root, root should be hidden.
As I said: It depends on the environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
Your analogy with the car falls down as I choose to use to use either my legs or a bicycle or some other mode of transport, I don't have to use the car just because the car manufacturers make cars.
But as you develop it, I get to think that my analogy works better than I expected myself (usually I don't like car analogies) ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
I don't need full control and I could not control fully as I never got round to programming in machine code, however my point was simply that programs should not determine how you use your computer, you should.

samac
Then you just should have said that. But again: Computer programs *always* restrict your options, even the CLI tools. As you say, to have really full control, you would have to be able to write machine code. The question then is, where to draw the line.
And as I said above: Sometimes, depending on the users and the environment, such restrictions can even be helpful and desired.

gargamel
 
Old 09-27-2009, 05:28 AM   #45
gargamel
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Distribution: Slackware, SLAX, OpenSuSE
Posts: 1,593

Rep: Reputation: 142Reputation: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
JoshOOO I'm sorry if you don't get this, but your implication that I am saying that you should just use gui tools or cli tools, is just frankly wrong.
However, this is how your original posts reads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
All I have said is that I should be able to determine what happens on my computer. I use both gui and cli to do that. I just do not want the computer program/OS writers to make that determination for me, and that the specific case was where I made a modification to a configuration file and the OS wrote it back on the next boot.
Again, if you would read more carefully, you would have noticed, that this mechanism may be the default, but that the behaviour can be changed, at least, in SuSE. However, at a price, because once you start bypassing the added abstraction layer, you will loose the benefits that come with it. As has been said several times in this thread.


Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
I can and do expect to be able to use both gui and cli and not have them contradict each other as more often than not the gui is just using the command line as the backend, therefore they should in no way contradict each other as they are to all intents the same program acting upon the same configuration file.
You accept only rather basic GUI tools then, one per service or application. In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with smarter solution. Over the years I found only two distros that I liked, because their philosophies are both consistent. One is SuSE, and the other one is Slackware. Probably the differences couldn't be bigger, and the overall quality assurance of Slackware was better (and sets the industry quality benchmark, in my opinion!), but both approaches are helpful in trying to make the complexity of an operating system manageable.
Obviously you are referring to the Canonical way of answering to this challenge, but please note, that there are other ways to provide smart GUI configuration tools without hiding the CLI or the existence of a privileged user account. Personally I have no strong opinion against the *buntus, but they also never really convinced me enough to keep them installed (Xubuntu was not bad, though).


Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
In Slackware you can do this, that is why I use Slackware, in some other Linux distributions it is more problematic that is why I do not use them. In Slackware the designer (Pat Volkerding) has designed it so that everyone has the choice and control over their computer, some other distributions try to impose "their way".
Here I FULLY agree with you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by samac View Post
I hope this clarifies my thoughts in response to your actual question I would guess rather a lot, system V init, deb package management, etc. but more importantly the fact that right at the core Mr Shuttleworth is telling you that you shouldn't know about the root user and sudo is how things are done, but we know different don't we, after all we learned Slackware so we know linux.

samac
Ok, then: Peace!

gargamel

Last edited by gargamel; 09-27-2009 at 06:40 AM.
 
  


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
LXer: Linux Shootout: 7 Desktop Distros Compared LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-14-2008 07:40 AM
Linux Shootout: 7 Desktop Distros Compared DragonSlayer48DX Linux - News 1 05-05-2008 06:09 PM
LXer: Three MythTV Linux distros compared LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-28-2007 03:50 PM
Heavyweight vs. Lightweight Distros Rick069 Linux - Software 6 09-28-2005 06:37 PM
Why is redhat so big compared to the other distros? sandboy6184 Linux - General 4 09-30-2004 11:49 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:43 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