Hi,

People will burn bridges so as to justify the change is not their fault or responsibility in their mindset. And yes the OP is trolling or attempt at a poor one at that.

If by incomplete you mean a lack of packages, I agree. I often struggle with the shortage too. I have had to build about 120 packages to remedy my interpretation of Slackware's "incompleteness." In that respect there are times when I envy the Debian or RPM crowds. They download a package and move on with life. Slackware is different in that respect. If a package does not exist and a build script does not exist, then most often a Slacker learns to live without. Sometimes that is emotionally and professionally challenging.

If by incomplete you mean a lack of preconfiguration, the volume of posts at LQ Slackware regarding video and network configuration issues seem to support such a statement.

People create bonds when they invest time and energy into a group of people. Those bonds include a certain sense of loyalty, commitment, and trust. Should those bonds later become insufficient then there are mixed emotions. A little bitterness, a little disappointment, a little anger, a little cynicism.

Humans are social creatures and generally become anti-social only when their own boundaries are threatened. Boundaries are partially defined by comfort zones. Every human has a comfort zone and no human is exactly similar. When a person's hopes invested into a group prove lacking, for whatever reason or perception, people tend to lash out because they believe or feel their boundaries or comfort zones are threatened. There is a feeling of betrayal because of that sense of loyalty, commitment, and trust.

Despite varying interpretations, when people post messages like this there usually are elements of fact in the message. The people remaining in that group should listen. There usually is sufficient information in such posts from which to learn and possibly improve the group.

On the contrary, the message is an obvious sign of reaching out. Leaving a group is difficult. One does not need a Ph. D. in psychology to see this.

Although lacking in diplomacy and tact, the poster's message does contain elements that Slackers should address. For example, I'm glad to see WICD included in the extra branch and I suspect the next release will see that utility moved to the main branch. Yet the tool is GTK and for KDE user's that is always unsettling. Some people will respond that KDE users have KWifiManager, yet read the forum here and the general consensus is that the KDE networking tools don't work with Slackware. Why not? Why can't these tools be patched? Instead the usual response, as worded by the poster, "Slackware fans will often justify all the problems with a remarkably smug geekier-than-thou attitude." In other words, open a terminal and start tweaking.

One of the messages I received from the post is Slackware is a decent operating system but falls short in some areas. I agree with such a statement. There is room for improvement within Slackware. Many people like the underlying design of Slackware. Posters like this are arguing that some preconfiguration and point-and-click tools are long overdue in Slackware. Not everybody is a geek or even wants to be. That does not means such people can't or won't like the underlying Slackware design. I have been around computers for almost three decades. I like Slackware but I too would like to see some effort in making Slackware easier for the non-geek. Like the Debian and RPM folks, there are times when I just want things to work without working my way toward a degree in computer science.

I don't think the poster is trolling. There is a message there for people willing to pause and reflect. Looking into the mirror on a regular basis is pretty good wisdom.

Who is this "a Slacker" you're talking about? Most of the ones here would make that script exist and share it with others. That is not a "geekier than thou attitude." Rather, it's how open source is supposed to work.

Hi,
I'm sure everyone would want to have an easier function or application to meet their needs. That's one of the reasons for the *buntus of the world, hold my hand an lead me in the wrong direction at least until a run into a wall. I think that things could be better in Slackware but I really don't want a gui'fied OS that would cause me to walk into another wall. As for a 'CS' degree, I wonder if we could clep our 'Slackware' experience?

Maybe trolling was a bit harsh but I do believe that his/her frustrations were very apparent. I took dugan's lead an looked at the lucmove's posting history. I really don't like to judge.

Looking in the mirror will help if you know what you are looking for or at!

I won't say that the person is trolling as I've been reprimanded before for using the troll label. Suffice it to say that people can draw their own conclusions regarding this poster. I've had a few interactions with him in the past.

Slack rules!

I just get matching GTK and QT themes and then start either gnome-settings-daemon or xfce-mcs-manager with KDE.

One problem. Sometimes that fine system doesn't fit your needs, and you will have to fight that system. Right now I'm having problems on ubuntu machine, that wants to delete package I need. Package is non-standard, it is pinned down, but have one broken dependency which cannot be resolved. Because of this system can't do update (it wants to kill the package). Which is annoying. Of course, eventually I'll fix this (either by avoiding package management, or manually interfering with package manager's functions), but things like that are annoying.

Making packages yourself isn't difficult. And I don't like slackbuilds because of junk in /tmp and root privilegies for compilation.

Me, for one! I don't know how to create a build script from scratch. I use them. I test them. I do both well. I can copy a build script template but if there are problems compiling software, anything out of the ordinary, even with a build script, I have to post here at LQ for help.

Presuming somebody will make a build script or a package does not mean that always happens. For example, yesterday I posted a request for a discussion about gfxboot. No Slackers are responding. I believe adding gfxboot to the Slackware package collection would be wonderful. Now, I admit one day is insufficient time for responses, but I have had other thread posts go unanswered. I have little choice but to live without. Perhaps I can try rpm2tgz, but if that fails then I live without. In the mean time, all the Debian and RPM folks have this flexible and aesthetic tool. This was part of the poster's message about "being incomplete."

I don't think anybody can accuse me of being a parasite or leach. My web site contains a lot of information to help people with Slackware and I contribute here at LQ as well --- yet I am not an expert at compiling software. I like and prefer the underlying Slackware design, but that does not qualify me to compile software from scratch. I'm very good at using software and because of my background I have a keen eye for usability issues. Yet compiling is a challenge for me and if a build script or package does not exist then I have to do without. I lack the training to disassemble code. That was my point in agreement with the poster. Every human is a creature of limited knowledge. Even subject matter experts are limited, just less limited than others in their area of expertise.

Yes, I'd like to learn more about compiling software but I am a creature with limited time just like everybody else. There are dozens of subjects I'd like to study. Devoting time to any one subject means less time elsewhere. I'm on the downhill side of life and am well aware that my biological clock will one day stop ticking. I'm not a "young buck" anymore. Time is precious. I'm not a super man and don't try to be.

I was not implying hand-holding, although there is nothing inherently wrong with that. My point was only that sometimes this computer stuff is hard and some people do not find the solutions they desire. As the poster noted, the other distros have many people working together to provide solutions. The Slackware community is significantly smaller and tends to suffer with respect to people who want some of the nice things the other distros have.

I would like both options. As I wrote, time is precious --- there are times when I do not want to tinker, I want only to use my computer. For example, when I bought a digital camera a few months ago, I had to build several packages. Sure was not a out-of-the-box experience. A brother on the other hand, plugs his camera into his XP box and never once thinks about the process not working. Many months ago I wanted to rip the audio from one of my musical DVDs. Easy? No way. I had to build packages and then learn to use a cryptic command line tool. For a similar project I also had to recompile K3B after installing those packages. With those kinds of projects I am more than willing to GUIfy my box. Point-and-click. Just work.

Yes, everything now works. And somebody will quip that I learned a lot in the process. Learning was not my goal. I wanted only to upload my pictures and rip some audio.

To people without a computer background and education in building software, making a package is impossible. The same reasoning goes for any field of study. I regularly change the engine oil on my truck but that does not qualify me as an auto mechanic. I am trying to learn to play the tin whistle and I am finding the process a challenge. For somebody to tell me that playing a tin whistle isn't difficult is pompous and elitist. I have been in the technical writing field for more than two decades. I never would tell anybody that tech writing isn't difficult. Writing about technical subjects is challenging and requires skill and experience. So does compiling software and building packages.

There is only one such theme (QtCurve-Gtk2?) and that limits people. Yet even if there were dozens of themes for both, that would not resolve the problem of file picker dialog boxes. Many KDE users dislike GTK file picker dialog boxes. I certainly dislike them. Sure would be nice if developers in both sides would allow end-users to choose which file picker dialog boxes they prefer. I prefer KDE dialog boxes.

There's more than one set.

My setup (with KDE 3) is:

GTK
Aurora-Looks
nuoveXT 2 icons

Qt
Domino with the Daurora configuration
nuoveXT 2 icons

No, they don't look exactly the same, but they do look similar enough not to bother me... and I'm an anal freak about this.

BTW, your last two posts have been very critical of Slackware. What do you see in Slackware that makes you stay with it? If it's only because you then my question is, what did you think of the various forks you've tried?

It sounds to me like what you want is Slackware... with full hardware detection and with slapt-get pointed to a tgz version of Ubuntu's package repository. I agree that such a distro would be nice to have .

I'm not a "person without a computer background and education". So I simply don't care. It can be learned, people just shouldn't be scared about process.

You don't have to be programmer or "computer mechanic" to compile package. It was all explained before. Many times. And there were howtos written about it.

Playing a musical instrument is much more difficult than compiling something. Since I had much larger amount of musical experience (than computer experience), I think I have right to say that. Nearest equivalent to playing instrument is fixing bugs in existing software (still not writing your own software, though). Nearest equivalent in compiling is ability to play just one note on instrument.

//offtopic
Honestly, I'd recommend to use anything that allows "chromatic" sounds. Having just D or G major doesn't look like much fun to me, even if it is possible to get non-standard sounds by using tricks.

ErV is right. If you'd rather "do without" a program you want to run than build it yourself, then you need to become more comfortable with building. For your own sake.

What, specifically, was unclear in the guides or howtos you've read?

Why must people always insist that we make slackware into a new *buntu, when its purpose is to not be like ubuntu?

Alright, Woodsman, here are the ways of building Slackware packages, and an honest assessment of how difficult they are.

src2pkg: as easy as doing anything else in Linux

./configure, make, make install: open the tarball and follow the step-by-step instructions inside. By the third time you've done this, you realize it's the same for every package. We'll ignore the problem of uninstallation for now.

./configure, make, trackinstall: uses the trackinstall program from src2pkg. Same level of difficulty as above.

./configure, make install DESTDIR, makepkg: requires knowledge of DESTDIR and a few minutes spent learning how to use makepkg. ErV posted step-by-step instructions a couple of weeks ago.

write a SlackBuild: download a template from SlackBuild.org and modify it according to the comments inside. Requires rudimentary knowledge of shell scripting (such as knowing that hash marks represent comments), familiarity with the package's configure script, and reading of the HowTo document on SlackBuilds.org.

But what if the configure or make steps (involved in all of these methods) fail? If you have all the dependencies then the fault is with the program and you should report it to its project mailing list. If you can't wait for the maintainer to fix it, then another option is to see if other distros provide patches and try applying them. Again, this does not require knowledge of programming. It only requires knowledge the program "patch" and where another distro keeps its patches.

This, on the other hand, is something you really need a programming background to understand. I'll try to explain it. I assume you mean switching between GTK and QT dialogues at run time? The most obvious objection to this is that it would give the program an extra set of dependencies. Furthermore, Qt and GTK don't just handle file open dialogues; they provide the entire interface. Would you really want to implement an entire program in GTK and then give the user the option of using Qt dialogues? If you did, you would find here that Qt's dialogue sends information to the rest of the program in a proprietary Qt format, and that there is a performance penalty (and time and stress penalty) converting it to a format that GTK can use. It would actually make more sense to implement two complete interfaces: one in Qt and one in GTK. The program would have to be designed from the ground up to support this. It's not something you can just patch in.

"Unrealistic expectations are a precursor to disappointment." -- Quote unknown

Slackware is a distribution that has a simple philosophy.

It is intended to be a stable base that due to it's simple design and adherence to a vanilla software approach will allow customisations that would be impossible with other distributions. It stays out of your way and never tries to second guess your intentions. If you break something you will have to fix it. If you change something it will stay changed.

These are not flaws... these are strengths!

No distribution will be a perfect fit for every user and trying to do so is just compromise after compromise.

If Slackware does not fit your needs you can always try to find something that fits your definition of what a Linux Distribution should be but please don't try to turn Slackware into a copy of your current favoured "distro of the month".

Do however feel free to change/customise your own copy of Slackware into something that suits you but understand that the further you stray from the path the harder managing it will be.

Everyone is welcome to suggest (not demand) improvements but please understand that if your suggestion goes against our base philosophies then the likelihood of it being included are next to nil. Many suggestions here at LQ have been considered and even included. (Yes the team keeps a close eye on this forum)

Also please keep in mind that Slackware has a large and varied user base, what may seen like a minor change to you may have far reaching effects for many other users. For example: adding a GUI tool to do something may in fact make the same job more difficult for those that use the CLI. (yes there are many people that still use CLI exclusively).

A distribution is a very complicated collection of software and maintaining a level of stability such as found in Slackware is indeed a black art, decisions are not made lightly and every change is a balancing act.

Anyone that can pull off such a feat for 15 years has certainly earned my respect.