Yeah sorry... Well guys, slackware 13 stable is near...In the /etc/slackpkg/mirrors there are now a lot of new mirrors, for ARMedslack, slackware64 etc...Today I upgraded the new X packages, and the new intel experimental drivers too... Really satisfied guys

Hi,

I really like Slackware64 -current.

Just installed slackware64-current last night, and so far it's been a dream. Really like the move to a pretty stable version of KDE4, it looks slick! Whether or not it will hold up to my brutality tests is another story, but more on that later. It might be too soon to ask since this hasn't been around long, but does anyone have/is anyone currently working on a repository for 64 bit only packages? I'd love to see that, and am definitely down to pitch in if necessary.

You want other 64-bit packages check Alien Bob's repo.

If you mirror it you can run "find . -name "*-x86_64-*.tgz"
from ./slackbuilds and find all Slackware for x86_64 pkgs.

When slackware64 will be stable slacky.eu will adopt a repository right for slackware64

latest beta sbopkg can be also a useful alternative to easily build what's needed.

Should we be calling it Slackware-current or Slackware-13.0-RC1, or what, or doesn't it matter?

Slackware-current is already past 13.0-RC1. I would always call it slackware-current.

Eric

Thanks, Eric. A Slackware by any name would run as sweet (apologies to Mr W.Shakespeare).

Five days of eerie silence in the change log . . . could it almost be time? The anticipation is killing me.

This has been my first time ever to bother running the -current Slackware on my desktop . . . It's pretty neat. You wouldn't want to do it on a production server, but it sure is fun. The issues caused by pixman-0.15.10-x86_64-1.txz, for example, were driving me bonkers trying to figure out what I had done wrong with my custom 2.6.30.1 kernel until I saw 7/18's change log entry and breathed a huge sigh of relief.

I'll probably keep on running -current even after the stable release comes out. The view from the bleeding edge is cool and educational.

I have to wonder how many other slackers are running -current and doing daily updates for the first time due to the introduction of the x86_64 architecture, and how many of us will keep on doing it.

Has there been a poll on that?

I've been running -current for years. All that time I've heard mostly disparaging remarks from others for doing so. Now that so many Slackware users who have earnestly wanted 64-bit have had little choice but to run -current, it's personally pleasing/rewarding to see so many now have the fears of running -current finally dispelled. I suspect the experience will have affected them to such degree, that many won't stop running -current. The primary benefit of this will be the greater feedback in the continued development of software for Slackware. Hence, we may see more progress occur more often.

Shingoshi

This sounds like a contradiction in terms. Users run Slackware particularly because it is well tested and the official release does not include unstable stuff, just as others prefer to run the stable version of Debian, not testing or Sid.

The entire purpose of the development process is focused on bringing about a stable and fast final release that can actually be used in production.

You on the other hand suggest that we should be using current not stable, in order to make better the stable release, that we won't be able to use anyway, since we're running current, in order to make stable better etc.

Thus you create a vicious circle, like an infinite loop in a badly written script.

I don't think that is the suggestion . . . only that more users choosing to run -current on one of their machines expands the bed of testers and thus provides more feedback and perhaps quickens the improvement of the next stable release. Certainly the suggestion is not that John Q. Slacker should run -current. Of course the vast majority will continue to run the stable release. I see no contradiction.

Be that as it may, I think there's enough trouble getting the system up and running anyway. (I don't mean the initial installation process per se, but the tweaking and tinkering afterwards.)

I am willing to do that, because the end result will be a fast and reliable system, but if I wanted to go for the bleeding edge (the latest and greatest, aka the buggiest and the suckiest), I would run Fedora, Ubuntu or something like that.

Slackware gives me the nice balance between very stable and very new software (as new as it can be, provided it's well tested - again, comparable with Debian Stable).

(In this regard, Red Hat/CentOS is doing a much lousier job - their stable release still uses kernel 2.6.18 - hello!?)

The Slackware criteria are fairly close to those from FreeBSD, which I would probably be running, if their device drivers and filesystems wouldn't suck big time, as they do - the Linux kernel does a much better job in terms of hardware recognition and the filesystems supported in Linux are great (JFS from AIX, XFS from IRIX, ext2/3/4, ReiserFS etc.)

I will agree with you on your first point. I love the fact that Slackware's software is thoroughly tested, highly stable, and very reliable. I enjoy setting up a new Slackware box after the release of a new version of Slackware. The damn thing will run forever.

I've had very good luck with hardware identification with FreeBSD. I've run FreeBSD 5.x-7.x on Plll machines, and am currently dual booting Slackware 12.2 with FreeBSD 7.2-amd64 on my Intel Core Duo unit. FreeBSD runs well and is stable as hell, like Slackware.
Slackware is and always will be my first love.