LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
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 08-12-2017, 09:44 PM   #31
rainydayshirt
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2017
Location: Ferguson, Missouri, USA
Distribution: Slackware, antiX, Devuan, Puppy
Posts: 16

Rep: Reputation: 18

Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
It was never an expectation that a fresh Slackware install would be capable of rebuilding all of its packages.
Isn't that literally the point of the sources DVD? You can recompile any included software using just the full Slackware install and the sources. Thats the impression I got from the main site, SlackDocs, manual pages, etc.
 
Old 08-12-2017, 11:34 PM   #32
montagdude
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2016
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 595

Rep: Reputation: 411Reputation: 411Reputation: 411Reputation: 411Reputation: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainydayshirt View Post
Isn't that literally the point of the sources DVD? You can recompile any included software using just the full Slackware install and the sources. Thats the impression I got from the main site, SlackDocs, manual pages, etc.
I agree, that would be a departure from the norm. As far as I know, any of the Slackware sources should be rebuild-able with a full Slackware install and nothing more (though I've never tried rebuilding all of them, so I could be wrong).
 
Old 08-13-2017, 12:50 AM   #33
a4z
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,376

Rep: Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
ESR stands just for Extended Support Release, nothing magic here, you know...

I agree that may make sense to go ESR in a stable release, BUT the current stay on top of many other included software, anyways...

If we want really those old good versions, maybe we should NOT jump always on the latest X.org, consequently breaking every time the AMD drivers, BTW...
see ESR more as a LTS, and the other one, firefox current, as a developer snapshot. No magic here.
if you put a non LTS into current, and than want to stabilize for release, you might what to go down with the version number, or ship an unstable package with Slackware, or adopt to the release cycle of the whole distribution to the release cycle from FF.
So this is a different situation to your comparison with xorg, no magic here, just details, BTW ...
also, and this is why i prefer ESR, ff-current breaks plugins from time to time, and I know a lot of users that have changed because of this to chrome.
Mozilla made a huge mistake by making their current branch to the 'default' one, and the ESR to only those who know about it.
It should have been precise vice versa, than firefox would not have that big loss on users, which hey have.
Mozilla made its users to beta testers, and frustrated a lot of plugin authors with their unstable and unpredictable development plans. The shrinking user numbers are the result.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 03:03 AM   #34
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,436

Rep: Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainydayshirt View Post
Isn't that literally the point of the sources DVD? You can recompile any included software using just the full Slackware install and the sources. Thats the impression I got from the main site, SlackDocs, manual pages, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by montagdude View Post
I agree, that would be a departure from the norm. As far as I know, any of the Slackware sources should be rebuild-able with a full Slackware install and nothing more (though I've never tried rebuilding all of them, so I could be wrong).
As far as I know, that's a misconception. I'm going by this quote from Pat:

Quote:
We give you the exact sources that were used to compile the packages. There's no guarantee that these sources will compile under any arbitrary development environment (including any particular version of Slackware).
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...3/#post3978712

Last edited by dugan; 08-13-2017 at 03:06 AM.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-13-2017, 03:32 AM   #35
ttk
Member
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Sebastopol, CA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 528
Blog Entries: 21

Rep: Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Firstly, to note that we talk about a particular web browser, and is generally considered that for web browsers the latest versions are the best. Always.
That is factually incorrect, especially with regard to Firefox. Some releases are better than others, and it's seldom a linear progression.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-13-2017, 03:45 AM   #36
elcore
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2014
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 337

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Prefer no binary repacks and no more gnome in stable tree, tbh. I'll just remove it either way because of how demanding it is.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 06:15 AM   #37
rainydayshirt
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2017
Location: Ferguson, Missouri, USA
Distribution: Slackware, antiX, Devuan, Puppy
Posts: 16

Rep: Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
As far as I know, that's a misconception. I'm going by this quote from Pat:



http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...3/#post3978712
I stand corrected. Makes sense. (The thread that link is for is RIDICULOUS)
 
Old 08-13-2017, 08:41 AM   #38
montagdude
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2016
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 595

Rep: Reputation: 411Reputation: 411Reputation: 411Reputation: 411Reputation: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
As far as I know, that's a misconception. I'm going by this quote from Pat:



http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...3/#post3978712
Okay, now that I looked at that thread I remember that I've heard that before. However, I still think it would be a departure from the norm for a SlackBuild script to require a certain compiler but for that compiler to not be available on Slackware at the time the package is built.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 09:33 AM   #39
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 6,588

Rep: Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainydayshirt View Post
I stand corrected. Makes sense. (The thread that link is for is RIDICULOUS)
Ah, that asshole LuckyCyborg... I used the occasion to add a bit of explanatory text to the Slack Docs FAQ page: https://docs.slackware.com/slackware...d_from_scratch . I hope that it is sufficient to fend off any future trolls.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-13-2017, 01:15 PM   #40
Darth Vader
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 1,132

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436
Eric, good to know that a well know fact about Slackware (that it is not rebuild-able from its given sources) it is also stated officially.

But, what is your opinion about the Pigzilla Firehog shipped by Slackware even in its development tree?

Also, you consider to be normal for a web browser to eat 3.5GB memory or something really stinks?

As a Slackware Team insider, maybe you can enlighten us...

Last edited by Darth Vader; 08-13-2017 at 03:31 PM.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 01:19 PM   #41
Darth Vader
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 1,132

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttk View Post
That is factually incorrect, especially with regard to Firefox. Some releases are better than others, and it's seldom a linear progression.
Just install and use the 55.x version, and you will see that it is dramatic superior from all points of view...
 
Old 08-13-2017, 01:21 PM   #42
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,436

Rep: Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813Reputation: 2813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Also, you consider to be normal for a web browser to eat 3.5GB memory or something really stinks?
You weren't talking to me, but...

yeah that's normal.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 01:41 PM   #43
Darth Vader
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 1,132

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436Reputation: 436
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
yeah that's normal.
Then, how you explain that three major versions later, same software manage to do the same job using around 500MB ?

Last edited by Darth Vader; 08-13-2017 at 01:44 PM.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 01:48 PM   #44
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 6,588

Rep: Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841Reputation: 3841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Eric, good to know that a well know fact about Slackware (that it is not rebuild-able from its sources) it is also stated officially.

But, what is your opinion about the Pigzilla Firehog shipped by Slackware even in its development tree?

Also, you consider to be normal for a web browser to eat 3.5GB memory or something really stinks?

As a Slackware Team insider, maybe you can enlighten us...
Well... I do not use Firefox, so I have no opinion to share on this.
 
Old 08-13-2017, 01:52 PM   #45
Gerard Lally
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Ireland
Distribution: Slackware, Crux, NetBSD
Posts: 1,222

Rep: Reputation: 710Reputation: 710Reputation: 710Reputation: 710Reputation: 710Reputation: 710Reputation: 710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Then, how you explain that three major versions later, same software manage to do the same job using around 500MB ?
Do add-ons like uMatrix, uBlock Origin and Tree Style Tabs work with this latest Firefox? They're the reason I use Firefox. Memory use is not an issue for me because I have 32GB but the plugins definitely are an issue. Perhaps Pat has this in mind?
 
  


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: A Modern Day Front-End Development Stack LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-17-2017 07:30 PM
Firefox 53 and rust Lenard Spencer Slackware 18 05-01-2017 03:09 PM
LXer: Mozilla's Rust Language Gets A GCC Compiler Front-End LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 12-03-2013 08:21 PM
Is there a Mageia repository that includes a modern Firefox? Timothy Miller Mageia 61 11-12-2013 08:05 PM
svgalib_helper with modern slackware ? WiseDraco Slackware 1 05-28-2011 01:26 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:16 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration