SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I actually like Arch quite a bit, but I prefer stability over bleeding-edge... and so, Slackware. I do like that neither of them are hand-holding distros, they force you to learn things.
Because 64-bit Slackware puts the Python site-packages directory in /usr/lib64/python/site-packages, and 64-bit Arch puts the Python site-packages directory in /usr/lib. Slackware's arrangement is neater.
i tried ArchLinux once in a while and it was driving me nuts when i left the system for 3 weeks without any update and then suddenly they migrated /lib to symlink few months ago and it breaks the system into unrecoverable system. Lucky enough it's just my old laptop with no data placed on it
i can leave Slackware for whole year and then i can upgrade it safely whenever i have time
i tried ArchLinux once in a while and it was driving me nuts when i left the system for 3 weeks without any update and then suddenly they migrated /lib to symlink few months ago and it breaks the system into unrecoverable system. Lucky enough it's just my old laptop with no data placed on it
i can leave Slackware for whole year and then i can upgrade it safely whenever i have time
+1. Tried Arch a few years back, and even went so far as to put it on a few production desktops. Lasted a few weeks, until the first update, which left the whole system in a mess. And I'm definitely no lamer for RTFM.
Personally, I think the question should have been worded better.
"I use Arch, but am interested to learn a little more about Slackware. So I would like to know the reasons you prefer Slackware over Arch."
That is an invitation for people to give honest assessments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by notsure
Why do you think Slackware "better" than ArchLinux?
This looks like, "Why do you wrongly believe Slackware is better than Arch?" Which is fine if it is an attempt to troll, but a bad choice of words if looking for honest opinions.
Arch is largely very good and its wiki is a great resource - bleeding edge means it can get broken by updates and that's a bit of a pain. It's easier to make Slack what you want it to be, so I find Slack more flexible.
I like Arch a lot though, I have it on my PC so I can use Gnome 3 now and again.
Why do you think Slackware "better" than ArchLinux?
I don't.
In fact, I don't think that I have ever read the words "Slackware is better than Arch" on this forum. Why do you ask this?
I like Slackware better, but I can't say that I have incredibly good reasons for this, since I haven't even payed attention to what Arch is doing for something like five years. It's enough keeping up with RedHat/CentOS/Fedora; By the time I've invested the energy there, I'm about done putzing with Linux. NetBSD and Illumos have been eating all of my UNIX hobby time lately, and Slackware is my commercial OS replacement and persistent friend.
I don't think I am alone in this use profile; Most of what I read these days comparing and contrasting Linux distributions are actually just descriptions of installers and bundled software or parroting of well-repeated truisms about the systems in question. Not many people seem to be in a good position to make well-reasoned, meaningful comparative analysis.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.