The updates makes me hesitate to use it in a production environment just because it will take longer for me to fix. When they moved /lib I was really annoyed. My LVM,dm-crypt setup complicated things.
During that time systemd was in transition. I'm still not sure if I'm OK with systemd (hence this thread) and yes, I'm using it. It doesn't seem right to have systemd control EVERYTHING. Even fstab entries are converted into a systemd mount!

I'm considering slack or gentoo for a distro WITHOUT systemd.

Wow, the more I think about systemd, the more I want to ditch it.

Good posts, thank guys.

BTW, eXpander_ is the only troll here :)

While I have Arch on my machine and find that systemd works well enough (at least as a casual desktop user), I don't much care for what systemd seems to imply for what Linux is/was/will be.

Slack is great, can't speak for Gentoo - you could always run them both side by side to see which you prefer.

From the Arch wiki


source

Pointless comparison as Arch targets a different kind of user...? I've never touched Arch - nor gentoo - always meant to give those two a go at some point. In the case of Arch, I'm just not too keen on distros which are in a constant state of flux and where the user is force fed a continuous stream of updates - whether they need them or not - on a daily basis. I ran Debian unstable for years and even that was too much eventually. I prefer a distro where I can build stuff off a reasonably stable base.

I never touched Arch, although I like to look at Arch and Gentoo build scripts and patches. But I am a Slackware guy and only with Slack I found enough simplicity to go ahead and try things like this...
...without rendering my system into an electric consumer brick.
I just love Slackware =]

I maintained a few Arch VMs prior to jumping to Slackware. Arch definitely emphasizes using the CLI to get a lot done, but I feel that the abstraction of automatic dependency resolution and binary packages, although great accomplishments and useful, made me a little uncomfortable. That 'action at a distance' wasn't winning me over, so I rightly found Slackware. As goofy as it is, the adage about 'Learn X distro and you learn X, learn Slackware and you learn Linux', it piqued my interest.

Technically, big differences are systemd, binary packages, dep resolution and you're always up to date - "Sync'd". I'm not big on the attitude that certain things in linux software are evil or microsoftian schemes, they're just tools and the inherent tradeoffs are just something you deal with when dealing with those tools.

If all else fails and you can't decide; run both. There's a lot to learn from both worlds.

You'll have to explain that to me...

@notsure

For what I saw, ABS (Arch Build System) and pacman seems easy and user friendly, but I'm more comfortable with Slackware's build system and it way to manage packages and dependencies (or lack of). I can't count the times Arch and Gentoo helped when experimenting with some esoteric builds, as I can't count the times I messed so badly with my Slack install and a simple symbolic link kept the fun going on. Sorry, my english isn't good enough to articulate all the peculiarities I found using Slackware all this time.

YEah, BrZ, I'm afraid I don't see why the command 'gcc -v' should be scary to use on any system...

I've used Arch (before systemd) and Gentoo for quite some time. I came back to Slackware because Arch is not stable enough and Gentoo took me too much time for building when updating. But both are quite similar to Slackware.

Markus

notsure,

According to my research in Slackware Linux everything I need works the way I like. So Slackware Linux comes first. Then comes Arch Linux and then comes FreeBSD. (I described some unsolved issues concerning FreeBSD here.)

The way you use the machine may vary from my way so FreeBSD or Arch Linux may be better for you than Slackware Linux.

Now you’re more sure, notsure.

Arch and Slack are my two most favorite distros. I dual boot them. They both have merit. I wouldn't crap on Arch simply because it has systemd. Systemd is actually turning out quite nice. I don't blame anyone for not wanting to be a test subject on a new init system, but to discount it just because of who made it, isn't very open minded.

I don't care for it because of what it is, not because of someone's poor track record.

Fair enough. As an end-user I don't really have to deal with the init system on a level that you do, so I have no doubt you have techinal reasons for not wanting to adopt it. And frankly it's good to have some variety in the Linux world, otherwise there would be no point to having different distros. The main reason I use Slack is because you guys stick to what is tried and true.

It’s a pity because it seems that MS Windows doesn’t like you.