LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Closed Thread
 
Search this Thread
Old 03-26-2013, 09:23 PM   #46
w1k0
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Poland
Distribution: Slackware, Mint
Posts: 1,241

Rep: Reputation: 196Reputation: 196

guys & gals,

I canít recall now my impressions concerning Arch Linux because I tested it almost three years ago (version 2010.05). I just remember the podium:

1. Slackware Linux
2. Arch Linux
3. FreeBSD

Fortunately I saved my notes concerning Arch Linux so I can share them with all of you. Maybe someone will decide to try Arch Linux as well:

Code:
install: gpm, iptables, kbd, links

i386/qwerty/pl.map.gz
lat2a-16.psfu.gz

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# refresh packages list
pacman -Syy

# python
pacman -S python

# curl
pacman -S curl

# uncomment six sources
/etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

# ranks mirrors
rankmirrors -t /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

# syncing, refreshing and updating system
pacman -Syu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# easy add user
adduser

# profesional user add
useradd -m -G audio,lp,optical,storage,video,wheel,power -s /bin/bash user

# password
passwd user

# user delete
userdel -r user

pacman -S sudo

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# alsa loading last
echo "options snd-pcsp index=2" >> /etc/modprobe.d/modprobe.conf

# install alsa
pacman -S alsa-utils alsa-oss

# add user to group
gpasswd -a user audio

# setting mixer (unmute master, pcm and speaker; increase volume)
alsamixer

# test sound
aplay /usr/share/sounds/alsa/Front_Center.wav

# store settings
alsactl store

# add alsa to daemons in /etc/rc.conf:
DAEMONS=(syslog-ng network crond alsa)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# x-files
pacman -S libgl xorg mesa

# video driver
lspci | grep VGA
pacman -Ss xf86-video | less
pacman -S xf86-video-ati libgl ati-dri

Xorg -configure
cp /root/xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# input drivers
pacman -Ss xf86-input | less
pacman -S xf86-input-keyboard xf86-input-mouse

# input hotpluging
pacman -S xf86-input-evdev

pacman -S xf86-input-synaptics
setxkbmap pl

cp /etc/skel/.xinitrc ~/
^
|
+--- exec xterm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# desktop environment
pacman -S ttf-ms-fonts ttf-dejavu ttf-bitstream-vera
pacman -S xfce4 gnome-icon-theme
pacman -S lxde gamin
pacman -S fluxbox fluxconf
pacman -S openbox obconf obmenu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

# abs
pacman -S abs
(As I mentioned it was three years ago. I switched in the meantime from ISO-8859-2 to UTF8 so now the right font would be lat2-16.psfu.gz rather than lat2a-16.psfu.gz. As I suppose some other changes would be necessary as well.)
 
Old 03-26-2013, 11:05 PM   #47
enorbet
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware 14 is Main OpSys on Main PC, 2ndary are OpenSuSe 13 and SolydK
Posts: 731

Rep: Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339
Oranges and Nectarines

Greetz
I have tried to like Arch Linux twice. The first time was 2 years ago and to be fair I used it almost exclusively for 2 months, many many hours each day.

The last time was 6 months ago and it lasted for about a week before I once again abandoned it and for the same basic reasons, not even including that I despise the install process.

Proponents of Arch point to it's "lack of bloat" and I find this ludicrous in this day of hdd's of multiple terabytes. As far as I can tell, it matters little how much stuff is installed in Linux if you properly administer what gets to run and when. This isn't windoze with all the TSRs and "preloads" to appear as speed. So it's minimalistic base install doesn't thrill me in the least.

Far more important to me is the very first reason I tried Slackware in the first place. When I asked in my favorite Linux IRC channel many years ago why so many there used Slackware the guys that seemed the most knowledgeable said basically the same thing, "Because stuff just compiles right in it". That seemed to me to be the signature of a proper, fundamentally correct system and it turned out to be true.

I have to admit that auto-dependency resolution is vastly better than it used to be but frankly I don't care. I don't want anything going on behind my back or without my express knowledge and permission and all of them have require some acceptance of this basic tenet. I will gladly spend time dealing with dependencies manually as the occasional cost of having a solid, robust system that never breaks and when a problem occurs I know exactly what to fix when the worst is that a new app simply won't run. It will be my fault and since I know what I did and can discover what I didn't do, not only does it get fixed but I learn something specific and often, useful.

Slackbuilds have made things much easier w/o giving up that basic control and power that I require. In addition they do not require searching for PPAs or the excruciating time and effort to recover from breakage from a bad "update". Why people assume Slackware is more time consuming is just ignorance of the "Six P's Law" as far as I can tell.

So to answer the OP, neither is universally better, but Slackware is most definitely better for me.
 
6 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-26-2013, 11:23 PM   #48
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,278

Rep: Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
I have to admit that auto-dependency resolution is vastly better than it used to be but frankly I don't care. I don't want anything going on behind my back or without my express knowledge and permission and all of them have require some acceptance of this basic tenet. I will gladly spend time dealing with dependencies manually as the occasional cost of having a solid, robust system that never breaks and when a problem occurs I know exactly what to fix when the worst is that a new app simply won't run. It will be my fault and since I know what I did and can discover what I didn't do, not only does it get fixed but I learn something specific and often, useful.
Agreed. Well-said! The lack of dependency checking in Slackware is a strength not a deficit. I never need to worry about a package manager wreaking havoc with my Slackware system because *I am* the package manager. The Slackware package management system works perfectly for my needs.
 
Old 03-27-2013, 06:26 AM   #49
jtsn
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 908

Rep: Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beelzebud View Post
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,
I stay away from Arch because of two deliberate design choices: rolling release and systemd. The first doesn't give me stable, reproducable results, which I like to have, and the latter doesn't give me a Unix system, which I like to have.

Quote:
but to discount it just because of who made it, isn't very open minded.
That's just the tip of the iceberg. LP is in no way capable of designing something better than DMR's stroke of a genius. He tries and is not capable of recognizing his failure. A typical case of Dunning-Kruger.
 
5 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-27-2013, 06:38 AM   #50
markush
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2007
Location: Germany
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,974

Rep: Reputation: 849Reputation: 849Reputation: 849Reputation: 849Reputation: 849Reputation: 849Reputation: 849
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtsn View Post
...
... Lp ...
... A typical case of dunning-kruger.
lol
 
Old 03-27-2013, 07:42 AM   #51
m.a.l.'s pa
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2007
Location: albuquerque
Posts: 199

Rep: Reputation: 35
Interesting thread, from the perspective of a Debian-user who has no real experience with either Slackware or Arch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
Why people assume Slackware is more time consuming is just ignorance of the "Six P's Law" as far as I can tell.
Not to hijack the thread, but: Would you say, then, that Slackware is also less time-consuming than Debian?
 
Old 03-27-2013, 08:27 AM   #52
kikinovak
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: Slackware, Slackware64
Posts: 1,951

Rep: Reputation: 972Reputation: 972Reputation: 972Reputation: 972Reputation: 972Reputation: 972Reputation: 972Reputation: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.a.l.'s pa View Post
Interesting thread, from the perspective of a Debian-user who has no real experience with either Slackware or Arch.



Not to hijack the thread, but: Would you say, then, that Slackware is also less time-consuming than Debian?
As an ex-Debian user, I can answer this. As far as I'm concerned, Slackware is a bit more time-consuming, but also way more flexible.
 
Old 03-27-2013, 09:17 AM   #53
spudgunner
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 228

Rep: Reputation: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
Proponents of Arch point to it's "lack of bloat" and I find this ludicrous in this day of hdd's of multiple terabytes. As far as I can tell, it matters little how much stuff is installed in Linux if you properly administer what gets to run and when. This isn't windoze with all the TSRs and "preloads" to appear as speed. So it's minimalistic base install doesn't thrill me in the least.
I have tried Arch multiple times in VMs and this is what gets me every time. Sure, release a "minimalistic" install disc for those who want to build a system from the ground up, but give the rest of us lazy people a fairly complete install: common display drivers (and other drivers I guess, I never used it in-depth to know what else it's missing), X, a few DEs to choose from, a complete development environment for the most common languages, and programs that people commonly use on Linux (apache, samba, etc.). The only thing I don't install when I install Slackware is the KDE and Y series.

In this day and age, with cheap storage space and the ability to control your computer, the only reason you would need a minimal install is if you are working on an embedded system and storage space is prime real estate. (Or if you are using it on a exceptionally old computer).

(Actually, now that this thread has got me thinking about it again, I'm going to try an Arch install and install "xorg" (which I'm pretty sure will install everything xorg related) and a DE and see if it'll run a desktop environment with just those two commands.)
 
Old 03-27-2013, 09:26 AM   #54
w1k0
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Poland
Distribution: Slackware, Mint
Posts: 1,241

Rep: Reputation: 196Reputation: 196
12 hours later (an explanation)

Some of you may wonder why I wrote to eXpander_:

Quote:
Originally Posted by w1k0 View Post
Itís a pity because it seems that MS Windows doesnít like you.
As some people feel and the other people know MS Windows likes dumb people and dislikes smart people.

I assumed that eXpander_ is smart.

As a result I draw the conclusion expressed in the quoted sentence.

Of course I donít know the real state of the affairs.

So my assumption may be wrong.

In such a case I lose and eXpander_ wins.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-27-2013, 12:01 PM   #55
perbh
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 261

Rep: Reputation: 40
I was an arch-user for 7 years (!) - and really had no (big) problems until their last endevours (/lib vs /usr/lib and systemd).
I tried to go along because (quote and unquote) "it was the future and soon everyone else would be doing it".
I struggled through the /lib /usr/lib thingy (and no, it was nothing like as unproblematic as the wiki makes out) - finally got it into shape again when along comes systemd - and for me that was the straw that broke the camel's back! Several failures later I just gave up on it - I have better things to spend my time on.
I sync'ed often (2-3 times/week) and although there were occasional breakages, there hardly ever was anything fatal or insurmountable. Occasionally (work/vacation) there could be a couple of months between sync's and although it usually led to more problems than my usual updating - it was very seldom anything that could not be sorted out in a couple of hours (or waiting until the next day when there were new updates).

So - systemd did it - and seeing Slackware was my first 'love' (~1996) (and I have always used it on my servers) - it was but a small step to use it 'fulltime' on my xfce-desktop.
So - thanks to Pat and his team!!

Last edited by perbh; 03-27-2013 at 12:02 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-27-2013, 12:03 PM   #56
Bazzaah
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-current, Slackware64 14
Posts: 327

Rep: Reputation: 49
Ha! I had a look at my Arch install yesterday and it says that it can't update and that seems to be because my system clock is wrong. It's not wrong.

Oh how I laughed.
 
Old 03-27-2013, 12:07 PM   #57
slackass
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: SE Texas
Distribution: Slack64-C ML
Posts: 890

Rep: Reputation: 78
1) For me Slack is easier to fix when something goes wrong.
I keep 2 local mirrors of -Current.
One is always updated, the other stays about 2 or 3 weeks behind the other.
This makes it easy for me to downgrade -Current to a working system when something goes wrong.
I've never been able to setup a system like this on Arch.

2) I don't like the pacman all or nothing approach to updates, or the fact that it bundles system packages with non-system packages. This has left me with a lot of broken non-system packages in the past. Slackpkg only updates system packages and leaves non-system packages and there dependencies to me to maintain, and that’s the way I prefer it.

3) I've been using Slack sense 12.0 came out and at first things were a little confusing to me. I do my best to find solutions to my problems on my own because I learn better if I figure it out myself. On those occasions when I can't figure it out someone on this forum will point me to something to read that will lead me to a solution. I've never had anyone on this forum be rude to me.
On the Arch forum there this Beginners section where a newbi would think that this is the place for someone running Arch for the first time would go for help with a problem. But in fact, this seems to be a place where other people that don't know the solution to your problem will respond with RTFM rather that point you to a specific link or document that will ultimately lead you to a conclusion without reading the whole manual. I've been running Slack for quite some time now and have never read the whole manual, I just don't have that kind of time available. When I have a problem I search that particular problem.

I like Slack better.
I like the Slack people better.

Last edited by slackass; 03-27-2013 at 12:24 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 03-27-2013, 12:38 PM   #58
jtsn
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Europe
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 908

Rep: Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446Reputation: 446
Just fetched the Arch ISO. I remember Arch having an nice installer the last time I tried it. Now it drops me to a prompt. What happened there?
 
Old 03-27-2013, 12:48 PM   #59
ozar
Member
 
Registered: May 2004
Location: USA
Distribution: Arch Linux
Posts: 390

Rep: Reputation: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtsn View Post
Just fetched the Arch ISO. I remember Arch having an nice installer the last time I tried it. Now it drops me to a prompt. What happened there?
They did away with the installer a while back and went to installation scripts.
 
Old 03-27-2013, 12:48 PM   #60
ruario
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Location: Oslo, Norway
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,902

Rep: Reputation: 963Reputation: 963Reputation: 963Reputation: 963Reputation: 963Reputation: 963Reputation: 963Reputation: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtsn View Post
Just fetched the Arch ISO. I remember Arch having an nice installer the last time I tried it. Now it drops me to a prompt. What happened there?
There was a thread here on LQ about this previously. Alternatively here are some highlights:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario View Post
pretty sure they removed the installer. read the arch wiki for how to install now without it.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installation_Guide

or for more detail

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...e#Installation
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixellany View Post
off-topic, but WTF???!!!!----what problem was someone trying to solve?

This highlights a major truth about Arch---read the news on their website before doing an upgrade, making major changes, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario View Post
From the relevant Arch news entry on their website:

Quote:
AIF had to be dropped due to lack of maintenance and contributions. Of course we would appreciate it if people would start hacking on it to bring it up to par
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario View Post
There is a thread on the Arch Linux forums on the install media change if you want more information:

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=145602
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario View Post
Since I haven't installed Arch for a while (and never since AIF was dropped), I thought I'd give the new install method a quick try in a VM using archlinux-2012.08.04-dual.iso. For the most part I just followed the Install Guide and only referred to the Beginners' guide and other parts of the Archwiki for a few small things I couldn't remember or wasn't sure about.

In summary, the installation was actually faster and easier than I recall. Perhaps this is just because I have a better understanding of Linux and Arch than I had previously. In any case, the instructions are quite clear and I found that most of the heavy lifting in getting the install up is actually actually still done for you via a handful of scripts like, pacstrap, genfstab, arch-chroot, mkinitcpio, syslinux-install_update, etc. I can't see any major downside to the new install process when comparing to an AIF-based install. All you really lose is an ncurses interface. Personally therefore, I don't see any need to bring back AIF, as the new way works just fine.

Last edited by ruario; 03-27-2013 at 12:57 PM. Reason: Added in quotes from previous thread
 
1 members found this post helpful.
  


Closed Thread


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
SOLVED : P new install of archlinux with archlinux-2010.05-core-i686.iso elenger Arch 1 08-18-2011 02:55 PM
hi. i new here. from archlinux ywzhaifei LinuxQuestions.org Member Intro 1 11-25-2009 06:18 AM
iptables -I INPUT -p tcp --dport 22 -i eth0 -m state --state NEW -m recent --set deadeyes Linux - Server 14 07-29-2009 05:30 AM
not work: iptables -I INPUT 5 -m state --state NEW -m tcp -p tcp --dport 3306 -j DROP abefroman Linux - Security 1 07-18-2007 09:19 AM
LXer: State by state, Microsoft responds to creeping threat LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-01-2007 08:16 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:31 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
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration