No, I just won't accept being put in the same category with Arch users who are being encouraged to use alpha stage software in production.
It's insulting for everyone except users who don't care whether or not their system is stable. I've nothing in common with them.
If you do, that's your choice and your right, please don't make me a part of it.

elcore - try to sound a bit less elitist, OK? Your rationale stinks and your comments are in fact insulting to non-Slackware users.

8 members found this post helpful.

Such was most certainly not my intention. I have simply shared a very broad observation I've made with absolutely no ulterior motives.

I'll just go, there's nothing else I had to say.

It's just you. I was not insulted by the comment in the least. I think it's kind of silly that you think someone's choice to use bleeding edge software somehow reflects negatively on them in a personal sense.

I don't see the developers telling the users what distro they must use. But it kind of sounds like you want the users to be able to dictate to the developers what kind of distro they must develop.

2 members found this post helpful.

I know that argument was made within the Debian project during the aftermath of the TC vote. "You can't make us maintain sysvinit!" But frankly, 'developers' (they aren't, they are packagers) who are tone-deaf to what their users want are going to lose a lot of users and are going to have to live with some degree of unpopularity.

2 members found this post helpful.

Yup, like I said, developers/packagers/whatever can't dictate to users what distro they use.

1 members found this post helpful.

Its not his fault most distros are maintained by people with poor taste to say it nicely...

1 members found this post helpful.

While some of you fellow (and dear) Slackers are arguing pretty much subjectively (like football supporters) over the future of Slackware, I'd like to remind you about the Slackware "brand" that has been created:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slackw...ign_philosophy
I cannot sum it up with better wording and I can only state that it's because of this I'm using Slack for 2 decades. I switched from BSD over to Slackware mainly because of the HW support (Linux kernel) and although over the years I've tried different distros, some weird experiences closely related to Redmond-like way of doing things, I kept coming back to Slack. Its elegance, simplicity/clarity, speed and ease of use (obviously you need to know Linux first) is still not to be matched by any other distro I've tried (apart from BSD, but that's not Linux).

Now, with the developments from the last 5-8 years, starting with the overhauling of HAL -> DeviceKit, then UPower, Polkit, Udisks, D-Bus ( nice idea but hopeless), Pulseaudio (hopeless too), systemd & co, there is a new way of "doing Linux" that keeps pushing to get adopted by the more conservative and "purist" Linux distros and their user bases. While these developments are to be appreciated, there's always need for creativity and improvements, there is an apparent issue with their design and completion. Some of these new developments were designed to suit KDE/Gnome and not the whole system and many of these developments are far from being completely functional and documented (oh dear, a pain!). Without being rude, but just trying to be nice - I call them premature ej***lations (unfinished work) and a real pain for a sysadmin / advanced user.

Systemd is something I really do not understand, neither its purpose nor its design/usage. I'm fine with the simple and clear init scripts from Slackware, I do trust the simple init process, my efficiency in simply modifying these scripts as a sysadmin / sysuser, creating some new, the full control I have over the processes I/system boot starts and I do not need any useless over-complications. I don't want to spend 5 minutes as root to kill a process, because systemd keeps re-spawning it and the utilities that come with systemd won't recognize it as running, nor could I easily find / investigate all the systemd configuration related to that process. I'm sorry if I'm getting older for such cra*, besides I'm root, I wear the pants on that system

Nor do I understand other modern deamons that behave like bad dogs (Redmond is full of them), that know better than me what is to be done and are a pain to configure & control.

I hope I didn't make anyone feel bad with my observations, actually I'm feeling myself very bad when I see something related to org.freedesktop and I need to struggle to make it work, and if you have any objections to what I wrote, feel free to bring your arguments. I won't mind, not at all, actually I won't even reply
I just hope I won't be forced to turn back to BSD.

7 members found this post helpful.

I tried to look up some documentation for a couple of freedesktop.org hosted things. I concur that the documentation situation is dire -- aside from all other objections against these.

Docs for X are excellent, but I believe that started out as something else, and suffered some sort of internal coup?

More and more I get the feeling that it bothers some people that people in the wild can have that amount of knowledge and control.

I have never used BSD in any serious capacity, and have some serious incompatibilities in some philosophical areas with their user base. But if for some reason either Slackware or the kernel was no longer available or viable, I fear BSD looks to be the only practical refuge available.

Hi shevegen

is this

on github, and where are the recipes/cookbooks ?

thanks for info!

I agree with you, however the mainstream, end-user oriented distributions are headed the other directions, where full control is hidden away behind ease of use, automation and oversimplification.

The average person wants to be served, wants everything to be as simple as a purpose built tool that only has an on/off switch. If you don't even have to read a user guide that's even better. I do not like this, but this is what i encounter every step of the way.


Even at work, i struggle to find employees who take their own initiative to find out how "stuff" works.

With gross overpopulation and the ubiquity of personal computers, I suppose this was inevitable. I grew up in a time where technical aptitude was earned. In my opinion, we have no obligation to do any hand-holding unless being paid well to do it.

1 members found this post helpful.

I owned a couple of the O'Reilly books at one point: two inches thick each. (I think there were at least six volumes.)