Oh, come on.. How does this affect me, the end user in any way? Some would say that Slackware is too dictatorial (controlled by one man etc. etc.) Does that make Slackware a bad distro??

Sometimes this is what irritates me about Slackware users who tend to see every other distro in a negative light.

I don't go about preaching everywhere about how bad Slackware is when somebody asks me about Debian (and I don't think Slackware is bad either). On the other hand, Slackware users always tend to find ways to bash other distros first before praising Slackware.

I know this isn't true of all Slack users, but that kind of irritates me a lot...

Thanks for all your replies! I hope more are coming on..

@ cwwilson721

*cough*

Ok.. you got "a little" agrressive so I have to reply.

Sounds like you are a linux elitist, "bub". I don't want an Operating System that "holds my hand". After going through distributions such as Red Hat, Fedora, Mandrake, SuSE, Ubuntu, Knoppix, Gentoo, Debian and Slackware and the FreeBSD Operating System; after successfuly running CLI only (no "X") for months in a row both on FreeBSD and on Gentoo Linux; after more than 2/3 years of not touching a Microsoft product .. I don't consider myself anywhere near an expert .. but I can cirtantly say I know my way arround well enough to not find much difficulty to adapting to any environment .. be it Slackware .. be it Ubuntu (as they are pretty much at two opposite poles). So no, I don't need an operating system that holds my hand" and I don't miss windows.

You make it sound like ease of use of a particular program is a *BAD thing*. Why is that ? If it doesn't give you some difficulties, you don't get an "elite" feeling and you just can't have that ? Think before you attack people you know nothing about.

"Do you want program FOO? Get the source. Compile it."

Do that with about 30 programs and try to keep them updated. Compare the experience with one in which you used a package manager that installed the programs for you (and kept them updated). Kthnx.

"I read the changelogs and all documentation before I update or install, and as a result : I have never had a program not work." <<-- So do I. This line is irrelevant considering the topic of the thread.

I agree entirely. In fact, compiling programs is not exactly an "enlightening" thing which gives you knowledge but can waste loads of time doing things which are already done for you... If anything there is no "learning" involved in compiling but merely dealing with hassles like dependency checking. Manual dependency handling is not about "learning" to use anything but a hassle many of us like to avoid.

Unless you write your own programs, why compiling is seen as a part of "learning" or "education" is beyond me. Unless it helps in memorizing the famous "./configure; make; make install" steps which a child can memorize and repeat...

There are a few people who have that attitude. And yes, unfortunately they tend to sometimes "represent" the community and give us a bad name.

I'd agree with what Crashbox said: try installing Debian and see what you think of it. You mentioned that you've tried a lot of different distros already, so you have a lot of background to compare your experience of Debian. I use several different distros, for different reasons. At work I use Kubuntu because it is very quick and easy to set up and use, and while I'm there I want to be concentrating on my work and not tinkering with my Linux setup - this is something I have already spent a lot of time on! Slackware I tend to put on older boxes and on my webserver, because it's stable and doesn't include a lot of bloat placing extra demands on the system. The distro I find most "fun" is Gentoo, and that's what I use on my home desktop, but I wouldn't want to put it on all the computers I manage because it takes ages to set up. Life is just too short!

If you have several computers and the time to play around, I'd advise running several different distros. It stops you getting too set in your ways, and different ways of doing things should give you more insight into what's going on in the background.

Gethyn: if you'll look again through my list of "tried distros", you'll see Debian is one of them.

Unfortunately I do not own more than one computer.

Is it just me, or have there been a lot of "Debian vs. Slackware" threads lately - and not just here.

It has a ways to go before it reaches the "Vi vs. Emacs" level (for the record, I'm less confused by Vi ).

To me, comparing a distro maintained by one man to a distro maintained by an army is a bit apples to oranges. I use both and see no clear advantage to either that is objectively measurable for my computer usage. I do prefer slackware though. Just what I'm used to I guess.

With respect to package mangement and dependency checking:

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may very well be wrong), but aren't most dependency problems (read "dependency hell") caused by (or at least aggrivated by) the splitting of source into application and developement packages by package management systems like rpm and deb? If that is true, then aren't apt-get and the like with their dependency checking just solutions to a problem caused in large part by by the package management system itself?

I have not had much of an issue with Slackware and dependencies despite the "lack of package management" and "dependency checking". That's not to say it does not happen. All software depends on libs and other packages that may or may not be present on a given installation. And some software is far worse that others in this respect, but I have been able to resolve these issues relatively easily - so far.

I use Freerock Gnome. I also keep up with -current. This can cause issues. Gnumeric, for example, will break when I first re-update my instalation to -current after installing FRG (built for 10.2, not current). libgsf is over-written (along with many other things) by a newer version in -current and gnumeric won't run. The solution is to install the older version "along side" the newer version of the lib. I don't think this would be so easy with rpm or deb and dependency checking and is why a simple upgrade or installation of one package can result in a large number of package changes in Debian. This may be why many people think they cannot live without dependency checking when they consider slackware as an option. They don't realize that "dependency hell" is far less likely in Slackware. Dependencies exist in slackware for sure, but they don't seem to permiate the entire system the way they do in rpm and deb based systems. Often, all that is needed is to read the project page for what you are installing and get the listed dependencies. Not point and click I admit, but not brain surgery either.

Furthermore, if you are not installing much extra software, then package management is less of a selling point. Particularly for more experienced users. The new user will be interested in distros like Debian because they can try new software with little or no knowledge regarding compile options and filesystem integrity etc.. I suppose this is what is needed for new users to more easily try linux and open-source software and this is a good thing - it's just not a big selling point for me. Unfortunately, most new linux users learn linux in systems that are prone to "dependency hell", and thus need dependency checking, and don't understand that there are systems like Slackware that are not like that. So they hear "no package management" (not true) and "no dependency checking" and they freak.

In short, I am happy with Slackware despite it's lack of dependency checking. I would not be happy trying to run Debian without it - if it were even possible to do so.

Apples to oranges.

I'm by no means an experienced *nix user. I've just dabbled a bit over the years, and only recently have I determined to make Linux my primary OS, abandoning Windows for daily use except to the extent I need to use it to support others in my family who use it. All this to say that I'm not speaking from a position of sound experience and knowledge, but more from a position of a newbie. What can I say? I like to use more words than really necessary.

I've run Red Hat through several releases starting with version 5 about a decade ago, Fedora Core 3 and 4 more recently, and Debian also within the past year. I'm not counting Knoppix or DSL, both of which I mainly use to fix my screwups.

I was just playing around back in the Red Hat years, and never really got much past the "wow, this is cool" stage. FC 3, FC 4, and Debian were serious attempts to break free of Windows. For a newbie, I found them all quite frustrating and, at the same time, enlightening. I learned a lot by taking them for a spin and trying to make them work for me. I was trying to find what distro I felt most comfortable with from among the bewildering array of possibilities. I'd never even heard of Slackware at the time.

The aspect of FC3 and FC4 that I liked was that they installed easily and cleanly, handled all my mostly new hardware without glitches or complaints, and gave me a desktop that was both attractive and functional, with working apps for my CDROM and DVD drives, sound card, etc. Where I ran into problems was when I wanted to start doing things beyond just using the desktop environment. For example, I had a really hard time trying to access my Windows NTFS drives from Fedora, and I couldn't get Samba working to access the Windows machines on my home LAN.

I was running Debian (Sarge) simultaneously from another partition. Unfortunately, I did have a few installation hurdles with hardware on my system, especially with the ATI Radeon AGP card that didn't seem to be well supported (800x600 was the only video mode I could get), and my gigabit ethernet card that wasn't recognized at all. Hey, at the time I didn't know of LinuxQuestions.org, and it took me a while to figure out that I could download a driver (from Fedora or Windows where I had internet access) and install it on my Debian system myself.

With both FC3/FC4 and Debian, I ran into problems with the package managers. I spent a lot more time with the Fedora system trying to learn Yum and RPM and get the repositories set up right. Apt-get on Debian worked pretty well for me, but I don't think any of the package managers really handle dependencies especially well all the time. At least, I had a lot of problems, and I'll admit that my problems may have been mostly self-inflicted, stemming from my ignorance and lack of experience. I'm living proof that those package managers aren't idiot proof yet.

Other than the really cool Debian logo that appealed to my primal instincts, making me want to grunt and mate and sacrifice cattle to stone gods and elemental forces, I found myself liking FC3/FC4 better. I think it was mainly because of the lack of hardware issues I had with Fedora, compared to Debian. It also annoyed me that even though I'd tried to do a full install of Debian, every time I turned around I'd find there was some missing programs that I'd have to install from the CDs before I could continue. And that 800x600 screen was killing me. I very much doubt I gave Debian a fair shake, all in all. And then, Fedora started to bother me because it seemed like there was too much stuff under the covers that I couldn't get to (didn't know how to get to, in reality). I felt isolated from the operating system, set apart, sitting on top of it like a man in a lifeboat in the middle of the ocean, with nothing but a vast empty blue-black Gnome desktop around me, and unimagined depth and mysterious unseen complexity below. I had an epiphany of sorts; I realized that I felt like... a helpless user, and not someone who knew what they were about. Like my friends and family members who use Windows, and who have not a clue what goes on underneath. It was a humbling and shaming realization for me, like unto finding oneself suddenly unmanned.

Then one day, fate dealt me a blow that turned out to be a blessing. I had installed some packages with the graphical version of Yum on Fedora Core 4, and somehow, by a combination of stupidity and impatience, had managed to ignore or override dependencies. I don't recall what all it was now, but "stuff" started malfunctioning and breaking and leaving my system in a crippled state after that spate of ill-fated installs. So I tried to uninstall everything I'd installed recently to get back to a stable system. That's when disaster struck. As I selected packages to uninstall, Yum happily started resolving dependencies, real or imagined, and went on a grand uninstallation spree... until my system unraveled right out from under me. One moment, Yum was running on my Gnome desktop, dutifully uninstalling packages, and the next moment, my desktop was gone, graphical Yum was gone, X was gone, and I found myself dumped unceremoniously at a naked and accusing command prompt, the cursor blinking desultorily, mocking me, as though to say, "what now, fool?". I was thoroughly disheartened, disgusted with myself, as I sat staring dumbly at the command line in a state of stunned shock. What had I done? What was I to do?

Fortunately, I had just bought a copy of O'Reilly's "Linux In A Nutshell" and "Linux Pocket Guide". Between them, I was able to figure out how to use mount and unmount, tar, mkisofs, and cdrecord (that was a hard one!), and I managed to backup and save my home and root directories, grub configuration, and /etc directories to several CDs. Perhaps I had other alternatives available to me, but at the time, all I knew was that I would have to start over.

Surrounded by the shards and debris and the wreckage of my once powerful though ill-fathomed Linux FC4 system, lost in a sea of utter devastation and heart-wringing desolation stretching out for gigabytes around me, I dolefully rebooted Windows and went on a hunt for a new distro. I could have installed Fedora again, but not only had it failed to meet my needs, it also blew up in my face, accusing me, taunting me with my lack of ability to master it. Even if it was my own fault, I could hardly forgive it for that.

I'd already decided that Debian wouldn't fill the bill because of the hardware problems with my system that I lacked enough knowledge to solve. I decided I needed to start at the ground floor. I'd recently discovered LinuxQuestions.org and I was already familiar with distrowatch. I knew I wasn't ready for Linux from scratch, so I went consciously looking for a distribution that would help me to learn and understand Linux from the ground up, from the basics. I did not want to feel helpless anymore, like an emasculated user. I wanted a system that was under my control. I didn't know its name, but I knew it was out there. I considered Gentoo, but it seemed a bit tedious to install from the descriptions, almost a Linux from scratch. I looked at Ubuntu, Suse, Mandriva, and Mepis. I discarded them all for one reason or another. Aside from Mepis, they all seemed to be striving to fill that Windows-replacement niche that Fedora Core and, to some extent, Debian appeared to be seeking.

Then in my perusals of distros, I came upon Slackware. It had a reputation for stability and a fairly large and loyal following, at least judging by the googled accounts of it I'd found on the net. A mostly quiet, self-assured, knowledgeble following of relatively unpretentious people who appeared to posses more basic and esoteric familiarity with Linux than even the most knowledgelbe and helpful gurus of the other distros. On LinuxQuestions, there seemed to be a solid core of long-time Slackware mentors, people who were willing to help newbies and even answer dumb questions, especially when it seemed that the newbie was genuinely trying to understand and help themselves. And regardless of the specific forum, I observed that all the really tough questions seemed to get input from the Slackware masters. And as for Slackware itself, I liked the fact that it was touted as a trim, yet full-featured, fully functional and highly capable, stable and solid distribution, carefully crafted to present Linux in its fundamental form, sans the layers of fat and the bells and whistles that adorn many of the happy shiny distros for the masses that festoon the virtual landscape. A Linux distribution that you could use as a base for any endevor, from personal desktop to enterprise server.

What I've come to appreciate most about Slackware is that everything I have tried to do with it, I have succeeded at, even if not always on first try. Whenever I've broken it, I've been able to fix it. I can even compile and install kernels now with my own customized configuration, and that is a very empowering and liberating thing from the standpoint of a newbie. I don't have to just install packages. I can download and install software from source, and have it actually work! The path to this liberating power is not always smooth, and Slackware doesn't hold my hand along the way, but it doesn't put up artificial barriers to my efforts to customize it to my liking, either. And the best part is that I'm learning how the operating system works, how it is put together, how the various components are related, intertwined, and layered.

I am no where near to really understanding Linux, but with Slackware, I have the opportunity to do so over time. I'm also teaching myself how to program in C and C++, and one of these days, I'm going to be writing my own programs to run under Linux.

I am totally sold on Slackware. It is definitely the distro for me.

Slackware has many flaws. More than the average distro, BY FAR.

I'd hate to say this, but pat makes too many mistakes that he doesn't own up to. Coreutils was broken for YEARS after there was a patch to fix it, and uname -a still says (unknown) on my PC.(It took 3 years before pat finally patched it into current).


Also, i challenege all of the lemmings here to compile "Electric Sheep" screensaver for me. 100$ says you will have difficultly doing it, at least on vanilla slackware. You know why? Because pat improperly stripped the libraries in libpng, so many things won't build against them. Including Electric sheep, and until a workaround was put into CVS, Gnash wouldn't compile against slackware's libpng.

And guess what? Even if you do compile it, pat's CURL is also broken, and both electric sheep and xmms-scrobbler have problems using it. And of course, his curl is not broken, it works "just how the developers intended it to". Which is why i assume that only days after the version of curl that slackware uses was released the curl developers made a release that fixed said bugs in curl. Of course pat won't incorporate it in slackware...


In Debian, you would not get stupid bugs like that, because the developers don't have a nice group of lemmings behind them, so they know if they make a mistake, it won't be considered as a "feature" like the lemmings consider it, but it will be considered as what it is, a bug. One that needs correction.


Slackware for some reason is one of the only distros where i had to actually REPLACE packages provided by the maintainer in order to get a bug free system. That is far from simple, far from stable, and far from functional.



Having said that, i still do use it, because i do like building packs form source without having to worry about dependency incompatibilities, but still have the ability to use binaries if i need them.

It's just the slackware community is SO close minded, SO elitist, and would so blindly follow it's leader who is no different from any other distro maintainer. It is one of the worst communities i have ever come accross. Just as bad as the Gentoo, Debian, and Archlinux communities.

I should have read more carefully. To be honest, I think you're in a better position to make up your mind than we can advise you. Someone else suggested a dual boot, perhaps that would be the way to go while you come to a decision?

Wow...holy misinterpreted Batman!! I wasn't slamming Debian at all. In fact, if I HAD to change to another distro, Debian would be it.

As for what I said about Debian's political process being paralyzingly slow...I made that statement based on what I've read. Because of the large and active user base, one of the benefits of Debian is that everything is well documented and openly available. Debian is slow moving. I don't think the Debian community will disagree with that statement. Debian is slow moving almost by design. Let's think about it....a political process where decisions are made by a large group of people (Debian) is bound to be slower than one man sitting in a tower calling the shots (Slackware).

Just in case you still aren't convinced that my intentions were good...who says slow is bad. The old story about the tortoise and the hare still applies today. Watch the tech news...how often do we see some entity (hardware company, software vendor, etc) jump on something new, only to be force to rollback later due to terminal errors? Happens all the time. How often do we see Debian (or Slack for that matter) make this mistake? Not bloody often.

That's about all I have to say. To anyone reading this: You can't pick the perfect distro for you without trying some out. If you use X, but have been thinking lately that you might like Y, the only way you'll know for sure is to try Y. I'm afraid thats all the help I can give you.

I had Debian 3.1 (Net install version) on my box once and now I'm running slackware.

Why I prefer Slackware, though Debian is nice too?

1) Slackware is rock stable and secure. (Debian is too)
2) Slackware has much more uptodate "stable" packages than Debian. I was horrified to find that half a year ago for example, the stable Gnome version of Debian was still 2.8 while 2.12 was already out.
3) Installing Slackware isn't harder than installing Debian
4) Get the two CD Images for Slackware 10.2, make a full install, and BAM. You got tons of good software. Whatever exceeds your needs can be removed by pkgtool any time.
5) Slackware's slapt-get and gslapt (the graphical frontend) have enough programs to keep you going for a long. Just use a mirror of www.linuxpackages.net beside the stock "repo" and life's good. Also refer to 2) for the age of available .tgz's

I don't know, out of experience I enjoyed Slackware more than Debian. Debian didn't manage to get me off Fedora after using it for over a year, but Slackware did. (nothing against Fedora, I still like it)

-A

Way, way off topic here..

Gethyn - your sig is clever...of course you are forgetting:

"Old black water, keep on rollin’
Mississippi moon, won’t you keep on shinin’ on me"
- The Doobie Brothers

Can you show up some statistics or are you just trying to troll ? Maybe I'm not alone who prefer Slackware just because lesser occurrence of flaws.
Nobody is perfect, it's even valid for Pat. But your example with coreutils is wrong. First it is not a serious bug(cpuid in uname) and second and most importantly it's not a mistake of Pat but author of coreutils tools from GNU project. Philosophy of Slackware is to avoid own modifications of software as possible.

Can you be more specific about a bug in libpng package ? I've never experienced problems with libpng. I've compiled various sw with it many times (Qt, Imagemagick, Krita, Scribus ...) and no errors encountered. And SlackBuild scripts for libpng are ok - they strip executables and shared libraries in a standard way with "safe" parametr --strip--unneeded.

I do not know about a bug in curl package you were talking about, you have to be more descriptive next time. But it looks like you have problem with vanilla software distribution again.

Great story Z038, i had similar experiences!

I have NOT found this to be true. Quite the opposite, actually. As one learns more about Linux and how to use it properly, one appreciates the simplicity and elegant beauty of Slackware.
OK, ignoring the IRONY of "Electric Sheep,"

Under the /source directory on your Slackware CD is the source code for EVERYTHING that was used to build the distro, including the SlackBuild scripts. If you don't like the options Pat used to compile a program, all you have to do is copy the source code to your harddrive and tweak the SlackBuild script to your own liking. I've done this myself to include the static libraries in the SDL package. It is extremely easy to do.
Really? Won't, or hasn't gotten around to it yet? I take it that you've emailed Pat? Did he answer you? Why don't you just download the new version and use Pat's SlackBuild script to package it? As I said before, it isn't hard. People like you should stop bugging Pat with this crap. If you don't like it, don't use it.
The goals of Debian and the Debian community are very different to what I (as a Slackware user) want. That's fine, it takes different strokes to move the world.
Pardon me? Slackware users are elitist? Since day one, I have found the Slackware community to be helpful, and as a member of said community, I try to be helpful myself.

In conclusion, you are free to not use Slackware and have no right to complain unless you paid for it.

Have a nice day.