LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 07-02-2009, 05:03 AM   #706
/dev/me
Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Distribution: Slackware 13
Posts: 116

Rep: Reputation: 20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
Try to remember that Slackers are technical people, computer savvy people. A majority of the computer users today are office people and non technical users of computers. That does not mean they like Windows but without the technical expertise they are not going to try to install a new operating system. A Live CD allows people to test systems.
To most non-technical users, the GUI is the OS. Sorry if I sound negative (I'm trying not to ) but I hardly think your average office worker can tell the difference between Kubuntu or Slack. A 'Slackware LiveCD' to them is a 'KDE-preview CD'. And the default KDE, again, I love it because I don't need to turn things off but only need to build it up... but as a preview it's quite plain and little exciting.

Perhaps that technical users would benefit from a LiveCD though. But I'm thinking, they might just as well benefit just as much from a VirtualBox image?? I mean, I understand your point, but virtualization has become childsplay. It may have more to offer than a LiveCD? I've not run a physical LiveCD in ages, and I've not dual booted either, because it's fast, stable and very convenient to run something virtually.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowsnipes
One of the Slackware team members, for instance, could make a copy of their custom setup to a VirtualBox image (BSD girl background images and all). They would also probably want to take out any sensitive information or user docs that others don't need and change any configs needed to fit the default virtual hardware. A brief description of the setup could be included where the VBox image is hosted. Multiple images could even be included for different setup examples- or better yet, one image with multiple Slackware installation examples on separate virtual partitions.
Yeah, this seems like a good idea to me. It would be easier than creating a LiveCD/DVD in terms of hardware compatibility, and images can be more focused towards a task. Slackware desktop/Slackware webserver/Slackware whatever.

I'm almost thinking it would be Instant Slackware.

Last edited by /dev/me; 07-02-2009 at 05:14 AM.
 
Old 07-02-2009, 06:27 AM   #707
AGer
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2007
Distribution: Slackware current
Posts: 136
Blog Entries: 22

Rep: Reputation: 19
Installation to a file is better than LiveCD

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowsnipes View Post
As I mentioned previously, one way to at least minimize the second problem would be to create a VirtualBox image instead of a LiveCD.
A VBox image demonstrates the system better than a LiveCD, but does not allow to see how the system works with user's actual hardware. Installation to a file system image in a file, like Wubu, is even better. I guess Slackware may be simpler than Wubu - install to a file system in a file and boot that image from the installation media, so that the addition of a single file is indeed the only change to the user system, be it Windows or Linux.
 
Old 07-03-2009, 01:04 AM   #708
vigi
Member
 
Registered: May 2009
Location: australia
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 177

Rep: Reputation: 27
Another problem with live CD/DVDs is they run from a noisy drive buzzing in your ear and can be relatively slow. Live mini distros (Wolvix cub - or Puppy linux etc) that run off USBflash-or loaded into RAM are far better for a user experience. One can then experience the slackware zippy response.
 
Old 07-03-2009, 01:09 AM   #709
murankar
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: Cleveland Ohio
Distribution: Current CentOS 5.6
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 20
Mysql to work right after an install.
 
Old 07-03-2009, 02:31 AM   #710
shadowsnipes
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,442

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGer View Post
A VBox image demonstrates the system better than a LiveCD, but does not allow to see how the system works with user's actual hardware. Installation to a file system image in a file, like Wubu, is even better. I guess Slackware may be simpler than Wubu - install to a file system in a file and boot that image from the installation media, so that the addition of a single file is indeed the only change to the user system, be it Windows or Linux.
You mean like TopologiLinux?

The problem with that is that the user would have to configure the mini Slackware for their hardware, so they would not be able to get a quick snapshot. The main draw of the VBox image is that it would be instantly ready to allow the user to preview some example Slackware setups. The user could start imagining the possibilities they could create with Slackware. They could experiment with pkgtools (and that sbopkg they heard about), etc to see if they like the "admin tools". They could marvel at the stability of a properly setup Slackware install. If a new Slackware user botches a fs on file system Slackware install they will probably just assume that Slackware has a lot of bugs or isn't compatible with their hardware. I highly doubt Slackware is incompatible with any typical (non-exotic) hardware, so spending a lot of dev time for startup tricks to autodetect and configure hardware is probably unnecessary. Slackware has proven over and over to stable. Is it a system that the user can make their own? Can they make it what they are looking for? The VBox snapshots can quickly give them a ballpark answer for this.
 
Old 07-03-2009, 09:56 AM   #711
mRgOBLIN
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Jun 2002
Location: New Zealand
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 999

Rep: Reputation: 227Reputation: 227Reputation: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by murankar View Post
Mysql to work right after an install.
What doesn't work about it now?
 
Old 07-03-2009, 09:18 PM   #712
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
One challenge to a virtual imaage is the size. A Live CD can fit on a standard 700 MB disk. Even with compression a virtual image will be larger.

I'm thinking in terms of downloading, not storage requirements. Downloading a CD image is one thing, downloading a virtual hard drive image might be too much for many people.

Last edited by Woodsman; 07-04-2009 at 01:33 AM.
 
Old 08-02-2009, 12:30 PM   #713
sahko
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2008
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,041

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
OMG this thread on the 8th page? Must be a sin. Or i guess too many people are content with the 64bit port and KDE4 in -current.

Earlier in ##slackware , Lord_Khelben asked the following:

Quote:
i read the new updates in -current yesterday and there was an update for shadow. i have always wondered why is shadow-4.0.3 still used ? are > 4.0.3 versions PAM only or something ?
i have the impression that there was a discussion in the slack 8.0 time but i may be wrong. i cant remember (and there are even major releases since there)
But he didnt get an answer. Does anyone know whats the deal with shadow?

Last edited by sahko; 08-02-2009 at 12:33 PM.
 
Old 08-03-2009, 03:52 PM   #714
rworkman
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama (USA)
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,945

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
shadow is a low priority consideration, to be honest. Is there some good reason that a newer version needs to be considered? Otherwise, what we have works just fine and doesn't have any known bugs.
 
Old 08-03-2009, 04:51 PM   #715
pokipoki08
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 76

Rep: Reputation: 16
Pre-install or make available compiled packages of

fftw
ffmpeg
vlc
aqualung
virtualbox-ose ver. 3.0.2
jack-audio-connection-kit
pulseaudio (if it works!)
enable UTF-8 in X & console

some of these packages takes considerable time to compile. Took me a few hours to complete, especially with the required dependencies.

Last edited by pokipoki08; 08-03-2009 at 04:54 PM.
 
Old 08-03-2009, 05:03 PM   #716
rworkman
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Tuscaloosa, Alabama (USA)
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,945

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokipoki08 View Post
Pre-install or make available compiled packages of
fftw
What needs this? Nothing in the tree now can even use fftw iirc, so it's only some other additions (perhaps suggested here) that would need it.
Quote:
ffmpeg
Patent issues in USA, right?
Quote:
vlc
Patent issues in USA
Quote:
aqualung
What the hell *is* this? More importantly, that's a rhetorical question. If I've never heard of it, there's a better than average chance that it doesn't belong in a "general purpose" OS.
Quote:
virtualbox-ose ver. 3.0.2
That's easy enough to install yourself, and it's large, and then it opens the door to other virtualization software. Why not qemu and kvm too?
Quote:
jack-audio-connection-kit
What needs it?
Quote:
pulseaudio (if it works!)
You don't even know if it works, and you're suggesting that it be added??? WTF?
For what it's worth, do a google search on pulseaudio - I don't think too many people are happy with it.
Quote:
enable UTF-8 in X & console
Enable it yourself - see /etc/lilo.conf and /etc/profile.d/lang.sh
 
Old 08-03-2009, 05:44 PM   #717
onebuck
Moderator
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Midwest USA, Central Illinois
Distribution: SlackwareŽ
Posts: 11,451
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505Reputation: 1505
Hi,
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokipoki08 View Post
Pre-install or make available compiled packages of

fftw
ffmpeg
vlc
aqualung
virtualbox-ose ver. 3.0.2
jack-audio-connection-kit
pulseaudio (if it works!)
enable UTF-8 in X & console

some of these packages takes considerable time to compile. Took me a few hours to complete, especially with the required dependencies.
Why not build packages for Slackbuilds or wherever if you feel that others would need such animals? Just because a few might use there's no reason to include in the distribution.
 
Old 08-03-2009, 05:56 PM   #718
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,139
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Most of those things are available from slackbuilds.org, and using SlackBuilds is easy with sbopkg (not that it was difficult before, but it was slower).
 
Old 08-03-2009, 05:58 PM   #719
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,384

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokipoki08 View Post
Pre-install or make available compiled packages of

ffmpeg
vlc
There are pre-compiled packages for you, just not as part of Slackware itself.

ffmpeg:

http://slackware.org.uk/people/alien...builds/ffmpeg/ (not distributable in the US)
http://slackware.org.uk/people/alien...builds/ffmpeg/ (distributable in the US because patented code has been left out)

vlc:

http://slackware.org.uk/people/alien...ackbuilds/vlc/ (not distributable in the US)
http://slackware.org.uk/people/alien/slackbuilds/vlc/ (distributable in the US because patented code has been left out)

Eric
 
Old 08-04-2009, 01:22 AM   #720
sahko
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2008
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,041

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by rworkman View Post
shadow is a low priority consideration, to be honest. Is there some good reason that a newer version needs to be considered? Otherwise, what we have works just fine and doesn't have any known bugs.
No reason it *must* be updated AFAIK. It works reliably here too.
Like i said in my post shadow is in the same version at least since Slackware 8.0 (which was released 8 years ago) and the specific version has been rebuilt 18 times, even for fixing minor issues.
I guess at some point it could have been updated to some more recent version instead of just rebuilding the same one, as there have been many shadow releases since 4.0.3, and i was curious if there are any reasons for not being doing that all this time.
Like PAM or something else.

After all, most of the parts of Slackware that are essential to the system's well being are updated regularly and shadow seem to be an exception.
 
  


Reply

Tags
cd, live


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
Slackware future? coyctecm Slackware 12 02-01-2006 11:03 PM
Future of Slackware kratunko Slackware 30 08-12-2005 01:31 PM
Slackware features? rusty_slacker Slackware 49 12-02-2004 05:45 AM
what are the features of the new slackware 9? ethanchic Slackware 2 09-27-2002 07:15 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23 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