LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
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 02-20-2011, 05:07 AM   #1111
55020
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2009
Location: Yorks. W.R. 167397
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 390
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 372Reputation: 372Reputation: 372Reputation: 372

@gnashley, I've read your post several times now and I like it more each time

More *information* about dependencies is good, for all the reasons you give, and also it helps developers and packagers to minimise dependencies. But if the developers and packagers do their job properly, end users shouldn't need to know, unless they pretend that they are developers by running -current

Using that information *automatically* is bad, because it means *people* no longer care about minimising dependencies, and it leads to crazy situations like rpm depending on seamonkey, or the whole gnome mess.

If I could please waste a few moments of everybody's time on a hopeless rant, the whole dependency problem is caused by Unix not having proper dynamic linking. Unix merely has delayed static linking. On Multics, you didn't need to snap links at load time. Linking a segment happened when it was *called*, and you could even patch it in *after* a linkage error and resume your application as if nothing had happened. If you never *invoked* a missing segment, there was no problem. Of course Multics did this with segmentation instead of stupid flat memory

Last edited by 55020; 02-20-2011 at 05:10 AM.
 
Old 02-20-2011, 10:54 AM   #1112
AlvaroG
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2009
Location: Canelones, Uruguay
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 128

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnashley View Post
In short, having good dependency info is a great time-saver. And so is having a package manager that doesn't cripple you by doing its' own thing.
I agree 100%. Guidance is good, forced compliance is not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 55020 View Post
So I just write "this package depends on program a, b, c, and d, and optionally on e and f" and run away
And that's perfectly fine, I don't need to know which package is required to build and which one is required for certain feature, I just want to compile the program and get it working as expected! :-)
I like to tinker with the system, many times I had changed default compile options in order to avoid compiling certain library if it was required only for a feature I knew I wouldn't need. But sometimes I just want to get the program working and move on.

Of course, I am referring to SlackBuilds on SlackBuilds.org, which are not part of Slackware, and therefore this comment is probably offtopic :-D

Regards
 
Old 02-20-2011, 12:37 PM   #1113
xspartan
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 3
What i would like to see in Slackware?
1)Better choices. For example Samba 3.5 was buggy and a bad choice for Slackware 13.1. Version 13.0 had the worst IMO kernel for ext4. (2.6.29)
2)A way to to install a minimum system (core) without X and a way to install a system with just X and XFCE. It would be nice for servers and old computers. Not all of us need KDE 4X libraries.
3)Dependency checking. Some people claim that the reason they prefer Slackware is because it doesn't have a tool like apt-get. But lets be honest here. If someone doesn't like dependency checking then he can simply disable it. Such an option is available to slapt-get. So it's just a bad excuse. Personally i believe that Slackware doesn't provide a tool to resolve dependencies either because Pat doesn't have the time to do it or simply he can't. (But i highly doubt for the second.)
 
Old 02-20-2011, 12:46 PM   #1114
Lufbery
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Distribution: Slackware 64 14.0
Posts: 1,142
Blog Entries: 29

Rep: Reputation: 119Reputation: 119
Not a bad first post, Xspartan, and welcome to LQ.

I just want to point out that this last bit is a bit inflammatory:


Quote:
Originally Posted by xspartan View Post
3)Dependency checking. Some people claim that the reason they prefer Slackware is because it doesn't have a tool like apt-get. But lets be honest here. If someone doesn't like dependency checking then he can simply disable it. Such an option is available to slapt-get. So it's just a bad excuse. Personally i believe that Slackware doesn't provide a tool to resolve dependencies either because Pat doesn't have the time to do it or simply he can't. (But i highly doubt for the second.)
We've just gone though several pages in this thread on that very topic. More to the point, Pat has explicitly stated why he doesn't have dependency checking in Slackware, and it's not the two reasons you posted.

Personally, I think it's fair to debate the merits and consequences of dependency checking in Slackware, but I don't think it's fair to speculate on the maintainers' motives on the issue.

Regards,
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-20-2011, 01:00 PM   #1115
xspartan
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 3
Ty for the welcome. Believe me, i do not wish to start-up a flamewar or something. I am a Slackware user too, after all. And i can mention 1000 reasons why i prefer Slackware over Ubuntu. But the topic is "what changes would like to see in future Slackware".
 
Old 02-20-2011, 01:36 PM   #1116
Lufbery
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Distribution: Slackware 64 14.0
Posts: 1,142
Blog Entries: 29

Rep: Reputation: 119Reputation: 119
Xspartan,

I could tell that you're a slacker.

Welcome again.
 
Old 02-20-2011, 01:45 PM   #1117
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,193

Rep: Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548Reputation: 548
Quote:
Originally Posted by xspartan View Post
Personally i believe that Slackware doesn't provide a tool to resolve dependencies either because Pat doesn't have the time to do it or simply he can't. (But i highly doubt for the second.)
Welcome to LQ!
The above statement does put our Slackware maintainer in a negative light. Perhaps that was not your intent. Slackware has no dependency checking by design. Remember, you are in the official Slackware forum. We all very-much appreciate and value what Mr. Volkerding does for our community.
 
Old 02-20-2011, 10:40 PM   #1118
Lufbery
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Distribution: Slackware 64 14.0
Posts: 1,142
Blog Entries: 29

Rep: Reputation: 119Reputation: 119
FWIW, I still don't get the whole concept of dependency-checking as it relates to Slackware.

It's been said before (and said above several times), if you do a full installation of Slackware, then all the dependencies are already in place and you're good to go. If you install something that is not a part of the distribution, then you're on your own.

So the people who want dependency-checking seem to want it for one of two reasons:
  1. They only want to install parts of Slackware and want to make sure that everything works, or
  2. They want to install 3rd-party packages and have the dependencies checked for them.

FWIW, I don't necessarily think either reason is automatically a bad idea. I just thing that they're rather contradictory. If you don't want to install the distribution as packaged, then this leads to a situation that many distributions have where one installs a "core" and then picks what one wants after that's installed.

... which is fine, but that requires that the maintainers develop and maintain a lot more packages to accommodate the huge variety in software that people want to add to the core.

... which is fine, but that means that everything the developers maintain is still part of the distribution and installing something outside the distribution means you're still on your own.

Sure, third-party distributors can put together packages in your distribution's package format (RPM, .deb, etc.), and perhaps that's an advantage.

Serious question: am I missing anything here?

Regards,
 
Old 02-20-2011, 11:28 PM   #1119
a4z
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2009
Posts: 444

Rep: Reputation: 152Reputation: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by xspartan View Post
...
2)A way to to install a minimum system (core) without X and a way to install a system with just X and XFCE. It would be nice for servers and old computers. Not all of us need KDE 4X libraries.
3)Dependency checking. Some people claim that the reason they prefer Slackware is because it doesn't have a tool like apt-get. But lets be honest here. If someone doesn't like dependency checking then he can simply disable it. Such an option is available to slapt-get. ..
sounds for me like you would like to use http://www.salixos.org
based on and compatible with Slackware and the points you mention are realized
 
Old 02-21-2011, 06:00 AM   #1120
xspartan
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by a4z View Post
sounds for me like you would like to use http://www.salixos.org
based on and compatible with Slackware and the points you mention are realized
Salix (Fluxbox edition) is already installed on my old Laptop
 
Old 02-21-2011, 06:13 AM   #1121
goossen
Member
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: Bayern, Germany
Distribution: Many
Posts: 224

Rep: Reputation: 41
I love the "no dependency checking" of Slackware. I allows me to install whatever I want and whichever version I want.

Real life example:

I want to install xxy:
yum install xxy.
Version available: xxy-0.2 (released in 2004)
Last stable version: xxy-3.2 (released in 2010)
Ok, go to download xxy-3.2 and install it "manually".
Error, it requires libccx >= 4.5.
Last version available in yum repos: libccx 4.1.
Download libccx 4.6 and install it.
Error, it requires libzz >= 2.1.
Last version available in yum repos: libzz 1.8.



In the end, package management is more a problem than a solution!
 
Old 02-21-2011, 06:26 AM   #1122
Slax-Dude
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Location: Valadares, Portugal
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 261

Rep: Reputation: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnashley View Post
Creating a dependency-resolving system means being able to massage the contents and format of the packages themselves.
Well, not quite
As mentioned in this thread, there is the "Slack with deps" project by STEFANO STABELLINI, does not touch the packages themselves.
He just modified the PACKAGES.TXT from the repository.

I do agree that Slackware should provide dependency info, just like slackbuilds.org does.
Providing info is not the same as auto-installing dependencies and I for one would be grateful.

As for what I would like to see in future slackware: a better organized repository (a "xfce" directory comes to mind) wouldn't hurt
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-21-2011, 07:02 AM   #1123
xspartan
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 3
Dependency checking could be optional and not a default feature. Slapt-get or a similar tool could be in Slackware's cd extra directory. Just like Grub.
 
Old 02-21-2011, 07:10 AM   #1124
bonixavier
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2010
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 320

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slax-Dude View Post
As for what I would like to see in future slackware: a better organized repository (a "xfce" directory comes to mind) wouldn't hurt
It would be really weird. XFCE itself is 12MB, with an extra mega from its other packages (thunar-volman, xfce4-notifyd, etc). What I'd like to see is thunar packaged separately. But I don't really know what thunar depends on so that might lead to an explosion of tiny packages. If that is the case, nevermind what I said.
 
Old 02-21-2011, 07:48 AM   #1125
linuxs64
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 93

Rep: Reputation: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slax-Dude View Post
Well, not quite
As mentioned in this thread, there is the "Slack with deps" project by STEFANO STABELLINI, does not touch the packages themselves.
He just modified the PACKAGES.TXT from the repository.

I do agree that Slackware should provide dependency info, just like slackbuilds.org does.
Providing info is not the same as auto-installing dependencies and I for one would be grateful.

As for what I would like to see in future slackware: a better organized repository (a "xfce" directory comes to mind) wouldn't hurt
I would appreciate the same gesture to provide dependency info of a package. It helps the administrator to learn what packages must be installed first or later in an installation chain, which is what a slackware admin does on a regular basis.

Something along the lines of:

Quote:
PACKAGE NAME: abiword-2.8.4-x86_64-2gsb.txz
PACKAGE LOCATION: ./gsb64/go
PACKAGE SIZE (compressed): 3633 K
PACKAGE SIZE (uncompressed): 19400 K
PACKAGE REQUIRED: gtk+2,boost,wv,goffice
PACKAGE CONFLICTS:
PACKAGE SUGGESTS:
PACKAGE DESCRIPTION:
abiword: abiword (AbiWord Word Processor)
abiword:
abiword: AbiWord is a lean and fast full-featured word processor, with lots of
abiword: features useful for your daily work, personal needs, or for just some
abiword: good old typing fun. AbiWord is able to read and write all industry
abiword: standard document types, such as OpenOffice.org documents, Microsoft
abiword: Word documents, WordPerfect documents, Rich Text Format documents,
abiword: HTML web pages and many more. It also supports page layouts,
abiword: internationalization, mail merge, and has an assortment of plugins.
abiword:
abiword:

Source: PACKAGEs.TXT from GSB
 
  


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 10:03 PM
Future of Slackware kratunko Slackware 30 08-12-2005 12:31 PM
Slackware features? rusty_slacker Slackware 49 12-02-2004 04:45 AM
what are the features of the new slackware 9? ethanchic Slackware 2 09-27-2002 06:15 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 PM.

Main Menu
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