As someone trying slackware for first time (after many years of other distros) - it is not the best or worst - it is
just best for a certain type of person/situation.

For a user from a MS background who just wants to set up a system and then not change anything, there are plenty of other
distros which may be easier to get going, and will probably function acceptably on good hardware.
Slackware, on the other hand, is really attractive 'standard' system for a user with some
background knowledge, who does want the option of tuning the system occassionally.

The main attraction to me is that I am tired of all the 'automated configurators' in the other distros - all different
from each other, and most annoyingly changing config files which I had set up in a certain way. Some of those distros
dont even use the standard *nix config files behind the scenes.

Quick example, I needed to be able to change my laptop's static network setup when working at different locations. Pretty easy to do
with a few versions of the standard config files, and a couple of scripts to swap the files around. Not so easy to do with 'netconfigurator'
or 'lancon' or .. what was that tool called again... must be somewhere in the menu system here...just gotta find it..

Anyway my 2 cents worth from a relatively unbiassed perspective.

I can probably boil down why Slackware is for me in two words.

It's not just the stability, nor the ability to "work under the hood".

Wi9thout the two words, I probably wouldn't be ABLE to change things, install other stuff, remove other bits, add in this and that.

Have you tried to "install" a kernel in some other distros? In SW, just do it.

What are the two words?

"This forum"

The answers, and the patience exhibited here, are first rate. Ask a question, you rarely get a "Look it up", or "Google the answer" or "Did you read the docs?" type answer. You get a answer you can use.
The answer may be a link to another post, or an external site. But you rarely ever see a zero reply here for long.

It's the community. This forum. THAT'S what makes Slackware so great.

cwwilson- you stole my thunder :)

I just read this entire thread and was thinking "no one has mentioned the community"

my first thread here is a great example of the patience and willingness of the slackware community to help out someone who is utterly clueless.

since then I've come a long way with linux (still don't consider myself a guru) but I've tried many different distros. The only rival to me for a desktop/laptop system is zenwalk.

I don't think you can find an out of the box distro more stable than slackware. and no binary distro is faster.

I'd also argue that nothing short of LFS teaches you as much as slackware, which is 50% of why I started using linux in the first place.

I also love that the source repos are so easily browseable, whenever I'm building something complex in (B)LFS I 'wget' a copy of PV's slackbuild script.

As one who started with Slackware 2.2, I can say Slackware is simple and reliable. I run many different distributions to be compatible with work. My network server is Slackware 10.1. As of last night, it has been up for 160 days without a problem. Though I purchased Slackware 12, I never installed it. The machine is working fine, even though it is old (picked up on the street.) I have never thought of the distribution as old. It might not have the ease of rpm installs, or the pizazz of apt, but if you really need software you can generally get it from one or another repository, or compile it from source code.

Good luck. Welcome aboard

Without slackware, I would have killed myself.

Oh come on, really ?

You snooze, you lose...Or you're running Windoze...lmao

Some things that are great about Slackware ...
 

Outdated is relative. Because you are/are not running 2.6.yada.blah.NEW means you are not/are outdated?

Some distros are missing KDE are they incomplete? Or, they are missing ... so they are incomplete as well?

With Slackware, I can go, get the SOURCE, configure, compile, install, and KNOW where things are going, IF I need them, which I might,or might not.

[Q]How many sysadmins does it take to maintain a distro? [A]It depends.

I got a job as a UNIX (read SunOS/Solaris) System Administrator because of my experience leveraged from installing Slackware and upgrading it, and such, way back in the early days (1997-1998) of distributions. Geez that was a LOT of floppies.

Seems like a good reason to be loyal to a "benevolent dictator."

... Mark

This thread is outdated.

Most of this thread pre-dates Slackware 12... FYI

My 2 cents
 

A friend of mine got me interested in Linux when I was a sophomore in HS. When I was a little noob underclassmen I tried: Core, DSL,Red Hat, Ubuntu, and Slackware. I fell in love with Slackware. A big plus for me then was the ease of install. Nothing but a nice organized little menu. The only thing I had to learn how-to do before install was partitioning and cfdisk is great for a noob. Also Slackware just felt right, from the name of the disto to the "keep it simple stupid" type of setup.

The only downtime I've had has been from power outages.

Slackware forces you to learn; after two years of reading, studying, and a lot of trial and error(on my part of course) I can look at a blank screen and feel great.

There is a lot more I'd like to say but I think that's enough.. just a little haha though... I take a Microsoft networking class(please don't hate me now) and for labs we use server 2003. The first time I saw it boot and load the GUI I felt a pang in my stomach and felt so restricted, while everyone else was saying, "This is so easy!" I love the saying, "Linux isn't user friendly it's ./user_friendly"

__________________________________________
favorite thing to showoff with:

tree /WEB > site_map; cat /WEB/site_map | grep "pron"

I think it's funny

This isn't the first time I've seen the fact that Slackware is largely maintained by one person portrayed as a "bad" thing. I think the opposite is true. The fact that Slackware is organised in such a way that it is possible for a single individual to maintain it is a very good thing IMHO!

Gnome? I use and much prefer XFCE anyway.

I recently installed openSUSE and was horrified by what Yast2 did with the config files. What I like about Slackware is that it is pretty much straight Linux, with no vendors fiddling with configuration files and layouts.

The slightly extra time I might spend configuring things on Slackware is *way* preferable to the hours I have to spend un-configuring things on Fedora or openSUSE.

Slackware also has a very simple and effective package system that makes it easy to build and manage packages that just work.

Slackware is Linux, pure and simple (or the closest thing to it you'll find).

i dont know if the original poster is still keeping up with this thread.. but to further verify. i have been messing about with ubuntu and its clones, debian, and gentoo as of lately.. just doesnt cut it. when i can have my system up and serving in 15 minutes.. that is the deal maker for me.

as far as all that crap about being incomplete. slackware has more libraries installed by default than nearly any other distro. someone saying no gnome makes it incomplete is completely ignorant (not in a bad way). the choice of a distro is just that. choice. ubuntu doesnt come with kde, infact, it doesnt come with really anything. ok, it is in the repositories. so, we have slapt, emerde, and linuxpackages.net for packages. and debian and ubuntu has apt. and that is it. i think the debian clones are pretty incomplete to start. debian has a lot... but too many times have i tried to install it and it told me i had corruptions on my disc. using the same type of cds and cd burner as i used to burn and install slack and many other distros.

to me, if i cant get it running, i dont want it. i can have a server if a few minutes, and a few minutes longer, my desktop. and i know what i did. not what someone else thinks you need or want.

i do like the idea behind ubuntu. just isnt a very powerful linux distro. it isnt linux, it is ubuntu.

and dont get me started on redhat and suse.......

And that is why I use it. Every once in a while I get a new piece of hardware and it doesn't work. I think, hell, I'll try ubuntu or mandriva. Load them up, try to make source code. Can't do it because kernel headers or sources are missing or some development package is missing.

FC9 is a prime example (although FC6 -maybe 7- worked pretty well). With FC9 I could not compile radeon or radeonhd sources. Something was missing. Then I actually found the latest rpm for one of these, FOR FC9, but it would not load. Some kind of dependency error. And I downloaded the dvd image. It should have everything. Pathetic. Anyone wanting fedora should start with fc8.

Same thing with Mandriva, I could not load nvidia proprietary driver, ie the one that actually does 3D and works. Same thing with PClinux, ubuntu804, and zenwalk. The livecd and install work well. They come up with almost no user action required (but be careful they don't overwrite your first partition and mbr). It is only when you need more stuff they fail. Then you have to spend time finding the right package by whatever goofy name and protocol they use to see if it will work.

Every once in a while I try freebsd but can't figure out the install. I get stuck in circular configs (probably because of sata dvd). I would be willing to try gentoo but it is so large (700MB) that it will only fit on one type of cd, and I still have 50 disks of the other type. Was it really so important to get that last 60MB on the cd? You have to load other stuff anyway as a single disk will not have enough.

I try other dists but always come back to slackware.

But enough of this, I like this or that crap. I want you folks to learn how to program and help improve the packages. I'm not quite there myself but maybe someday.

I had difficulty installing FreeBSD in the beginning, but, stuck with it (FreeBSD's sysinstall is rather slack-like). I'm currently running Slackware 12.1 in a dual boot with FreeBSD 7.0 on one of of my machines. Lilo is an excellent boot loader for FreeBSD:-) The FreeBSD manual is pretty-well laid out.
However, Slackware is and always will be my favourite OS used on my main machine.

CW good to see you around!

I agree, the people in this forum make Slackware a great distro.

And YOU are one of those people! Thanks for all your help in the good ole days! I haven't had to ask you a question in ages ;)

Randall