Why Do You Recommend Slackware Over Debian Or Ubuntu...?
SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I have to disagree with the assertion that "Debian unstable and testing are too unstable to be used for anything at all." I use debian unstable as a web and file server, print server, mythtv backend, mysql, etc., and never have any stability problems whatsoever. Occasionally something breaks from a premature upgrade, but usually it's fixed very soon by another upgrade or by downgrading the problem package to the earlier version.
That said, slackware has always felt even more stable to me. For some reason that I've never completely figured out, it also feels more "intuitive" somehow. A problem in slackware that would be relatively easy to fix would probably mystify me in debian. usually I have to ask how to fix it if it's something really difficult or obscure.
The things I learned in slackware also helped me a lot and were easy apply to fedora, red hat, arch linux, etc. and even to some extent the debian distros, whereas the stuff in the debian distros seems more about the distro than about linux. That probably only makes sense to the slackware users, and the debian users feel exactly the opposite. But in reality, debian seems to have taught me to use apt-get, the dpkg tools, etc. and not much else, whereas slack teaches you how to do almost everything. Maybe that's just because I use debian as a server and don't really have a lot of direct day to day interaction with it like a desktop, but there really is a difference, imo. I honestly think you learn more from slackware.
At least with XP I could count on having to reboot occasionally, or run a virus scan or spyware scan. Defrag the hard drive, cleanup the registry, remove old files. There was always something to do.
I suppose I could use my newfound computer time now to actually learn Linux and become as proficient as possible at the command line, compile a custom kernel for optimal efficiency, and so forth. It's just that the installing, configuring, tweaking and problem-solving part of Slackware was the fun part for me. Now it just sits there waiting to be used. LOL.
I'm like that middle-aged married guy who has a good stable thing going on at home, but out of boredom his eyes start to wander. And I don't want to do that. My distro-hopping days are over. Besides, I'd just come back to Slackware anyway and there's only so many times this hard-drive is going to allow itself to be re-partitioned and formatted before it gets pissed off.
I have to disagree with the assertion that "Debian unstable and testing are too unstable to be used for anything at all." I use debian unstable as a web and file server, print server, mythtv backend, mysql, etc., and never have any stability problems whatsoever. Occasionally something breaks from a premature upgrade, but usually it's fixed very soon by another upgrade or by downgrading the problem package to the earlier version.
Yes I tried to modify that statement in a later reply. «It's too unstable for my taste to be used for anything at all». I'm sure you, intotrouble and a lot of other people can use debian unstable, but for me... well, it's just too unstable. I haven't tried to use debian unstable as a server, but on the desktop, there were just too many problems and too much work.
On the other hand, I have Debian stable running on a home server. It has been running for several years, without me having to do anything with it. It does the job, and sometimes it needs and apt-get update or even a dist-upgrade. It provides the packages I need, they are compiled like I need them to, not any problems with it, it's stable and I don't have to put any work into it - I'm happy.
For my workstation I have other demands, and right now there seems like noone meets my demands better than Slackware. It's stable, it's simple, it provides the latest stable packages and I can easily build other versions or missing packages quite easily.
The biggest problem I have with Slackware right now is boredom. I'm not trying to be cute or funny either. My machine is incredibly stable for the first time in it's life, all the software I need for school is loaded and runs perfectly, I haven't rebooted in days, no error messages in sight, nothing left to figure out. It just sits here staring at me all day like I should actually be using it for something constructive. Yikes! Don't like the sound of that.
Heh-heh.......the tyranny of perfection in Slackware is indeed a problem for Slackers. I had that problem as well for a few years where I would get bored because my Slackware stations ran perfectly. I might on occasion scan for a rootkit, but, mostly the desktops would run on and on, stable and secure as hell.
Now I really appreciate the perfection that is Slackware. My Slackware 12.1 boxes run happily and I'm glad that I've found my distro. My distro hopping days are behind me:-)
Hehe... Well, you started this marriage analogy...
Actually, I think we've hit on something here...
Slackware is my wife,
OpenBSD is my mistress,
Debian is my sister. (she's ok, but it would be wrong to sleep with her)
Ubuntu is my sister's best friend and a bit of a beauty. She looks stunning, but knows it and is a bit on the superficial side. (ok for a one night stand)
WinXP, is the ex-wife.
Windows Vista, is the local disease ridden prostitute.
Slackware stays out of your way but makes it easy to modify the system (this is mostly because the config files are so well commented). It also feels professional, just look at the CHANGES_AND_HINTS files and the upgrade files, Patrik knows what he's doing.
Dependency checking is so overrated, especially when you have slackbuilds.org!
it seems this questions has been closed for a while. I only want to share my own very limited experience on the matter. I've been using Ubuntu for a couple of years and I really like it. It was my introduction to Linux (I had tried slackware many moons ago, but it wasn't a good experience then; I didn't know what I was doing). Although I love the community around Ubuntu (and have learned much from them), I have always wanted to try Slackware. I finally did, and I am glad. It's been a great experience. Tough, no question, but i'm learning lots every day. I'm glad to find this community here; I've already learned lots from you. So thanks and you'll be seeing my questions in this forum quite a bit.
i like slackware because of the run levels it has retained. debian and ubuntu dropped the run levels, and make it hard to install video drivers. i like slackware because it is just so well rounded, it can take an rpm, deb, or tarball to install but basically anything goes. the webserver setup is easy enough for an idiot to run a full blown web page on.
i like slackware because of the run levels it has retained. debian and ubuntu dropped the run levels, and make it hard to install video drivers. i like slackware because it is just so well rounded, it can take an rpm, deb, or tarball to install but basically anything goes. the webserver setup is easy enough for an idiot to run a full blown web page on.
If you're an idiot, should you be running a full-blown webpage? Furthermore, if you were an idiot, would you be using Slackware?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.