Thanks for the interesting replies.

I also really agree with the comments made by pixellany.

I learned so much by doing a minimal install, figuring out what was needed, how stuff works etc. I always thought this approach was far more in line with the slack philosophy.

I don't understand how things have changed, and now a full install is recommended because it is simply easier. Or, has this always been the case?

I'd be really curious to see an example of why that's true. In my pea-brain, once the required libraries are required for a particular functionality are defined, then you would simply install all the specified stuff when you needed something. MANY distros are set up this way--regardless of whether they use dependency-checking package managers.

If you can maintain a whole happy meal, why would not be able to maintain the beef patty?
Or--if you prefer: If you cannot maintain the patty, how would you ever be able to maintain the happy meal?

If someone says "I want to eat a hamburger", do you give them a patty or a happy meal? People who know better say "I want a burger with wheat bun, lettuce, tomato, and onions, no mayo, mustard, or fries", or even "I want a burger, *just* the burger" (though that'd be pretty hard to eat).

Well, that is an interesting analogy.

I think it is commonly accepted that while burger can refer to the patty, it commonly refers to the whole item, bread and all.

By default, you should just have a patty, bread, and maybe cheese. People who know better can add what they know they like, and people who don't know better can read the menu and learn about the choices and add items as they like.

Recommending the full install by default, is akin to giving them everything on the burger, making them remove pickles and tomatoes if they don't like them.

Why not offer the choice and encourage learning, rather than simply give them everything at once?

edit:

On another note, I feel that advocating a full install is quite similar to what you might get with Ubuntu or Fedora. Everything installed by default, and ready to use. However, I would say Slackware does not have the advantages that go along with these systems, and instead, slackware shines and the advantages are apparent when doing a more minimal install and exercising control.

Seriously, go to a local In-n-Out (or other decent burger place) and order the standard burger without any customizations.

I'd rather have a good square meal than bread and water.

Followed by a trip to the local ultra-violence?

Not sure what your point is, as I'm not from the US.

If I go to Mcdonalds or the local burger place, and ask only for a burger, I will get a patty with bread and maybe cheese. That is the standard burger.

The burgers with extra stuff, tend to be named appropriatly, and sold on the fact they do have extra stuff.

that was not the point!!!

Of course most customers will walk in the door and just ask for the happy meal. The issue was with maintenance-----to sell happy meals, the place needs to know how to maintain beef patties--and lettuce---and fries.....

Sure, in order to make a happy meal, you need to know how to make all the stuff in it. The point is that if you give them a full hamburger, you won't get someone complaining "Where's the lettuce?". And of course, you can remove the lettuce later if you discovered that you didn't really want it. And now you know next time you order a burger to leave the lettuce out.

So, why is someone complaining "I have lettuce I didn't want and now I have to remove it" worse than someone asking "wheres the lettuce?"?

I think it makes much more sense to educate from the ground up, rather than dump everything and slowly remove things you don't need.

full install disadvantages:

more software to update and maintain
user may have software they were unaware of, and did not want
security vulnerabilities -- increase attack surface
bad practice..encourages not knowing your system as well as you could

advantages:

everything works..no dependencies


ground up install disadvantages:

something may not work because of a dependency. Not so much an issue, learn what is required and why, and add it.

advanatgaes:

education, encouraging learning of how the system works(see disadvantage)
better maintainable, advocation of better practices in general
better security...basic security practice to run only what is needed/required
far less unused disk space...not so much a problem anymore, but why waste just because you can?


probably a lot more from both sides.....

Because people don't tend to complain to the cash register when they remove lettuce, they just do it and remember to tell them to hold the lettuce next time. If there was never any lettuce to begin with, they'd have to make a trip to the register to get any.

This here is a lot more significant than you give it credit for. People expect things to work out-of-the-box, and will ditch things that don't.

These aren't really advantages. Nothing here is any different than having a full install. You can't force people to learn anything, and people who would learn about their system would do so *anyway*.

Sorry, I don't buy that.

If you don't know better, but decide you want lettuce you can ask for it or know for next time.

It really doesn't make sense to shove everything on a burge because people can remove what they want, rather than just letting people select what they want.


So? Are we catering to the Ubuntu crowd now?

I would have always thought that if you were not prepared or interested to learn, then Slack is not the distro for you.


That is quite incorrect.

The points I raised do not apply to a full install. The first one you quoted is debatable, but holds moreso than a full install.

It's interesting how the community has apparently changed.

Install full and configure your system. Get used to Slackware. When you are confident enough, remove the things you think you/your system do not need. It's easy to troubleshoot. As for security, relax and trust the crew... but maintain safe computing practices.

That's not what we're talking about, though. You can always select what you want.. but only if you know what to select. The only way to know what to select is by having it and deciding you don't need it.

Uh.. no. Psychology 101: First Impressions are Important.

There is *zero* difference in security because I have gv or gucharmap installed but never use it. You still have to patch, you still have to turn off services, you still have to read the ChangeLog.

Communities evolve. But I don't think this issue is any different than it has always been. There's a difference between not hand-holding and throwing someone into a pool of piranhas.