Would you like to see more graphical tools in Slackware?
 

I was reading Darrell Anderson's excellent writings this morning.
His My Bumpy Relationship With Slackware article summarizes his own 'frustrations' with Slackware.
This poll focuses mostly on the following points:
and mostly on the 3rd and 4th paragraph.

It's not really the nature of Slackware to address the points brought up by Mr Anderson, in my opinion, so no. They're good points otherwise, but it's not really meant to be unconstructive when these kinds of frustrations are answered with some kind of referral to another distro, like Ubuntu. There's a reason Ubuntu is popular, but it doesn't seem to be Slackware's current mission (if there is one) to compete with Ubuntu, or SUSE, or anything else addressing those particular types of frustrations.

I think it wouldn't benefit Slackware if it lost its own character. If people want to add graphical 'bling-bling' in Slackware they just can, but in the process they will have to learn a bit of Linux too. But than everything is possible. That's the beauty (esthetics if you want) of Slackware.

I think that it would be a good idea to be available a separate group of GUI tools and the new users can install it, but these who won't - will not install it.

meh............
 

Ncurses is essentially graphical as far as I'm concerned.

There is already a bootsplash, if the author of the article took the time to setup lilo with it. It is during the post installation setup.

Still the fact that it 'bothers' some people to have to look at what the system is doing during the startup, and would rather have a 'curtain', then why not just go ahead and use Ubuntu?

There is one, it is called 'pkgtool.'

It seems to me that the author is wanting Slackware to be something it is clearly not what Slackware is intended to be. There is already a distro available that offers all these 'features' that the author is reportedly looking for. Why should Slackware have to bend to what the author wants?

I like Slackware the way it is for a reason, the author and 'mom and pop' that is mentioned doesn't have to use Slackware, there are plenty of distros out there that can fit their needs. Just like Slackware already fits my needs.

I,m glad the No's are winning... !

I don't think many slackers would ever want any more GUI tools. I definitely wouldn't.

Graphical administration tools fall under a "maybe" category to me -- I won't use them (and don't WANT to use them) but if GUI tools were included that take care of simple administration just by creating the proper config files (and NOT doing something sneaky behind the scenes) I would be OK with their inclusion. However, getting a consistent GUI administration tool that doesn't add a layer of complexity is difficult -- I don't think one exists that supports a wide variety of tasks and software, and certainly the Slackware team has no time (or incentive) to create any (unless they talk about these things behind closed doors, of course). If this is important, start writing a GUI tool that produces clean, simple configuration files for applications included in Slackware (but what happens with third-party software? Sounds like you'd get stuck with a tool that functions for some programs but not all, providing an inconsistent experience...).

The graphical package manager exists in the form of pkgtool. If you want something X-based, that's fine (and there used to be a half-functional tool included with KDE3.5), but since Slackware has NO official repository and doesn't support any third-party repositories officially, what is the point in shipping a graphical package manager? In Slackware you are assumed to be capable of compiling your software or acquiring it from third-party sources yourself. sbopkg is a great graphical (ncurses) manager for slackbuilds.org, and gslapt is a working alternative for binary-based repositories. I don't believe either should ship with Slackware though, unless a repository of packages or SlackBuilds was deemed official. And of course that would probably change the entire Slackware philosophy, since any binary-based package manager would have to support dependency resolution (which I don't want to see in Slackware).

So my answer to the question at hand is, no. Those who try to impose the norm onto a distribution that willfully opposes it are trying to use the wrong distribution. Morphing Slackware into a mirror image of every other distribution negates its reason for existence. The issues stated are philosophical and would completely change the distribution. And if it did, what distribution would fill the niche that Slackware currently fills?

Why is there this assumption that every distro should be designed for "non-technical users"? There are loads of distros targeting this audience already. Slackware seems to me to be quite deliberately aimed at more technical users, and is advertised as such.

Why must everything be "easy" all the time anyway? What's wrong with learning stuff??

We would all be happy to see more graphical tools. If someone decides to write one and it turns out to be functionally better than not using it, it has a good chance of catching on. Sbopkg, Slackpkg and Wicd are examples.

There already exist several graphical tools in Slackware (not talking about KDE or Xfce stuff by the way) and yet I never hear anyone advocating that they be removed. Why?

With the exception of fdisk (I'm sorry, I just can't make myself LIKE it), I find the slackware installer to be the best I've used, and ncurses is perfectly graphical as far as I'm concerned. It's simple, straightforward, and fast..... and ncurses is less likely to fail than an X based installer.

As for graphical admin tools, I've found that once the initial shock of manually editing text files wears off, it is a much simpler method to get things going quickly and properly. Even in Ubuntu and Mandriva I found that I ultimately had to resort to hand editing to get something like a samba share going properly, only I was much less clear on what was actually going on, because the graphical tools always generated so much cruft that 20 lines for 3 shares turned into about 60 lines.

I just really think that a big part of Slackware's appeal and character is that it doesn't seem to jerk in any one direction on a whim or to try and include the next "must-have feature."

"Lack" of graphical tools is a Slackware feature!
 

Before becoming a full-time Slacker a few years ago, I was a Mandrake/Mandriva user and promoter. But I avoided their graphical admin tools in preference to a shell. But it was a major annoyance when I would occasionally enter their graphical admin suite for some reason and find that some config file had been over-written and all my own comments and configs removed!

A major feature of Slackware is that it allows me to use my own admin skills, such as they are, without obfuscating things behind a GUI front-end or second-guessing my own choices!

As far as "mom-and-pop" users, I support some of them with Slackware and minimal problems, at least problems related to lack of GUI tools.

If Slackware began to cater to the willfully ignorant, then there would be nowhere left for them to grow as they learn!

I don't like fdisk myself. I am a little lazy when it comes to fdisk, and that is why I prefer cfdisk, :D. It is as 'glitzy' as it will ever get for a Slacker, easier to use but still true to it's core.

Graphical Installation
- Meh, who cares. The more an installation tries to be help full, the more it hinders me. And non technical users often end up messing up their harddrives both with and without the graphics, so you aren't helping anybody.

Boot Splash.
- You can add this your self using the existing busybox program used with Slackware's mkinitrd setup.
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/...Graphical_Boot

Graphical Administration Tools
- Can't say much on this end, but KDE makes a lot of tasks easier with it's polkit stuff.

Graphical Package Manager
- slapt-get, you said it. Works well enough. And for those that need more software, there is sbopkg.


So if you want to offer Slackware as a support option to clients, you can always modify the installation with slapt-get, sbopkg, and add in a graphical boot splash then tell them to use KDE. Probably make up a nice little pamphlet to tell them out to do basic system admin tasks like adding users and general functionality.

Chances are, you are going to have to modify the installation anyway for things like OpenOffice.

Mom and pops along with non technical users, really should not be messing around with partitions anyway.

One of the many wonderful things about our distro is that the developers stay true to the Slackware KISS maxim. The Slackware team knows that Slackers do not want a GUI-fied version of Slackware. I sure as hell don't! The administration tools that ship with Slackware are excellent as is.
There are lots of other distros out there that offer bling.

LOL. Offtopic I know, but just to see what had changed in the last few releases I just booted into a ubuntu 10.04 live usb and right as I was reading your post all I could think of is "Damn Ubuntu actually got UGLIER!"

I think the "vanilla-ness" of Slackware is what makes it different than other distros
so I say "No"
If one wants that stuff Get SalixOS!
That's the best "Slackware based" distor and lots of gui apps,etc

No.

curses = graphical

I agree. What does X do for an installer?

I think it'd be ok to leave the Slackware installation without gui tools. Then again I don't think it'd hurt to include them in the extras directory and as long as they're gtk based, but it still seems kinda iffy to include them even there. Slackware is the most *nix like linux distro and I think it should stay that way. Especially for the more hardcore linuxerz...

I just installed Fedora, and I could barely understand how to use the graphical disk partitioner, however, with fdisk I know exactly what to do. About a year ago, I would have been scared off using fdisk though during a new install thinking I would destroy something, it's funny how things change, :-)

I think it is then agreed that none of what the author of said article is ever going to be taken in by Slackware, nor does any Slacker even want such 'features' and he just should get over it and try a different distro.

After all I don't really see Slackers go to Ubuntu, Fedora, or whatever other 'glitzy' distro and demand elements of Slackware be included.

The only possible radical change that I would ever consider that Slackware should undergo is maybe, maybe going multilib, but even then only have that option in /extra.

That makes three of us.

And another thing. I don't know about anyone else but I spend more time installing slack in a non-gui environment, over ssh etc.

I vote no too. Slackware is awesome without more GUI tools that insulate the admin from the Slackware system.

A minimum complement GUI tools sets the expectation for a higher degree of admin competency. Competent admins require less support which allows the Slackware team to stay lean and focus on improving core functionality.

If something breaks with Slackware then there is one less thing to trouble shoot when a GUI is not involved.

Minimal GUI apps is a situation when less is better IMHO. If you want to add more GUI apps to a Slackware desktop or server then take a look at something like Webmin.

*I guess this post doesn't technically have to do with graphical utilities, but it has to do with the Slackware way of doing things.
---

I will be completely honest, I think the Slackware way of doing things is much easier than a lot of other distros, I was pleasantly surprised. For example, when installing a piece of software, on debian:

Would you expect a beginning Linux user to be able to remember that? The Slackware way is similar to what non-Linux users would expect. Do an internet search for a piece of software and download it. Then instead of having to remember complicated commands, just:

Of course, that is if you are using a slackbuild, but I would think beginners would be using them.

Keep the ncurses installer, it gives dumb reviewers something to whine about. :)

I voted no - heck no was not an option. Graphical installers can be very confusing when throwing up options. GUI admin tools just take too long after the simplicity of Slackware. I realize that some people just love the GUI, and it definitely has it's place, but its not the best (easiest) way.

Thinking is hard, thinking hurts me noggin`
 

As well as no 'default' bootsplash (except on a lilo menu, just to tease them), and also keep the current philosophy of Slackware just so that they actually have to THINK for a change. :eek: *gasp* "We actually have to THINK?' :eek:

If the majority feels that Slackware is not welcoming, then thats fine by me. Slackware welcomes those who prefer to LEARN about computing, not just for use, and DEFINITELY NOT turning a computer into an 'appliance' like other systems have done.

Isn't this what sites like Slackbuilds.org are for?

And just once, I would love to see one of these reviewers state what advantages a GUI based installer has over the Slackware ncurses installer. Just once!

Well thats just it isn't it? I mean they all 'advocate' the use of such utilities but never really go into any REAL detail of any of the perceived 'advantages' of a more 'glitzy' installer, and gui-based tools.

It seems more like a herd of sheep thing. Slackware rather than conforming with the rest, stands out and refuses to simply follow a trend. This seems to irk them, and try to 'demand' that Slackware be like other distros.

No additional graphical tools are necessary for me. I learned more about how Linux works with Slackware in one month than I have in years of working GUI based distros.

Bob

Another hearty "NO". I like this distro because it is what it is and does what it does...no more..no less:)

There is no bootsplash in slack. As I understand it is about to cover all messages issued by the kernel during the boot process. A present "bootsplash" is the Lilo's bootlader "splash".
I think that what is really needed is a simple tool for building graphical tools. I always wonder why there is no a button for 'eject CD tray ' and 'close CD tray'. Eg. an icon on a desktop. Click this icon once - tray is opening - click again - tray is closing. Really amusing. Sometimes ago I was thinking about creating such 'graphical tool' as a frontend to 'eject' and 'eject -t' commands using Tcl/Tk widgets but I was unable to find a good introductory to Tcl/Tk - the standard man pages for Tcl/Tk are awful. My idea of *nix - it is a bunch of small parts which easily fit together. And this is my idea of what the GUI should offer - a set of basic tools which allows user to build its own graphic interface. Some kind of lego pieces. This is why I am displeased of the way both GNOME and KDE are evolving. For me they becoming non-unix. People say "if something is for everything then it is for nothing".

xmessage, gxmessage, dialog (ncurses), xdialog, gtkdialog are all desktop independent and can be slapped over shell scripts. Individual desktops have their 'zenitys' and 'kdialogs' or whatever. I'm sure there are many more. And what you're wanting could likely be done as a simple desktop icon, depending on what you use for such things (if anything). TCL/TK is probably overkill for what you're talking about and, while these things vary and people will probably be using TCL/TK decades from now, it seems to me it is a kind of fading language.

at first I was inclined to select "yes", but then I read on, there seems to have been a discussion going on in my absence :-) Probably too long to catch up;

I LOVE the simplicity of Slackware, and any GUI tool that should be allowed imo is one that ADDS to, but never REPLACE any tool we currently have. Over the years I've been using Slack (I've never left it since I switched over in the nineties) I've leared to value that things remained essentially the same. I leared lots, more than I thought there would be to learn an operating system. (yet, there are miles to cover yet to know "everything")

GUI tools are not evil; Sometimes they ease up your work. No need to keep things needlessly complex. cfdisk is one of those tools; it keeps you with a good overview of what you've done and what's still to be done, yet keeping you in good control. I LOVE cfdisk over fdisk. It's an example of my philosophy of GUI tools. Webmin is one of the tools I rather like as well.

With computing world becoming more and more complex, demanding more and more in-depth knowledge about various aspects of your computer, it's handy to have tools that can discover settings for you. Yet it must be the administrator who is in control, always capable of tweaking things to his liking.

I love Slackware for providing the tools necessary to fulfill this, and hope and expect this to continue. Not to leave the user lazy, but neither frustrating him towards ugly things.

I'm inclined to say "no" now, as in: I don't want the existing tools replace any new tool. Slackware is GREAT for learning unix/linux, it's also GREAT for being stable and it's GREAT for not including stuff you can install yourself. Over the years I've also discovered that if you need a GUI tool, it's a fun way to discover and run along a few ones till you find one to your liking. Then create a package for it and maintain it. With a little bit of shellscripting you normally manage to get something that works for you.

A little hint for those that are curious, this is how I created all my pacakge scripts:
- A function that downloads the source tarball
- A function that does the ./configure --options
- A function that does the build
- A function that does make install to your package dir
- A function that creates the package ball
- A "main" function that calls the above
- call main :-)

Upon testing and fiddling with the configure options (usually), you can easily comment out those part of the build process you want to skip, so you don't loose too much time over the rest of the process; In the end you have all you need and it just keeps working when you upgrade. That's one of the strenghts of Slackware for me. So, no; Slack should not include the GUI tools, you can discover for yourself; Freedom!

I went ahead and ran through a Ubuntu install last night, just for kicks. It's a fully GUI installer, and IT'S AWFUL. I don't like fdisk, but with fdisk I'm in control. The Slackware installer asks me "do you want to format this partition?" Ubuntu was horribly confusing and the graphics were just confusing to try and read all the various partitons. I didn't want any partitions formatted, but ubuntu picked up my swap partiton (I didn't want it to use it) and I couldn't figure out how to make it let go of my swap, and then it wouldn't let me proceed without formatting my swap space, even though it let me leave the actual / partition unformatted. I got the feeling that if I would have chosen to let Ubuntu either overwrite everything or automatically use my free space as it saw fit, I wouldn't have been so frustrated, but who besides a newb that doesn't know any better, or someone with a virgin disk is going to just let an installer have it's way? To make matters worse there was no choice about packages anywhere that I saw.

If this is what people are wanting in an installer they can have it. It's neither simpler or easier. It really feels like it is intentionally trying to confuse you to have it's way. I feel a little dirty and suddenly fdisk isn't sounding so bad.:(

I voted no, but it really depends on how useful the tool is and whether the box is already running a GUI in the first place

If something looks like flower it is a flower. If Linuxes will look like Windows then they will be Windows. "Mom an pop" even don't know what is it an operational system. So they may ask: Why this Windows looks so strange?

@slakmagik
You have a piece 'ls' and a piece 'grep' you can join them together 'ls | grep'. Now imagine that instead of writing you draw rectangle, drag'n-drop into this rectangle two small boxes named 'ls', 'grep'. This way you get a new 'graphical tool' functionally equivalent to 'ls | grep'. I may call this 'scripting with GUI'. This is ,roughly, my idea about 'graphical tools'.

It seems to me that despite his "ongoing bumpy relationship with Slackware", the author still does not "get" what Slackware is all about...

Do I want Slackware to become Ubuntu, Suse or Mandriva?
NO, I want Slackware to be Slackware.
If you want something like Ubuntu, Suse or Mandriva, you should go with Ubuntu, Suse or Mandriva. Simple as that.

Greetingz!

I'm from the "frustrations build character" camp. I don't directly help Ubuntu users IRL (in real life), aside from one peice of advice; "If you want a GUI, great, UbuntuForums can always use another user." usually followed by "This is why I never call home, Mom."

My answer is NO. I think that if you want graphical everything, you are using the wrong distro ... sorry, but I think it's the truth.

GUI apps tend to be buggy and difficult to use and understand, at least for me. I'm glad that slackware exists, and that it doesn't have any GUI tools except those provided by KDE.

I voted no.

I have my preferences, and my vote reflects them.

Regrettably this poll reflects only one aspect of this article. The other contributions, Darrel gave elsewhere are simply omitted. Yet I was somehow disappointed by the article. It basically says that Slack sucks sometimes but there is nothing better.

I was particularly worried about the small community argument. Here you find some knowledgeable Linux Users that are not to be underestimated. The average Slacker is a much respected “UNIX Head”, so I didn’t quite understand this point.

Chris

When I saw the headline, the first thing I thought of was this thread:

http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/1...I-and-Shove-It

The disadavantages of GUI tools are well documented even in Sysadmin Linux Training Material, so I am slightly surprised that this article is being discussed here.

I think that we may safely assume that:

CLI is better for servers and for sys-admins.
GUI is better for desktops and for non priviliged users.

The question then is: "What desktop GUI tools are really needed by non-priviliged users?" I believe that KDE already provides them all.

Chris

these little boxes on our desks are intended to make life easier, so it makes sense to have config tools that make life easier, hence my vote. i would like to see more GUI config tools, but keep the ability to do the CLI level stuff if needed. one conflict between GUI tools i will bring up, KDE's GUI network config tool tends to break things, and wicd's GUI tool works well only when rc.inetd.conf isn't broken or modified from the original plain vanilla install. and wicd cannot be config'ed from CLI. i'm glad slack includes mc (midnight commander), which while not really a GUI tool, does save me a lot of time in the config process.

I was put on slackware in my teens by a friend who has worked with UNIX since it basically was created. He chose slack for me because it was rough, and would force me to really learn how linux works. If I want system-config-samba, for example, I'll get Fedora. That kind of tool is good, but you don't really learn how to configure Samba with it. If you end up working on a non-Fedora system, you'll be pretty lost.

I've worked with Red Hat, SuSe, and Mandrake professionally, and despite not having had experience with those, I adapted very quickly simply from being exposed to the command line and raw config files from day one. Those don't change significantly from distro to distro. Imagine learning on Fedora then being dropped into a slackware environment.

It is my feeling that this is exactly what slackware is supposed to be about. Like someone else said, if you want graphical tools, you can install them, but you'll have to learn linux to do it. If slack lost that, it would lose the essence of what it now is.