LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Reviews > Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password

Notices

Search · Register · Submit New Review · Download your favorite Linux Distributions ·
 

Slackware 10.0
Reviews Views Date of last review
59 188556 07-09-2005
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average Rating
97% of reviewers $15.73 9.3



Description: This is the latest slackware version, released on June 23, 2004. It features GCC 3.3.4, X.org 6.7, Gnome 2.6.1, Mozilla 1.7, KDE 3.2.3. It uses the 2.4.26 kernel with an alternate 2.6.7 in /testing as well as GCC 3.4 in /testing.
Keywords: slackware 10 10.0 9.2 patrick


Author
Post A Reply 
Old 10-08-2004, 09:19 PM   #1
JCdude2525
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: Slackware/Fedora
Posts: 103

Rep: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Fast like no other, stable like no other.
Cons: I'll tell you when I find one.



Well, I have used many popular Linux distros, such as Mandrake, Fedora, Gentoo, and SuSE. My favorite one though has to be Slackware 10.

To make a long story short, Slackware is fast and stable. And no wonder, it's been around for more than a decade! You configure it using configuration files, and you use the shell to get stuff done a lot. I suggest that if you are still semi-new to Linux, read the slackware book, found at their website(http://www.slackware.org/), and look through the extra packages on their site and look for checkinstall, and read up on that.

Another thing I like about Slackware is that they don't clog the software with their name in it. For example, when you are actually using slackware, you don't see the name Slackware in any gui program. Whereas on Fedora and SuSE, you see the name like 600 times a minute. Probably the only time you see the Slackware name in the os is if you are using pkgtool, and on the boot loader(witch you can change that!). This may be why it's so fast and stable, the code isn't edited, it comes staight from the community.

For those of you who heard bad things during the slackware install, they are probably wrong. The install isn't that hard. The reason why they complain is mabye because it's not gui based, and you have to fdisk your harddrive manually. But it really isn't that hard! If you have no idea how to use fdisk, just look it up before you start the install(If you already have linux, at the shell type man fdisk).

More about the installer- it's really fast!
Let's compare. On my P3 1 Ghz(about) box, I can install the .tgz of K3B(A burning program(duh)) in about 45 seconds. If it was an say on fedora, it would take a lot longer, mabye a minute or two. So what, a minute? Well, what if you are installing a lot of packages, eh? A slackware install for me takes about 15-20 minutes. A Fedora install would take about 45-60 minutes. So, there you go!

Another good thing about the install, you don't get bothered by dependences. This is a good and bad thing. The good thing is you can do what you want. The bad thing is if you don't know what you are doing, it can mess your system up. But there also isn't that big of a software selection either...(you can install the system and a gui(x-fce, clean and fast) with 1 CD)..., that reduces the risk of you not installing a required package.

O yes, with the CD's. You only have to download two(not even, you only need the first one, the second tends to have KDE and GNOME on it, witch you don't need, you can just use x-fce, a fast and clean desktop), witch this saves you download time and CD's.

If you are a newbie, and you want to try Slackware, then go for it. If it doesn't work good for you, go back to an easier disto, like Fedora or SuSE, learn more about Linux, and then come back to Slackware. If it does work good for you, you better learn how to use the shell! And here is a newbie tip- to start the gui after a clean install, login as root, and type startx at the shell. It will now load the desktop software you configured to start by default. Then logout, login as a regular user, then startx. If you have kde or gnome, then kdm or gdm would be good to run also.

I'm done now, but I could go on for a really long time. Anyone else who uses slackware probably could also.
 
Old 10-10-2004, 09:04 PM   #2
worldwiderob
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 22

Rep: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: excellent security updates; open and simple
Cons: No fancy lilo splash screen. Big deal.


Installation
=======
Easier than anything else I've tried.

Configuring and Hardware
=================
Slackware has less hardware autoconfiguration than some other distros. However, I haven't found any hardware that I can configure in another distro but not in Slackware.

I have a laptop with some quirky hardware. I have tried installing loads of different distros, all of them suffered from the same initial hardware detection problems. What gave Slackware the edge is that it is very easy to configure and tweak. There are configuration programs, some of them specific to Slackware but you can also use the perfectly good configuration tools that aren't distro specific - alsaconf, xorgconfig, etc. You can also edit the configuration files directly, there isn't all that "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE" stuff.

You learn more in Slackware not because it is harder, but because it is more open and direct. You know that you are in charge.

And my laptop? It's working perfectly in Slackware 10.

Package Management
==============

Lots of flexibility here. You can use slapt-get or swaret; they are supposed to be very good but I have never needed them. I'm happily keeping my system stable and secure by getting just the packages I want and getting the security updates from slackware.org.

The security updates are fantastic, they are available for lots of versions, including the current branch. To get extra software, I have used linuxpackages.net, audioslack.com (needs slapt-get now) and the official slackware site.

The important point is that even swaret and slapt-get are optional for many package management tasks. Your computer is at your command.
 
Old 10-15-2004, 09:19 PM   #3
njbrain
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 416

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: $5.00 | Rating: 10

Pros: Fast, Stable, and Powerful
Cons: Steep learning curve, but it's well worth it.


The main reason I use Slackware is because it is the most "Original" distribution. It has all the powerful tools you will need, and then some. It really teaches you how to use the command line, and edit config files. It takes a while to get it set up and configured, but once you have it going, it is rock solid. I highly recommend Slackware to anyone interested in learning Linux.
Noah
 
Old 10-17-2004, 06:03 AM   #4
NeoSephiroth
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: Red Hat 9, SuSE 9.1, Slackware 10
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 1

Pros: you will like it if you like command lines
Cons: command lines


I can't stand command line programs just like Microsoft Visual Basic Compilers or Borland c++ Compiler. They drive me nuts. And they are hard. You might need a book on this crap.

If you like command lines you'll like it. I hate it. I actually took a dump on it I hated it so much.
 
Old 10-19-2004, 04:33 AM   #5
xhispage
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: SlackWare 10.0
Posts: 13

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Fast , Light , Smaller then the rest
Cons: Setup is quite hard , configuration problems


Pros:
Fast download via bittorent (people who think it can only be used for warez: WRONG!).
Only 2 CD's
Runs VERY fast on my old 266MhZ
Samba included (Windows networking)

Cons:
Stupid LILO configuration
Setup is stupid
Booting problems (that slow down booting (Press SPACE or wait 30 seconds etc.) are very anoying).

But I recomend it: RUNS FAST LIKE HELL!

 
Old 10-22-2004, 05:58 PM   #6
tuxombie
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10, Ubuntu, Debian Sarge
Posts: 53

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Fast, stable, configuring is mostly uncommenting config files
Cons: Non-trivial for newbies-not so good to get things working right away


I had always thought that linux was either Red hat or Mandrake. This was because I didnt have the net, and mostly used linux to write CFD codes (I will fluid mechanics for the rest of my life I think:)). Needless to say XP was unusable for this purpose. They dont even have a usable text editor, and may be worse , shift+control+t/w,control+pageup, pagedown doesnt exist. And no quick and dirty plotter like gnuplot.

I was actually quite fond of Fedora. But it seemed that it was slightly slower than what I would have liked, but it didnt seem to matter because XP was perhaps an order of magnitude worse. And then, about a month ago, we got the net in our rooms, and the linux world sort of opened itself up. I read the challenging review in distrowatch about debian, and got hooked into linux distroing.

The debian installer actually wasnt all that bad, although it does its best to scare you away. As it turned out, I had to go through the installation several times ( The data had all been backed up, so it was okay) after incorrectly partitioning it, and finally x(nvidia) wont work. I tried to work around this (two full days), but had to give up because I had to get back to my coding, an d put back fedora. I got back a week later, this time to Slack.

Slack's intaller was almost benign in comparison. Partitioning was easy, with cfdisk (or may be I was a pro by now!), and the installation was a no fuss, twenty min. job. And here again, x refused to install, and I assumed the worst. Another bad thing was that it did not recognize my fedora , and I had to reinstall, with lilo now in the floppy. The lilo was probably one of the very trivial of the issues involved, but it was devastating then. But on the other hand, one is probably a competent user anyway if he installs more than one version of linux in his hard disk (grub was configured later, and the config file is fairly straightforward to understand, as with most other Slackware config files).

And I almost gave up on x, as Debian had been a disaster to me, and I didnt even consider editing xorg.conf after what I had been through with debian. I left slack to hibernate for a few days, postponing the day it had to be deleted. I gave it another shot a few days later, and all it took was the routine change in xorg.conf from vesa to nv in the driver section. X booted up nicely, and installing the driver was easy later.

This set the scene for my experience with Slackware. Almost all configuration involved uncommenting a line or two in the respective config files. Most instructive was rc.d and the init (I changed the init to the graphical login and got into trouble, but that had a perfectly logical explanation, which need not be gone over with here) . I was quite uncomfortale when my friend asked me to fix stuff in his mandrake comp. Slack's config files are in my opinion, as intuitive as one can make them. And with all these potential problems with x, I cant appreciate Slack's non-graphical login more.

The packages are all very new. With the exception of Oo, which is easily downloaded and installed, there is everything that a sane user needs. totem, gxine (xmms doesnt play wma files), latech, pdf viewers, they are all there. And the latest kde and Gnome 2.8 minus (which is okay). If one wants a up to date packages, one might as well do a full install every time Slack releases. Slack releases only once a year anyway. Besides, one doesnt want an unstable system because of unreliable packages.

I put dropline Gnome after reading about the shocking news from Pat. This is possibly the best desktop I have used so far. KDE is alright but too colorful, and XP is plain clutter (I hope it goes obsolete-- *when was their last release?*). The kernel was also upgraded without incident-again the excellent instructions in the README file.

I went back to debianing, this time with Ubuntu (I got rid of the tortoisian Fedora once and for all). The installation was quite smooth here, but again, x wont work . After much hair pulling, and more than a week of truncated and aborted attempts, I managed to get Ubuntu working. In the end, it was only a question of getting the nvidia kernel module and the driver from their place.

Ubuntu is neat, and apt-get, aptitude, synaptic are great tools, but it has crashed twice already, in two days. I dont know if it is because of my being a novice or something inherent in the OS, or Gnome 2.8, but by comparison, Slack has not crashed even once after putting dropline. Its ultra-stable, and pretty fast too.

I would be sad to let go of this system; its been heavily configured. Yes, vi is elvis, and the default bash doesnt have colours, but these are all not really problems. elvis, vim and bash, or anything else, can be configured. My guess is it is not going to be all that simple in other distros. The software here is probably pristine, as has been said so often. At least one gets a working system, which is more than can be said about some of the debian based distros (if you have nvidia, and are a newbie, or don't have the time, forget debian and all its clones).

The upshot of all this is that one learns, and not too painfully at that. Slackware rules.
 
Old 10-25-2004, 07:57 PM   #7
BiafraRepublic
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Distribution: Slackware 12.0
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Very Stable, few problems, plenty of base packages, comes with HFS utilities.
Cons: Pkgtool a bit difficult, uses LILO instead of GRUB, had to edit /etc/rc.d/rc.4 to have KDM as my default session manager


I decided to get Slackware on reccomendation from a friend, and try to set it up in a dual boot with Win98SE. The setup utilities were a bit difficult, but partitioning things, as well as recognizing my hardware (mainly because my computer is a bit old). I've never been too fond of LILO, but the setup program's saving grace of helping configure LILO was to say the least convenient.

I'm still fairly new in using it, but so far my experience has been more or less good with Slackware.
 
Old 10-25-2004, 08:58 PM   #8
Crucifer
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10
Posts: 10

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Very straight forward. No problems that couldn't be addressed.
Cons: Not for those who are new without patience


A lot of people say that Slackware 10 is not good for the beginner and I would say that is true partially. There really isn't a whole lot of documentation that is Slackware specific although (as of this review ) they just updated the help on their website to some extent. If you are interested in learning something more hands on, are not afraid to buy a few books on linux and you are not totally new to computers Slackware should be fine for you. If you want a distibution that is more 'Windows' like, I would recommend Suse.
 
Old 10-29-2004, 08:28 PM   #9
predator.hawk
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Distribution: FreeBSD-5.4-STABLE
Posts: 252

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Stable, Powerful, Secure, No bull
Cons: missing some ethernet drivers, needs SATA support out of the box


Slackware, well harder to grasp as a first distro. Is suprisingly easy once you get to know it. When i say simple, i mean that it doesn't screw around with useless GUI Configuration utils and doesn't mess with packages. I basicly mean that, because it doesn't stick crap in, its simple.

What I like:
Its vary stable, without many bugs and proforms vary well. Slackware has a history of being stable, it has a simple design which allows it to be stable and beyond that, Patrick Volkerding is one of the most experianced distro developers around. Be sides being vary stable, its also vary secure. The fact that patrick pays good attension to security makes it vary hard to exploit and before releasesing updates, he makes sure they work. Also thanks to its simple design, Its vary Powerful and offers flexiblity others can't match.

What I Don't Like:
It Doesn't Offer some ethernet drivers that other distros do and also doesn't (currently) suport SATA out of the box.
 
Old 11-02-2004, 07:01 PM   #10
rphook
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: something trendy
Posts: 19

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Package installation, configuration possibilites.
Cons: None so far


Slackware is the only operating system I am willing to write a review on. For all the other Newb's, being able to install a package directly from a .tgz file is very nice. And not having to worry about dependency issues is also a very nice feature. I only use what I trust, and I trust Slackware.
 
Old 11-05-2004, 04:26 PM   #11
doublefailure
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 747

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: no rpm , checkinstall
Cons: none other than i can't play windows games ..


save yourself from rpms
go slack
 
Old 11-14-2004, 07:22 PM   #12
green_squirrel
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Distribution: fc3
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 4

Pros:
Cons: No complete support for laptops


Understand that I am a newbie. Slackware is a command line type system that can start your favorite graphical desktop, if you want. It seems to have more in common with the BSD systems, rather then current crop of Linux distros.

I briefly had Slackware 10.0 on my old Gateway laptop. What caught my attention was that there were several supplied kernels. Some had APM supported, which is needed by laptops. And some had SCSI support. But there were no supplied kernels with both SCSI support and APM support. Obviously you can roll your own, but newbies like me avoid this, if possible. Home users of laptops have all kinds of SCSI devices that hook into the computer. Even FreeBSD, which requires a lot of tweaking, comes with APM and SCSI support in the same kernel.
 
Old 11-20-2004, 04:14 AM   #13
toiletgoose
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 10

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Reliability & Speed
Cons: Configuration Learning Curve


I was once eager to try out every distrution that there was out there, starting from RH6.2 to Mandrake to SUSE. There was always two things that were always a problem for me, dependancy hell and bloat.

Dependancy Hell:

I am not one to stick to a standard regiment of software that would work well with all of the packages/libraries installed with you out of the box system. I like to try many things, and I have found it extremely painful to do this using RPMs. Installing one package requires you to find another, and on and on until you are spending hours fulfilling dependancies. Worse, if you ignored some dependancies and seg faulted RPM... what do you do?

Slack turned this problem around for me, pkgtool was a godsend. Download a .tgz file... installpkg and you are done, typically without a problem. I have a hunch that the amount of tinkering and configuring Slackware actually helped me more than pkgtool though, I have also become a compile freak.

Bloat:

I found that RH and other distributions like it tried to do too much at once and I found that I had little control about what it installed or how it did it. I only have a miserable 6.4GB HD, I don't want to install absolutely everything. Load times with any of these standard distributions were miserable and to make matters worse, during installation I had a choice... GNOME or KDE... both load far to slow and are far too robust for me.

Slackware introduced me to Window Maker, Fluxbox & XFCE... I was so happy when I could just install the programs I wanted and configure my menus and keyboards to map to the programs I knew I would use.

Slackware really threw me into the world of Linux and I think I have learned more from it than any other attempt that I have made to use Linux on my system. Of course you have to spend the time, but the rewards are many. If you want to learn a lot about the way a 'nix OS work, this distro is the perfect place to start. Kudos to the Slackware team!
 
Old 11-26-2004, 08:49 PM   #14
Stang_Man
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10.2, RHEL4 AS
Posts: 29

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: steep learning curve
Cons: packages don't describe dependencies, very annoying. steep learning curve.


Well.. as you can see from my Pro's & Con's.. i'm listing "steep learning curve" as both good and bad.

I am a complete newbie to linux, and this is my first real distro that I've tried. I tried RH8.0 like 2 years ago, but got lazy after a few days and didn't feel like doing it.

Having to search for hours, read README's and help files, how-tos and guides... it taken me a lot of time to get some things working in Slack. this is good, as I'm really trying to learn this stuff, and I have the patience to learn it. If you don't have the time to learn, I guess it's not for you.

One thing that's really annoying, is you think you're doing an install of as little as you need that's from the cd's.. and notice one package you wanted is dependent on like 3-4 other packages that you thought you wouldn't need. this is the most annoying part to me.

other than that, it's a speedy OS, has years of "experience" and a knowledgable community backing it.
 
Old 11-28-2004, 09:57 AM   #15
LauroMoura
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Ubuntu 5.10
Posts: 44

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Stable, simple, quite fast, good amount of software.
Cons: Scary for most newbies, dependencies stuff. Poor alsa performance


I tried Slack 10 about early september. After 3 months I could see what I liked and what I didn't.

I really started in the Linux world with RH 9. I did a dual boot with Windows but I ketp with Windows because it was TOO slow, and I tried many times but I couldn't boot from a new kernel. After I tried Conectiva 8, 9; Debian 3.0; Slackware 9.1. The best of these were Debian and Slack.

Here's a quick pros and cons from each one.

- Conectiva 8: Small, fast, but lacks of MANY libraries.
- Conectiva 9: Like RH 9, slow, but with many softwares. I think it was more unstable than the others.
- Debian 3.0: Fast, stable but very old (KDE 2?!?!? Gnome 1.4?!?!?!)
- Slack 9.1: Fast, stable, but had a very annoying bug with mozilla and firefox.

Now back to Slack10...

1- Pre-install -
I made backup in a different partition, so after install I 'll have 3 partitions. System, Home and Files (my backup).
2- Install - 9.5 -
It was very easy, except for the partitioning. I spent some time to make the changes, but after that it was very easy. The installer gives enough informations and it's very intuitive.
3- Software package - 9.5 -
I would be 10, but lacks OpenOffice.org, Firefox, K3B and some other utilities....
4- Stability - 10 -
I don't remember a serious crash all this time. I had some issues with X, Alsa, KDE but nothing serious.
5- Speed - 9 -
I used to use KDE but using OpenOffice was quite slow. Now I'm with Fluxbox and It's very fast, even under some average-high load conditions.
6- Configuration - 10 -
Despite being a "full-command-line-config" distro, I was quite easy to config my system. This style also heps the user to know the system more. It may be very scary for the total newbie, those who should try Slack already know this... =)
 
Old 12-01-2004, 01:05 PM   #16
Jerre Cope
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Distribution: ubuntu,Slackware,knoppix
Posts: 323

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Stable straightforward
Cons:



As with prior Slackware versions. It just works! It makes the perfect base for both a server and and a workstation. In these days where a 20 GB disk is considered small, 4 GB of packages should not be considered bloated at all.

I particularly like the rescue CD. I have "rescued" several unbootable Windoze systems with this by booting with the CD, then attaching to the network and using sftp to transfer the files safely to a linux box. At that point, I can continue the rescue by booting with the other "rescue disk"--Slackware install disk #1
 
Old 12-11-2004, 01:54 PM   #17
iZvi
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Distribution: Slackware-current, kernel 2.6.31
Posts: 284

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Fast, stable, very configurable, unbloated, reliable, professional
Cons: The lack of precompiled packages for non-standard/mainstream apps


Slackware converted me to Linux. It is powerful, configurable and customiseable. I love every aspect of Slack, the set of apps, comming with it, the utilities, the scripts, everything. Slackware has enough utilities to configure successfully the system, without forcing you to use them. You can use CLI or GUI and still enjoy the power of Linux. Slackware leaves you with a working system without any unneeded progs.
In contrast from many other opinions I like the packaging system of Slack, I prefer to keep the things simple when possible and a packaging system that worries too much about dependancies won´t be my choice.
As a conclusion Slackware provides the best of your system for you and your apps, without consuming unreasonable resources for itself.
 
Old 01-05-2005, 01:09 AM   #18
MylesCLin
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: Slack 9.1 with slackware-current packages...
Posts: 164

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Excellent package management with no poor dependancy checks, stability far beyond most other distros, up-to-date without killing pro #2, newbie friendy, good learning experience, huge community.
Cons: This particular release is not quite as stable as, say, 9.1, and a few packages are out of date.


I found this, being my first distro, to be the
most excellent I have tried.
It's a snap to set up, it has excellent package management, and it's rock solid stable!
I'll reccomend this to newbies and admins alike.
:D
 
Old 01-12-2005, 09:47 AM   #19
justin_p
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: slack 13; I've used it all :)
Posts: 433

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Simple lay out, rock solid stable, speedy system
Cons: Dropped GNOME support


After bouncing around with the RPM based distros (Mandrake, RH, FC, and Suse) I switched to Slackware and absolutely loved it. The simplicity of the system is the most amazing thing. I definitely recommend reading the slack-book as well to learn all the ins and outs. The install, although text based, is easy and straight forward.
Linux novices will learn a ton getting X configured. Turning off services is a breeze. Look in the /etc/rc.d directory and turn off the service with /etc/rc.d/rc.cups stop. That's it. Get comfortable with a text editor. I found pico to be the easiest and most intuitive. No archaic ctrl xyz to save or anything like that.
Speed and stability have long been a trademark of Slackware and this remains to be true. Patrick V does an excellent job of including everything you need into the fewest amount of packages and organizes packages into small groups for easy administration. I found myself using slackpkg, which is inlcuded in extras, for upgrading my packages. It uses the native pkgtools to upgrade your package groups. For example to upgrade your KDE run the command:
slackpkg update
slackpkg upgrade kde/
This will upgrade all the kde files included in the kde/ directory provided on the slack mirrors and the CD.
As mentioned above I have left slackware due to the dropping of GNOME support from Patrick. He stated that GNOME would not always play nice with everything and that he spent a third of his time of making it work with the system. I have tried DLG but found it to feel bloated and replaces a lot of the system files with custom packages that make uninstalling nearly impossible. I also gave KDE a whirl, but just did not like it.
In a side note I have moved on to Debian Sarge. Same rock solid feel and speed. The system is a little more complex and I am learning quite a bit. For those looking for a new distro to turn to now that GNOME support is gone may want to consider this option.
 
Old 01-14-2005, 04:31 AM   #20
akaBeaVis
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Distribution: Slack 9.1,10 Mandrake 10,10.1, FedCore 2,3, Mepis 2004, Knoppix 3.6,3.7, SuSE 9.1, FreeBSD 5.2
Posts: 1,109

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: $24.95 | Rating: 10

Pros: Lean install, fastest performance, preferred startup scheme
Cons: Network script doesn't seem to allow for non-eth%d names.


more pros:
Have various versions of Slack installed on 3 laptops and 2 desktops and have preferred it for some time. In direct comparison on the same machine, Slackware always seems to deliver the snappiest performance.

con:
needs to be updated for wireless networking. rc.wireless is very nice addition, but rc.inet1 seems to only deal with eth%d named devices.

Linuxpackages.net offers quite a lot of quality packages for Slackware, ready for installpkg.
 
Old 01-15-2005, 09:50 AM   #21
MikeZila
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 377

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Quick, Stable, The user can fiddle with whatever they please
Cons: Package system is a little primative


Hardcore.

I use Slackware as a standalone server, and it has outperformed every other OS I've tried. Solaris, Win2k3, XP, and a bunch of other Linux distros. They all choke when I put them in the situation my Slackware server is in right now.

Webserver serving a Perl based message board, and PHP/mySQL based journal system.
SMTP/POP3
A Ventrilo Voicechat server
An 8 player CS:Source server
A file and print server for my LAN

Running on:
550Mhz AMD K/3D
~512 Ram
4GB Harddisk
junky eMachines motherboard

It does all of that, and still has enough juice left over for me to log in and compile software at a steady pace. You need look no more if you're on the prowl for an OS that has both mad speed, and unbreakable stability.
 
Old 01-18-2005, 04:35 AM   #22
scuzzman
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Slackware, Kubuntu
Posts: 1,851

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: source-based, simple, fast, stable, no dependency resolution
Cons: steep learning curve


Stability Through Simplicity - thats all there is to say. Slackware really trims away the fat! And with no auto-dependency resolution that'll break the system, there's very little worry of things blowing out or proportion.
 
Old 01-20-2005, 10:23 AM   #23
juanctes
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Distribution: Ubuntu :(
Posts: 74

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: i'm newbie and this is the fisrrt distro i use, befor this i used windows and, i wont go back there, itÅ› hard but i like to undestand how things work, its a LOT faster and i gritings just to tell u that itÅ› not so unrecommendable for a newbie. if u know
Cons: let me know it better and ill tell u.. just that i get tired of reading man pages (apropos/man -k helps)


 
Old 02-05-2005, 11:40 AM   #24
zcald
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10.0
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Stability, speed, robust
Cons: N/A


Slack is unbelievable. I had "experimented" with several flavors of linux for years now. I've used Redhat and its various flavors (Fedore, Mandrake) I tried SuSe, Solaris, Knoppix, and briefly Debian. I didn't care for any of them honestly. Thankfully I downloaded Slack and gave it a spin. Slack just felt right from the moment I started using it. I see no learning curve, it's incredibly straight forward and easy to work with. I honestly can't say enough good things about this flavor of Linux. And I honestly can't think of one negative experience or con. Sorry to be such a Slackware fanatic, but I can't help it. ;)
 
Old 02-14-2005, 10:54 AM   #25
thick_guy_9
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: VMS, RHEL, Slackware & FreeBSD
Posts: 99

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: lean, clean and no Customisations (to kernel, KDE etc)
Cons: horrendous package management. GNOME may be dropped


I had a P200MMX with 256 MB / 40 GB RAM & HDD resp running FreeBSD with FVWM2, happily. But since it could not install SOlaris, I bought an AMD 2400+, 256 MB.

Trouble was I ended up getting a SiS 200 Xabre card, which, while not a bad card under windows, has pathetic X support. So Slackware 10 was my first real taste of linux. ( I had Mandrake installed before, but felt too scared to touch anything).

Things I like: it is clean. Just like FreeBSD. You can control about every file that gets installed. No customisations. I have heard it is possible to do a clean compile of software from source. (be warned though: you are COMPLETELY at the mercy of the maintainer of the project, it is not really a slackware problem/feature). Also once installed it is simple, there are handy utilities to set up a dial-up connection etc. You don't HAVE to have KDE / GNOME to connect to the web.

CONS: Package management is horrible. I like using gnotepad+. I never knew that such an app existed.
PLus documentation is non-existent.

Actually, FreeBSD is better than probably all distros. Only reason I have stopped using it is they have a horrible USB implementation.

 
Old 02-15-2005, 12:51 PM   #26
cb951303
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: Slackware 11 + Dropline Gnome 2.16
Posts: 194

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: most stable and fastest distro ever
Cons: lack of package dependencie auto-check


this is the best linux distro I've ever used.(i tired almost 30 distros including debian, red-hat, mandrake, suse...)
i'm using it now for 4 years and I can tell that it never crashes.even if i don't reboot my computer for 3 days, it still works like a charm.

the only(and I mean ONLY) negative aspect is that there isn't an auto-checker for binary package dependencies.
don't get me wrong, the "tgz" package system is very good and simple but a little "dependencie check" tool would be great.

slackware is a 2 cd distro but the second one isn't necessary for installing the system.it contains only KDE and GNOME.

also i would recommend the DROPLINE GNOME which forms a great combination with slackware.
it's a great package because it has an auto-installer and it's stable enough.

summary: as i use DROPLINE + SLACKWARE for 4 years after trying 30 other distros, i can easily say that's the most stable distro ever.

 
Old 04-01-2005, 10:36 AM   #27
fearofcarpet
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Gentoo, FC4, FreeBSD
Posts: 34

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Simple installation, highly customizable, stable
Cons: Ensuing configuration can be a headache with lots of hardware


For day-to-day use on a laptop or Desktop, I personally am not a huge fan of Slack. For older hardware, servers, sandbox installs, and basically everything else, I loved Slack... Past tense only because I only have so many spare computers to play with distros :)

Now that you're shaking your fist, let me explain... For my day-to-day use as a non-computer professional, Slack is just too time consuming to get up and running with all my hardware. I'd much rather toss Fedora on my laptop and head off to work with everything I need sitting on my (now 1/2 full) hard drive and working out-of-the-box.

That said, I really like the Slackware installation. It is Debian-esque in its simplicity, but without the arbitrarily complicated package selection options and zillion CDs. Let's put it this way; it took me at least a dozen tries to get Debian up and running correctly, and exactly one try to get Slack going. The community at large is great too; very helpfull and seemingly very excited at a prospect of a new Slack user.

On the other hand, after installing Slack I was left staring at the command prompt. No audio, no GUI, no peripherals (save my PCMCI 802.11b WiFi and 10/100 NIC). Later that day, waaay after my bedtime, Xorg was running, and KDE followed shortly. Audio took some trying (again, thanks to help from the Slack community), but I eventually had to give up because it was clear my graphics card wasn't going to behave.

Ok, so maybe these issues are specific to my hardware, but after a while you start to expect a certain ease of installation concerning basic aspects of Linux, like the GUI. This is what dropped Slack from 10 to 8 for me; I'd rather not spend a bunch of time getting very basic things working. I have no problem spending forever getting all the little programs I love compiled just right, but spending all day trying to get my sound card working correctly just wasn't that entertaining :)

Overall my favorite two features are the installer and the stability. Pop the CD in, dig around some very easy menu selections, reboot, then toss your installation CD out the window. You now have a blazing fast and rock stable basic Linux installation. (I seem to remeber having to manually configure the partitions before the menu-driven installer, but if you can't handle that then go back to Windows... Just kidding)

To the Linux initate I would say steer clear of Slack - it can be intimidating to configure correctly and may scare you away from Linux. To those who appreciate the challenge of configuring every little aspect of your system Slack is a barrel of monkeys. If stability is a priority the look no further. Oh, and if you're ready to move on from a "friendly" distro, Slack is an excellent distro to learn about the underpinnings of Linux.
 
Old 06-03-2005, 02:35 PM   #28
verdeboy2k
 
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: Gentoo amd64, CrunchBang amd64
Posts: 350

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 10

Pros: Extremely Secure and Stable
Cons: Install and setup can be cumbersome


I simply love slackware because of its stability and security. I have never had any problems getting software working. Because slackware dosent make any modifications to the packages in their distros, it makes it easier to upgrade to the latest versions. The only problem that might come up is that the install system is older, and that all configuration but the most basic has to be done post install. Not for the fainthearted, but worth the effort.
 
Old 07-09-2005, 09:25 PM   #29
tireseas
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Distribution: Slackware 10 & 10.1
Posts: 149

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: stable, easy, predictable, powerful
Cons: the learning curve never stops :-)


I've been using Slackware since 8.1 and probably since 9.0 exclusively as my desktop/workstation OS, single boot. I have it installed on a Windows dual-boot which my partner uses and on a laptop (which, using slapt-get I have recently upgraded to 10.1). I have also managed to leverage a small non-X version onto some old hardware (2 Gb) with a Pentium 750 and 64 Mb of RAM for testing purposes.
I am no computer whizz by any standard, and once the basics are set up, and the batons tightened, then really the system is low maintenenace. There are so many more activities I could put this machine, but don't - not because the OS can't handle it, but because of the brick wall that is my knowledge limit. I suspect however that Slackware is a distro that will never get in the user's way and will always provide more than enough gumption to perform ahead of the game.
The machines are always on, often with several applications minimised or running in the background, and even with 256Mb the system is responsive and runs smoothly.
The WM/desktop I use is Xfce which is so cool with a small footprint. Running OOo-1.9* is a thrill, and I enjoy the distraction of Battle for Wesnoth, great connectivity software, and all the usual stockpile of GNU/Linux applications and utilities, thanks to some well-made packages at http://www.linuxpackages.net (thanks guys!! :-))
The user list/community is outstanding. The participants are knowledgeable and generous with their knowledge and time.
The only "con" I could think of again reflects the almost infinite possibilities a distro with this much flexibility and raw power for those who do know how to harness it ... I'm not yet one of those people, so for me the learning is still quite steep. The beauty about Slackware though is that the skills and info one learns is applicable across distros and even UN*CES.
Thanks Pat : outstanding workmanship.
 
Page:  1 · 2 




  



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:55 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement

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