For the stable version (14.2):
http://www.slackware.com/security/
http://www.slackware.com/security/li...ecurity&y=2019

Its very stable as it gets mostly security related fixes and that's it. Usually Pat will wait for when a collection of well tested and well tried software is at a good enough status and will bump version to 14.3 or 15.0, it doesn't really matter, and it happens once when its ready (1 to 3 years or so). If you stay on that you get an update when there is a serious bug, but you are otherwise stuck with what you have until you change to a different version. That version can be the next release, or you can switch to -current which gets weekly updates across the board. Take a look at the packages on -current vs the ones on -14.2:

https://ftp.nluug.nl/os/Linux/distr/...4/PACKAGES.TXT
https://ftp.nluug.nl/os/Linux/distr/...4/PACKAGES.TXT

^ ok thanks both for the info.

if i have to subscribe to the mailing list to be informed of security updates, i assume that means i then also have to take care of manually installing them? there's no package management with online repositories, no equivalent of "apt update && apt upgrade"?
sounds like a very hands-on approach to em and tbh i don't quite understand how that can be desirable for a server admin.

so there's no support inm the form of security updates, so there's also no releases or anything, you just install a static version and that's it, and it's up to you to patch security vulnerabilities?

There is automated package management and update for the distribution packages, but you still need to run it manually (like with apt get&don't get)and choose what you want to update (transparent, flexible and empowering the user):
https://docs.slackware.com/slackware:slackpkg

I guess it's an obvious requirement for a sysadmin to follow the development of the distro he's using, that means mailing list subscription, forum registration and checking the changelog:
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...00/page54.html
http://www.slackware.com/changelog/

On your other question, related to how Slackware is released, this section might provide you with some details:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slackware#Releases

Well, if you know what you're doing (Linux expertise), looking for stability and would like to have control over all the details of the system, configuring and optimizing (fine tuning) it yourself, without any opaque chain of scripts or dumb (limited exceptions handling) GUI interfaces (Redmond like), then you would like it. If you're into mouse-clicks and apt-get& don't get, superficial administration - just to make the system work, somehow, and leave the office, then there are plenty of alternatives.

Personally, I started with BSD in 1996 and then, due to the Linux kernel being superior in HW support, I went on using RedHat, which was a mess of dysfunctional scripts trying to do "automagic". Soon after I discovered Slackware and using it ever since, wouldn't exchange it for anything else, maybe LFS.

My point is, if you're savvy and dedicated, Slackware is offering you the most&best of Linux. If you're into get the job done and go home, there are mouse-click-click GUI interfaces alternatives. M$ Windows Server could also be an alternative, as I can't really make a difference between it and these new over-scripted/GUI-interfaced Linux distros that take the control of your system and won't let you change/install anything on your own.

As an average user, so far I am satisfied with Ubuntu 18.04 LTS.

As a server distro?

(Full disclosure - I work for RH, and I use Slackware and Gentoo at work)
Not pick on you specifically but saying that you used Redhat in the 90's and that its all automagic scripts and such is only a part of a "old-and-unrelated-to-these-days" story. Some of the certifications I did were RCHSA and RHCE and those automatic scripts handle the basics and work 99% of the cases. For the rest of the cases you are free to change manual settings just as if there weren't any automatic scripts. Those scripts are very helpful when you want to deploy an entire farm, especially in an HA environment where servers go up and down on demand and share a work load, something I am not terribly convinced Slackware can do OOB.

No. I have not yet gone so far in my capabilities, and work requirements, for having a server distro. I am still learning the usages of Ubuntu 18.04, of what is available and what I need in the future. One of the reasons why I answered the way I did, and why I am on this thread, is to learn more about server distros, why they are used, and the different advantages and disadvantages.

The fact that CentOS was voted for more over RHEL is too funny.

I just presented my history with Linux, being aware that RedHat grew professional these days, backed by the armies of engineers they hired (and sold now to IBM). I was also using RedHat recently for enterprise solutions and my experience with the paid support, which I sincerely don't understand, as it didn't work at all, was not the best experience one would expect, no wonder people are using CentOS instead. I vaguely remember (around 7-8 years ago RHEL 5?) that we had issues with grub booting from the external EMC (pre Dell acquisition) FC SAN and there were some issues with NFS, not to mention that we had to insert the FC adapter driver and recompile the kernel on our own, officially "loosing the licenses". I opened 3 tickets, ended up somewhere in the customer support office from Bangalore, in touch with some Yes-men that wouldn't care to resolve anything for months in a row -> "Yes Sir, we are looking into it, we'll keep you informed" .
In my post you replied to I was emphasizing the flexibility of the non-scripted Slackware and that you actually do Linux and not some distro "slang" that will only help you with that particular distro. You'll become a distro specialist and not a Linux specialist, as you won't work with the basic Linux tool set, but with the myriads of distro specific scripts that act as a layer of abstraction over Linux.
Just for example, I can't see here any ifconfig or ip basic Linux commands, but some, as I call them "dumb" (limited) scripts and GUI mouse-click interfaces:
https://access.redhat.com/documentat...o-addnetdevice
https://access.redhat.com/documentat...rk-config.html

I also used gentoo for a while, having a "stage" in which I considered I need to build my own system from scratch, but found it rather difficult (emerge system and the build switches). The Slackware way of building packages, using plain and transparent SlackBuilds (basic shell scripts that configure, compile and package the application) is way more simple&flexible to use.

I'm not sure I can follow you with the deployment of server farms. Almost all actual distros are able to be deployed OOB and then with the help of the orchestration framework of your choice, configured, updated and scaled. Slackware makes no exception, it's deployable OOB and due to its flexibility (simple&transparent, shell scripting BSD style init system), it's also ready for OOB architectural thinking/design and not limited by the distro documented recipes only.
http://www.slackware.com/config/init.php

Personally, I'd like to remain a Linux professional (or expert) and understand what I'm doing, be flexible and take ownership (and care) about my systems. That's why I stick with Slackware, it's solid and more convenient than LFS. These were my points about it in my previous posts and I highly recommend Slackware for anyone who is trying to achieve the same.
Again, there are plenty of other distros that can make one's life easier with the help of scripts and GUI configuration interfaces, apparently and superficially.

1 members found this post helpful.

On LQ, it is possible to subscribe to a thread without posting to it.

1 members found this post helpful.

Ondoho,

Thank you for the information.

FWIW, I have a slackware 14.1 box I use as a fax server. I update it regularly. By the time it required a reboot it had an uptime of over 400 days.

The day Slackware moves to systemd is the day I stop using Slackware.

I am in agreement with you.

how?
does slackware have compulsory package management like debian?
so there were no kernel updates?
what about kernel security patches?

thanks for taking the time to explain things a little.