I have a Dvd of Slackware as well as an Iso image of Arch.

All i know about the difference between Slackware and Arch is the stability, i.e. Slackware is more stable than Arch !

Is that all or there is some other difference which should be considered ?

Which one out of the above two, should i go for and why ?

If you recommend any of the two, be kind enough to state the reasons too !!

Hello Anisha,

I've been using Slackware for almost a year now and am very satisfied with it. I didn't vote however because I haven't had the occasion to try Arch yet. But I came across this site which explains some of the basic differences.

Arch Compared to Other Distributions

Kind regards,

Eric

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks for bothering, Eric

I don't have an internet connection at home. Therefore i do not want the package manager of some distribution to start downloading packages from the net.

In short i want to preserve tar or rpm files of the soft-wares i need.

I have heard Slackware doesn't have a package manager ? Does this mean we have to download tar files from the net and install them from source ?

I voted Slackware, but I only used Arch for a few days in the past. I'll probably give it a try in the near future.

Hi,

Slackware does have a lot of tools to update, upgrade, install packages, such as slackpkg, pkgtool, and others (Slackware Package Management). There even are tools that connect to repos like SlackBuilds.org (although I'm not familiar with them).

Since you state you don't have an internet connection at home, I'd go with Slackware which updates very little (stable, not -current for as far as I know). You could download the software packages and dependencies you need at another location and install them at home at your convenience. As stated before I'm still a 'newbie' at Slackware so I imagine that other users will kick in pretty soon

For what I read about Arch (no experience with it), it's bleeding edge and does lot's of updates on a very frequent base (rolling release), which in my opinion doesn't mean you have to update but in not doing so you'll take away one of the specific's of Arch.

Kind regards,

Eric

1 members found this post helpful.

it has package manager,though it wont check dependencies for you.

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks to all of you for replying !

If i need to install Vlc player, not through the package manager though, will it be easier on arch or slack ?
Vlc has lot of codecs which i think need to be downloaded separately ? Am i wrong ?
Or installing Vlc on any distro will require the same efforts (Without internet) ?

Aha, Player! With Slackware you download it from Alien Bob's site, with Arch you just use package manager. However, MPlayer is better in extreme cases.

With Arch, you install MPLayer using the package manager, with Slackware it is preinstalled.

However, with some hardware MPlayer may work better on Arch due to its newer X server.

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks to you,

You mean we can download a tar/rpm of vlc player which includes all its codecs or do we have to install codecs separately ?

In Arch, you inly install what you need.

And its package manager handles dependencies.

It also has non-free codecs and Flash available in its repositories.

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks Mtk

but i specified earlier i don't have an internet, will i be able to install every software from tar or rpm in it ? If i do so, will i face dependency problems ?

Hi,

When using Arch, since it comes with it's package manager that takes care of dependencies, you'd have to be sure that all dependencies are fulfilled yourself when installing manual (without internet).

When using Slackware, you'll know what you need up front since you're the one who has to take care of the dependencies, hence you'll download and install the dependencies before the package itself.

Kind regards,

Eric

May i am dumb but what i understand from the above two statements is that in any case i have to make sure that dependencies are properly installed !!

If i am wrong kindly do bother to explain !

Eric Hameleers (Alien Bob) has two packages for VLC:

http://connie.slackware.com/~alien/slackbuilds/vlc/

http://slackware.org.uk/people/alien...ackbuilds/vlc/

This explains the difference:
http://connie.slackware.com/~alien/s...D_PACKAGES.TXT

Get libdvdcss from Eric's site(s) too.

1 members found this post helpful.

Thanks brian,

i didn't download the packages right now. but i would like to ask whether all the codecs supported by vlc are included in the tar balls or they have to be downloaded and installed separately ?