im currently downloading ISOs for cd 1/2 of slack 10.1 and planning to install it.
currently i have 10.0 installed and learned afew things already with some simple configurations, but am removing it because of a problem that cant be solved [LQ thread here].

im asking.. of those who used to have slack 10 and have upgraded to 10.1: is it worth it?
should i finish downloading these ISOs and burning/wasting(?) 2 cds and my time installing this?

also, it says it comes with 2.4.29 by default.. but includes 2.6.10, what did you choose? what are the main benefits of 2.6.10 over the default one?

i mainly like slack because of how almost everything is done manually [educating you], and how theres many WMs included by default, and how easy it is to switch between them. i like gnome the best, but its very slow.

if not 10.1, then ill probably give ubuntu 5.1 ANOTHER try. although i posted a thread afew weeks ago that couldnt get resolved so i ended up removing ubuntu because of it.

anyways.. tips on what i should do would be appreciated... i want to be a linux user and have it work for me

i'm in love with slack 10, but i did install slack 10.1, had a few problems, but those were actually fixed when i upgraded it to slack-current. i can't suggest you stay with it or choose another distro, i won't slam another distro, but i'll say that because you already realize how much more you learned with slack over ubuntu (or any other distro) i'd stick with slack. i started with suse, which was excellent for me as a newbie, but once i tried slack, i was hooked. suse is an excellent distro, just not the one for me.
finish downloading the 10.1 cd's...install it, see how it works for you...you also might wanna upgrade to current...and go from there....i've found things have a way of working themselves out...and i've also never come across a problem that hasn't already been solved by someone else.

suse i think was my first--wait no.. it was RH9.0 as my first attempt at linux about last year. then suse was the next one to try. i didnt like it because it had kde, and didnt know how to (if possible) to simply switch to gnome-- could i have used xwmconfig to select gnome? (if its even included with it)
so suse was your first distro? whatd you like mostly about that? how long u use that for before moving on to slack?

wow...i was wrong...i tried rh9 first...got no place with it. switched to suse 8.2, then to 9.0...used suse for almost a year...loved it. it was newbie friendly, easy to learn, lots of documentation...and it worked on my pc, which was obviously a huge plus. rpm's made adding software incredibly easy...except for dependencies, which were quickly taken care of with apt4suse...but there were a handful of things i couldn't get to work, and i really wanted to know more about what i was doing with linux, or rather what linux was doing...and i had read the slackware forum here for awhile, and reading that everyone was saying once you tried slack, there was no turning back, so i tried it, just to see if i could learn how to use it, make it work and such, and once i had installed it, i was hooked. there were problems, but thats all part of the learning curve. suse is sweet, but i've learned more from slack, and slack just works. i have used suse, knoppix, ubuntu, and none have worked as well as or performed as stable as slack for me. thats kinda why i recommend sticking with it.
as for switching windows managers in suse, there is a menu option on the suse startup screen where you can choose what you wanna use. i liked kde cause it was "familiar", but once i installed fluxbox, i was hooked on that.
anyways, for me suse is great, slack is excellent.

You should probably just continue with the download. You never know if something may have changed. I just put slack 10.1 on about a week ago. The only major difference I've noticed so far is that lprng and apsfilter are not installed anymore so I had to do that part myself. If you use CUPS you won't care about that though.

Read a little about your orginal probelm with the whole web page not loading......very strange.
This probably won't fix it but you should use modprobe instead of insmod, or comment it out in rc.modules, or better yet make a file /etc/rc.d/rc.netdevice with a line like this in it.
/sbin/modprobe YOURDRIVERNAME
Make sure it is executable.

As for the kernal, it would probably be easier to just stay with 2.4.29.

Sorry I can't give more help,
jlarsen

the insmod seemed to load the driver.. but the problem was i had to do it on every boot,so i was wondering if there was a file i could just add a line to to load the file, something like you suggested. where you said yourdrivername, of course i put my driver name (3c2000.o i believe) in its place.. then chmod +x it, but where should i put the driver file? /lib/modules? not sure where.

i posted this other side question in a thread a while back but got no response.. it always comes up: whats rc? whats it stand for and its main purpose? i see it come up very often, and figure its something to do with startup jobs

thanks to you both

the /etc/rc.d/ contains your startup scripts.

You should use modprobe instead of insmod to load a driver. You can add that line to /etc/rc.d/rc.inet1.

You can place the actual module in /lib/modules/kernel/drivers/net and it should be ok.