LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 04-16-2018, 09:03 AM   #16
Paulo2
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2012
Distribution: Slackware64 -current (started with 13.37(32))
Posts: 389

Rep: Reputation: 121Reputation: 121

I think PACKAGES.TXT gives this information.
Code:
7z e -so /seagate2t/Linux/distros/Slackware/14.2/slackware64-14.2-install-dvd.iso PACKAGES.TXT|head

ERRORS:
Unexpected end of archive


PACKAGES.TXT;  Wed Jun 29 19:49:56 UTC 2016

This file provides details on the Slackware packages found
in the ./slackware64/ directory.

Total size of all packages (compressed):  2358 MB
Total size of all packages (uncompressed):  8538 MB


edit- After posting, I realized that 7z is a SBo software,
and looking for something native to do the same, I found 'isoinfo' from cdrtools package.
Code:
isoinfo -i /seagate2t/Linux/distros/Slackware/14.2/slackware64-14.2-install-dvd.iso -x /PACKAGES.TXT|head

Last edited by Paulo2; 04-16-2018 at 04:30 PM.
 
Old 04-16-2018, 09:47 AM   #17
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,209

Rep: Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ne01eX View Post
But not faster than the fluxbox/blackbox/fvwm/windowmaker/xfce.

Maybe your world is limited to KDE, but mine is not.
My world isn't limited to KDE, but I do prefer it. I've used the other window managers/desktop environments (gnome, xfce, enlightenment, blackbox, and probably others I don't remember) and wasn't sufficiently impressed with their speed. Going back to KDE never felt sluggish to me... and I only recently got a really high end machine, but these tests were done with a much older system. KDE has always been responsive for me. I was actually stuck using XFCE for about 6 months and I was consistently frustrated by it.

But you seem to correlate slowness with QT and I just don't see that. I have transmission and their qt and gtk versions both seem to run the same, although the gtk version is much uglier (IMO).

But montagdude is absolutely correct in that just installing KDE and QT won't result in any real or perceived slowdown unless you decide to actually run them.
 
Old 04-16-2018, 02:35 PM   #18
Ne01eX
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2018
Location: Ekaterinburg region, Ural, Russian Federation
Distribution: Slackware, RTK GNU/Linux
Posts: 173

Rep: Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
Damn, he forget MATE!
Slackware don't provide MATE "from-box".
 
Old 04-16-2018, 02:42 PM   #19
Didier Spaier
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slint64-14.2.1 on Lenovo Thinkpad W520
Posts: 8,414

Rep: Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179Reputation: 3179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ne01eX View Post
Slackware don't provide MATE "from-box".
But it's the default Slint desktop.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-16-2018, 02:49 PM   #20
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,183

Rep: Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164Reputation: 5164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ne01eX View Post
Maybe this member of forum creates motion in the dead sea? ;-)
This person likes to be spoon-fed. Just too lazy to RTFM or too ignorant to find the FM.
In http://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/slackware/...lackware-HOWTO you'll find two relevant sections. In "Hardware Requirements" it says "you'll need almost 9GB for a full default installation". And in "Slackware Space Requirements" you will find the installed size per Slackware package series (A = 608 MB, AP = 511 MB, ... etc).
A lot of those 3752 posts are pure waste of other people's time.
 
4 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-16-2018, 04:46 PM   #21
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,894

Rep: Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
I know that's hard to believe, but there are solid proofs that the greedy North-American Capitalists sells to inexperienced people around of World computers with really small storage devices which are soldered on board, then they are irreplaceable.

Those irreplaceable storage devices are eMMC ranging from 4GB to 32GB, sometimes more, and there are some proofs of their odious crimes:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-SD-WHI.../dp/B001IBHVC0
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07917WNCJ
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01LZE0396
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B073FRP3BX
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0792T5J76

Apparently, they try to install and run Slackware Linux.
LOL I have zero problem recognizing greed but am rather shocked to find that anyone imagines it is restricted to any specific geography. ... plus I always thought ASUS and those others were multi-national corporations based mostly in China. Gee! One learns something new everyday

.... and speaking of something new, how about .m2 over USB ? or old, how about simple usb drive or networked storage?.... or re-selling such an "odious crime" or using it for something else and getting a PC without such constraints?
 
Old 04-16-2018, 04:58 PM   #22
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,894

Rep: Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789Reputation: 1789
I'm pretty certain it would be possible to boot to runlevel 3 and write launch scripts to launch X for each and every app that requires it and that would be about as minimalistic as it could get- no Desktop at all. Few do that because Desktops have proven value for most people in most circumstances. In the above case launching several instances of X in parallel would soon defeat any low footprint value is just one of the values of a shared X environment. It is interesting that most compromise to Xfce or at the very least Fluxbox. Extremely few even drop as far back as Blackbox, so isn't footprint and "snappiness' simply a matter of taste, quality of PC, and the Big Kahuna - what we are used to?
 
Old 04-16-2018, 05:17 PM   #23
Ne01eX
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2018
Location: Ekaterinburg region, Ural, Russian Federation
Distribution: Slackware, RTK GNU/Linux
Posts: 173

Rep: Reputation: 22
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
But it's the default Slint desktop.
TS asked about Slackware. :-) Slackware don't provide slint or another Slack-like distributive. Slackware provide only Slackware. And into Slackware users maybe found and use "from-box" (into current time) only:

twm
fluxbox/blackbox
windowmaker
fvwm
xfce
kde


Into current time World of Warriors of Freedom provide +100500 WM and DE. Such as openbox, IceWM, MATE or Gnome (Slackware don't provide Gnome since of 10.2)

1. The lower, the fatter and more demanding of resources.
2. My choice.
3. Another good WM (and useful/usability, IMHO).
4. Maybe used, only if XFCE not present.

P.S. I don't used tiling-based WM such as dwm. IMHO, this uncomfortable (for me).

 
Old 04-16-2018, 05:26 PM   #24
Ne01eX
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2018
Location: Ekaterinburg region, Ural, Russian Federation
Distribution: Slackware, RTK GNU/Linux
Posts: 173

Rep: Reputation: 22
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal View Post
My world isn't limited to KDE, but I do prefer it. I've used the other window managers/desktop environments (gnome, xfce, enlightenment, blackbox, and probably others I don't remember) and wasn't sufficiently impressed with their speed. Going back to KDE never felt sluggish to me... and I only recently got a really high end machine, but these tests were done with a much older system. KDE has always been responsive for me. I was actually stuck using XFCE for about 6 months and I was consistently frustrated by it.

But you seem to correlate slowness with QT and I just don't see that. I have transmission and their qt and gtk versions both seem to run the same, although the gtk version is much uglier (IMO).

But montagdude is absolutely correct in that just installing KDE and QT won't result in any real or perceived slowdown unless you decide to actually run them.
Yes, after migration from GTK+2 to GTK+3 this program may be appear as very slow. Use GTK+2, this is will be always actual. :-)
 
Old 04-16-2018, 07:25 PM   #25
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,209

Rep: Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ne01eX View Post
Yes, after migration from GTK+2 to GTK+3 this program may be appear as very slow. Use GTK+2, this is will be always actual. :-)
I didn't say slow, I said ugly. GTK-based interfaces have always looked archaic to me... Maybe it's whatever the default theme is, but the default theme with QT apps look fine to me, and I'm not one to go and try and theme my systems.
 
Old 04-16-2018, 10:44 PM   #26
Ne01eX
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2018
Location: Ekaterinburg region, Ural, Russian Federation
Distribution: Slackware, RTK GNU/Linux
Posts: 173

Rep: Reputation: 22
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal View Post
I didn't say slow, I said ugly. GTK-based interfaces have always looked archaic to me... Maybe it's whatever the default theme is, but the default theme with QT apps look fine to me, and I'm not one to go and try and theme my systems.
Pencils of different colors for taste are also different.

In other words, your preferences are not a problem for developers.
 
Old 04-17-2018, 01:40 AM   #27
Ne01eX
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2018
Location: Ekaterinburg region, Ural, Russian Federation
Distribution: Slackware, RTK GNU/Linux
Posts: 173

Rep: Reputation: 22
P.S. Maybe need set topic title as [SOLVED] ? ;-)
 
Old 04-17-2018, 09:16 AM   #28
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,209

Rep: Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985Reputation: 2985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ne01eX View Post
Pencils of different colors for taste are also different.

In other words, your preferences are not a problem for developers.
I also said it was my opinion that it was ugly. But I haven't noticed any speed difference between qt and gtk apps, which is what I was getting at.
 
Old 04-17-2018, 10:24 AM   #29
orbea
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 1,277

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal View Post
I didn't say slow, I said ugly. GTK-based interfaces have always looked archaic to me... Maybe it's whatever the default theme is, but the default theme with QT apps look fine to me, and I'm not one to go and try and theme my systems.
As I am someone to theme my system, I've found that gtk+2 is the best because no one cares about it anymore and thus it just continues to work. Qt4 and Qt5 are the next best because they can use my gtk+2 themes without too much hassle. Gtk+3 however is the clear loser, not only do they not remotely support gtk+2 themes, they routinely break any theme I find passable every update...
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-17-2018, 07:08 PM   #30
Ne01eX
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2018
Location: Ekaterinburg region, Ural, Russian Federation
Distribution: Slackware, RTK GNU/Linux
Posts: 173

Rep: Reputation: 22
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by orbea View Post
As I am someone to theme my system, I've found that gtk+2 is the best because no one cares about it anymore and thus it just continues to work. Qt4 and Qt5 are the next best because they can use my gtk+2 themes without too much hassle. Gtk+3 however is the clear loser, not only do they not remotely support gtk+2 themes, they routinely break any theme I find passable every update...
GTK+2 4ever!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fedora Revisor required disk space apple.py Linux - Newbie 1 08-08-2011 04:42 PM
[SOLVED] Disk space required for openSUSE CSharpguy Linux - Desktop 1 10-20-2010 07:53 AM
Minimum disk space required for OpenBSD? as400 *BSD 4 11-19-2009 05:59 AM
Cedega "Disk space required for the installation exceeds available disk space" Solved Spewdemon LinuxQuestions.org Member Success Stories 1 10-18-2007 06:19 PM
How much hard disk space is required? SilverMermaid Linux - Newbie 4 02-04-2007 05:22 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:15 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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration