Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.


  Search this Thread
Old 03-02-2006, 12:55 AM   #1
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Vietnam
Distribution: FC , RH , SuSE
Posts: 106

Rep: Reputation: 15
Question Difference between Slackware and SuSE or RedHat , Fedora

Dear all ,
As I see on this forum , the number of Slackware users is larger than SuSE (RedHat , Fedora too) .
So I wonder what are core diffences between Slackware and others - not only advantages but also disadvantages .

Thanks alot .
Old 03-02-2006, 01:04 AM   #2
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Trinidad & Tobago
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Rep: Reputation: 30
1+Its optimized/fast
2+tgz / source based package installation (no more dependency hell)
3+It works
4+More modular/cleaner init tree structure

1-its a used linux before system
2-steep leaning curve
3-its a do it yourself distro
4-lots of manual tweaking to get recent hardware to work
5-can't think of anymore disadv.
Old 03-02-2006, 01:14 AM   #3
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: ~
Distribution: Slackware -current
Posts: 458

Rep: Reputation: 49
You may find some nice reading here:
and some reviews here:
but it's even better to install and try it for yourself, you may never go back to any of your old distros, you've been warned
Old 03-02-2006, 01:33 AM   #4
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Israel
Distribution: Windows Xp, Slackware
Posts: 316
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 30
You can get Slackware to do what you want, not like the "simple" distro's that you do what they want.
Old 03-02-2006, 01:57 AM   #5
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Vietnam
Distribution: FC , RH , SuSE
Posts: 106

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Could any one compare Slackware with remain distributions (SuSE , FC ,RedHat)in more details . I see that the advantages of Slackware said above always available on others .

Thanks all .
Old 03-02-2006, 02:11 AM   #6
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: fedora 7
Posts: 62

Rep: Reputation: 16
I am new to slack too but it's definitly more DIY than other distros. force you to learn a lot of linux basics, too.
Old 03-02-2006, 02:12 AM   #7
Registered: Jun 2005
Posts: 111

Rep: Reputation: 15
Advantages/disadvantages for who? In what situation?

It is all dependent on the context. If you have to deploy a server tomorrow, and all you know is SUSE, Slack is a bad choice. If you want to learn GNU/Linux, and have enough time to invest, Slackware is a good choice.
Old 03-02-2006, 02:50 AM   #8
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Vietnam
Distribution: FC , RH , SuSE
Posts: 106

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
In case you (GlowGlow and others) know both Slackware and SuSE , which you choose ? Why ?
Old 03-02-2006, 04:48 AM   #9
Senior Member
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Finland
Distribution: Slackware, CentOS, RHEL, OpenBSD
Posts: 1,006

Rep: Reputation: 37
I've used both, but not much though. I like slackware for I can do just what I want and I know what the system does at all times.

SuSE is nice but it doesn't tell you much what it is doing behind all the eye-candy. Same goes for Fedora Core and others.
Old 03-02-2006, 06:27 AM   #10
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Distribution: Slackware-Current / Debian
Posts: 795

Rep: Reputation: 30
RedHat/Fedora/Suse/Mandriva, etc all customize certain things (including the kernel), to suit their own needs. This makes the user dependent on their updates, and learns to do things the way they prescribe.

Slackware is simple raw Linux. The maintainer, Pat Volkerding does not modify the source code from the programmer's vision.

There is an old saying around these parts -- "If you learn RedHat/Fedora/Suse/Mandriva, you know RedHat/Fedora/Suse/Mandriva. If you learn Slackware you know Linux"
Old 03-02-2006, 10:37 AM   #11
Registered: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 794
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 30
Mandriva et al are easy in the sense that you can auto-install their packages, and the set-up is automatic.

Slackware requires some manual configuration to begin with (although it will go), but is very logically set up, comes with all the basic software you will need, far more than a basic Mandriva install, gives you the opportunity to do many different things with ease, and teaches you how it all works. If you use Slackware you will have a very stable distro, and will get to know a lot about Linux and your system. Using Mandriva will give you something that will auto-configure it all, and make life easy.
Old 03-02-2006, 11:18 AM   #12
LQ Newbie
Registered: Dec 2005
Location: Vilnius/Lithuania
Distribution: Slackware 10.2
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 0
Well the main advantage of Slackware (for me ) that this distro is free from all those rpm shit, wizards, graphical configuration and other mess which is intented to make Linux as LAMER-FRIENDLY as windos xp. This is why Slackware became my favorite distro.
Old 03-02-2006, 11:38 AM   #13
Senior Member
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Lee, NH
Distribution: OpenSUSE, CentOS, RHEL
Posts: 1,794

Rep: Reputation: 46
Slackware is an excellent choice when you want to spend time tweaking rather than actually getting real work done.
Old 03-02-2006, 11:45 AM   #14
Registered: May 2004
Location: Ohio, USA
Distribution: LinuxMint Gloria, Ubuntu 9.10
Posts: 299

Rep: Reputation: 30
Originally Posted by nguyennh
the number of Slackware users is larger than SuSE (RedHat , Fedora too)
Not the number of users, the number of confused users with questions. Very manual distro... But, you won't be tempted to add a bunch of stuff you may not get a lot of use out of - compiling takes time.
Old 03-02-2006, 11:46 AM   #15
Registered: Sep 2004
Location: Ontario, Canada
Distribution: Slackware 14.2, current
Posts: 416

Rep: Reputation: 36
I use both Slackware and SuSE.

I put slack on my old PII 455Mhz to upgrade from Windows 95. I chose slack for this precisely because of the DIY nature. It also felt the most like Unix which is what I had been using for over 10 years at work.

I chose SuSE for a new laptop from work because I wanted the hardware to basically work without much tweaking. SuSE had a good reputation in that area. Besides some ACPI stuff (common with laptops) it has worked just fine.

One really nice feature in SuSE is a profile manager which allows you to boot under very different configurations (eg. network settings).

In the end, both are good and the choice depends on what you want to do. It has been said before, and I can attest to it from my experience, "If you want to learn distro X, use distro X, but if you want to learn Linux, use Slackware."

Just my


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
Difference Between Suse & Redhat pakuson Linux - General 17 12-03-2013 11:53 AM
Fedora VS SuSE VS Slackware RoaCh Of DisCor Linux - Distributions 14 05-08-2008 10:19 AM
Highlighting text in Xterm...difference between RedHat and Suse guychambertain Linux - General 3 10-25-2004 07:28 PM
Redhat / fedora user wants to try Slackware. qwijibow Slackware 18 06-27-2004 05:20 PM
What's the difference between Suse, Mandrake, Redhat, and Vector Linux? javaarmy Linux - Distributions 7 09-28-2003 12:24 PM > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 PM.

Main Menu
Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration