Slackware has this invisible allure that I don't quite understand. However, it does carry a reputation of crappy package management, a complex upgrade procedure, and a lack of support for much modern software available on other Linux distributions like Arch. Obviously, if slackware survived this long, there has to be something good about it. What keeps you using slack, despite these problems? Are these even relevant issues anymore? What system have you come up with to keep slackware up to date enough and not feel like you're being punished?

I usually like to have a simple setup for Linux. I use dwm, firefox, and a terminal with vim and latex primarily, so nothing too fancy. Do you find slackware hard to keep updated? By updated I don't necessarily mean bleeding edge; I've used Arch enough to know bleeding edge isn't always best. I mean updated enough to be secure and relatively feature filled.

I had slackware installed for a little bit and liked it, but didn't have time to get into it before I had to wipe my install for various reasons, but I'm getting a little tired of distro hopping. I don't want to put lots of love and care into setting up slackware only to find halfway through the process that it doesn't do something I want, or the package management really is as "cluster@#$!" as I've read it is. I've been reading these forums lately and notice a lot of you are diehard loyalists for slack, and I want to discover why, so I can join this enlightened community, despite these shortcomings (if they are truly as profound as some reviews say).

Slackware has no package management - this is entirely by design and Slackers like it this way. Slackpkg and similar exist, but the point of Slackware is that you know what you have installed and you are responsible for keeping it up to date. Additionally, one of the big complaints about package managers is that to remove one piece of software you will often find things like, say, Gnome also being removed. Slackers don't feel this pain. Basically, if you know your system and are confident with reading and following instructions, Slackware is pain free and easy to use.

I think that these opinions are from those other people.

Slackware is as bleeding edge as you want it to be. If you don't want a stack of alpha and beta and RC software, don't install it. Slackware will not force you to install particular versions.

There is no package management. You can download and install via Slackpkg but it will not do dependency checking and resolution for you. So you won't have that issue.

Slackware has fantastic, bulletproof package management (but does not have dependency resolution; you're on your own for that). Pkgtools (menu driven) or installpkg, removepkg, and upgradepkg do a great job of keeping track of what you have installed, installing it, removing it, and upgrading it.

It's a modern, very complete distribution that will run any modern software. It will certainly run a whole lot more than you're planning on running.

My best advice is to give it a shot with an open mind. Read about it, try it out, ask a lot of questions to learn how things are supposed to work, and then make up your mind on whether on not Slackware has "crappy package management" etc.



Regards,

Xavier,

That's not true. See my post above regarding pkgtool, installpkg, removepkg, and upgradepkg.

Regards,

I usually just install Slackware releases and don't update packages much in between. Almost everything that I've wanted to add has either been done as a Slackware package or easily built from sources.

One of my reasons for using Slackware is the Slackbook Project. I found the documentation very helpful in configuring and using Linux.

I like the text based setup utility for Slackware because it generally works and doesn't leave me scratching my head when the graphics isn't compatible between my hardware and a GUI setup utility. That was also helpful in setting up my two fake hardware RAID systems where I had to build and install driver modules to access the disk.

Slackware cleanly separates the GUI from the text command shell and one can install and use Slackware without ever starting the GUI.

I prefer KDE to GNOME and Slackware seems to be a solid distro including KDE. Some distros support KDE but since it isn't the primary GUI it often has more problems than the standard GNOME version.

Slackware uses nearly unchanged versions of packages so I can install updates directly from the latest source. When something has a lot of dependencies I usually install a Slackware package.

I haven't found the package manager to be a major problem in Slackware. When I'm lazy and installing a simple package I just copy it to a folder and use "pkgtool". There are other programs for doing more complicated package installations but they aren't usually mandatory.

I don't usually "upgrade" or "update" Slackware. I install a clean copy and just copy my few configuration files or cut and paste the settings. I only do that about twice a year so it isn't a big problem. Very few Slackware changes have rendered my previous configuration settings unusable.

I think that Slackware is a better distro for someone who prefers to change their system less, and have it up and working most of the time. It's not as convenient if you want to constantly install new versions of everything. You can still do that but it's less automatic with Slackware. If you just install or update an occasional program then Slackware is just as easy to use as the rest.

Like any distro, updating the C/C++ compiler, libraries, or desktop GUI can be complicated. There's no getting around some of the version dependencies and even automatic tools don't always get it right. That problem is mostly solved by other Slackware contributors who take the time to package some of these major updates and test them.

The Slackware user community is a big positive for Slackware. Just about anything that I've needed that wasn't in the distro has been available from another Slackware contributor.

It's very hard to compare the quality of different distros but I've found Slackware to be very reliable. Anything included in Slackware has been tested and proven for a while. Generally what is included with Slackware works although it is often not the most recent version. I'm inclined to wait for new things to be added to Slackware in the next release rather than experimenting with "bleeding edge" versions of software. I don't want my Linux distro to constantly download and install new versions automatically because I would risk having new problems. That's been one of my complaints about Windows and it's the first thing I disable after I install Windows.

I think he meant to say 'no dependency checking package management'

You are correct in that you do not understand.

There ARE no 'problems' with Slackware - that is why we use it!

The only problems are actually the lack of understanding by users. The BEAUTY of Slackware is that IF you gain a little understanding, there are NO stumblingblocks to to what you can do.

Other distros try to do your thinking for you in many regards.

Slackware does not do things 'for' you like dependency checking package management, instead Slackware ENABLES you to do absolutely anything you want to do - IF you understand what you want to do!

Slackware is the power of simplicity!

Slackware is good as

it is fast to install
it can be easily upgraded and downgraded
it can be easily used as a rescue system if you broke your boot manager
it can be easily remastered to have a CD/DVD with packages you need

What cwwilson721 said. From the OP it seems that he is complaining that Slackware doesn't have apt/aptitude as in Debian. This is the oldest complaint against Slackware (that and the ncurses based install) and the fact that this has not changed since the early days should tell all detractors that this is all by design and that users of Slackware do not see it as a drawback.

Imho, Slack is actually easier to maintain and set up than Arch.
Initially there is less terminal time involved than with Arch but with a little work, thought and reading one can cut the terminal time down to where you don't really need to open a terminal that often unless you want to.
Yes, I realize one can do the same thing with Arch.
I ran Arch for quite awhile which broke the bleeding edge camels back for me.
Even though I really like Arch I would only put it on a box I don't depend on.
For my personal needs regarding Slack, I installed slapt-get and gslapt just for updating patches or maybe removing something installed.
I get what packages I can from Slackyeu and use pkgtool to install them.
Other packages I get from slackbuilds if they're available.
That process takes a little longer but I know what I'll have when I'm done.
If I can't find what I want at either of those spots, I hunt around and find a verifiable place that has the source for whatever it is I want.
After I have things set up the way I want them it's as easy as checking for updates now and then with gslapt.
Outside packages I check manually, but that's maybe a once a year thing.
I'm running 12.2 on one box with kde and 13.0 on another box with xfce.
I'm not bleeding edge nor do I want to be as I'm not interested in fixing things nor interested in waiting on devs to post a fix if I can't figure it out.
Right now both of my boxes have everything I need, everything I want and everything I think I need or want on them and I haven't once had to go and edit anything beyond my start menu/s.
I can have either 12.2 or 13 installed and set up to my specs in about 5-6 hours at this point in time.
The only problems I ever experienced while running Slack weren't Slack related but were problems with the software.
Nvidia probs from sometime last year are a real good example.

My first Linux was Red Hat. For a few months I tried also Mandrake. I started to use Slackware when Red Hat and Mandrake started to evolve into nice toys. It was in 2000. I installed Slackware on all my machines at work and at home and I never felt the need to switch to any other Linux distribution.

I change a lot in newly installed system but I never did those changes manually. I use a bunch of scripts called USERS, SYSTEM, NET, WWW+MAIL, XWINDOW and SECURE. When I want to change something in the system I add new procedure to the appropriate script. So when I install new version of the system I run all these scripts and I gain the system configured entirely.

In the past I assembled my machines myself. I picked up well tested components and I never had any problem with them. In 2004 I switched from desktop machines to laptops. I use exclusively ThinkPads because they have comfortable keyboard layout and TrackPoint apart of TouchPad. From time to time my laptops cause some problems but I resolve them myself or with the kind assistance of LinuxQuestions community.

I use Slackware because it allows me to have everything under control. For many years I upgraded the system using my own scripts and I built additional programs manually. Since 2008 I use SlackBuild scripts. Two months ago I switched from my scripts to slackpkg and sbopkg. I felt good with my scripts and manual compilation and installation of the programs and I feel good with slackpkg and sbopkg.

Hi,

Welcome to the Slackware® Forum!

Let me enlighten you a bit! Slackware® is not a hold your hand distribution and hopefully never will be.

Your lack of understanding and ignorance will be excused this time.

Slackware® has 'pkgtool' which is a curses based tool for maintenance by adding, removing or reviewing software package(s). You have 'slackpkg' which is a automated tool for managing Slackware® Linux packages. Then there's 'src2pkg' to manage packages. Along with a great site by the name of 'SlackBuilds' for a script repository.

I could continue but if you would just do a search here on LQ to find loads of reference for your queries.

Yes, it's been around for a while. You can look at the Linux Distro Timeline.
There's no problem for me in using the best GNU/Linux distribution that doesn't get in my way nor do things that I cannot correct like others seem to do. Slackware® has never punished me in any way. You just have to use it to understand what everyone has been saying. Actually the first read of your post seemed to be flame bait but I decided to respond.

The basic Slackware® install is feature filled! In fact I trim out a lot for some of my hardware/controllers.

Just think if you had been using Slackware® since your first installation then you would not be asking these questions. That's what generally happens with distro-bunnies, they finally want to get serious about something for once. I can only suggest to you that a install of Slackware® will hopefully provide positive answers to the questions. Again, Slackware® only seems to have short comings to the un-aware reviewers or distro-bunnies that claim to know GNU/Linux.

Compared to what? Based on ~14 months of ubuntu and ~2 months of Slackware (with the benefit of more Linux knowledge, derived from ubuntu experience) ubuntu was way faster to install but the key difference is that ~2 months into Slackware I have very few entries in the "Unresolved Issues Log" compared to ubuntu at the same time point and I feel to be "in charge" of Slackware, knowing what pretty much all the components do whereas, even now, there are many components of ubuntu that I know very little about and find very difficult to explore.

Wow. Just wow. I have never seen this astounding level of quality in community support. All of these posts are meaningful, helpful, and well thought out. Thank you!

Well that was simple enough. Erik FL wrote this that made me extremely happy:

I think that Slackware is a better distro for someone who prefers to change their system less, and have it up and working most of the time.

THIS is exactly what I was missing in Arch. I'm sick of dealing with .pac$#*( files and downgrading packages because they're "too new and unstable". What a load of something.

Lufbery, I'll take your advice:

My best advice is to give it a shot with an open mind. Read about it, try it out, ask a lot of questions to learn how things are supposed to work, and then make up your mind on whether on not Slackware has "crappy package management" etc.

and try slack out. I can't believe you guys all gave such amazingly useful responses literally within a few hours. This is a question I've been pondering for months, all of a sudden it's answered right here.

Thanks for forgiving me

And thanks for all the links! I like the Linux distro timeline. These are the kinds of posts that really show a great community, and this thread already has 5 or so! I thought the Arch and FreeBSD forums were the best, oh silly me!