SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
TBH I regret abandoning CRUX-2.x for Slackware back in the day. After LFS I could have been more patient about compile times. Nowadays hardware is fast enough. If Slackware had contributed something to the open source community I would have felt bad abandoning it. But it didn't. Pat continued making a living by snapping together bash scripts that package other people's work.
Migrated to Crux. It has proven to be lightweight, fast, versatile, and easily customized. The 64/32-bit coexistence is excellent.
Glad you found a distro that suits you. Personally I find Slackware to be lightweight, fast, versatile, and easily customized as well, and multilib is there if I need 32 bit for games.
The farewell is when there is no one to say goodbay. This is: I won't be here for some time - I don't know how long - so in case I won't return - farewell.
After 25 years of using Slackware, it's time to move on. My thanks to Pat and all the others who kept Slack going over the years.
Slackware is a great learning tool for Linux. Those new to Linux can set up and get a solid desktop distribution without a lot of grief. Whenever a Win/Mac user asks which distribution they should get to start learning Linux, I'll continue to recommend Slackware.
Migrated to Crux. It has proven to be lightweight, fast, versatile, and easily customized. The 64/32-bit coexistence is excellent.
Good Luck,
Halsey
Slackware, Crux, NetBSD -- they all have their pluses and minuses. I really like Crux but I end up adding so much to it I might as well use Slackware anyway.
Slackware, Crux, NetBSD -- they all have their pluses and minuses. I really like Crux but I end up adding so much to it I might as well use Slackware anyway.
Yah - Everyone's got to look at what they are trying to accomplish and pick the system which works best. (For some, that's M$ and Crapple, sigh...) I tested FreeBSD for a while before settling on Crux. If I was going to set up web/email/etc servers (again), it would probably be with BSD. We run a lot of Linux servers at work. Because of Slack, I love Linux.
I was thinking of staying with Slack and just rolling my own. At that point, it made sense to look more widely and think about what I was doing and why.
BTW - Like your perfection tag line +++. Saw it in the SRE book and have been trying to live it with Linux.
Slackware, Crux, NetBSD -- they all have their pluses and minuses. I really like Crux but I end up adding so much to it I might as well use Slackware anyway.
Don't forget Arch... I've been borrowing more patches lately from them than anyone else.
I was thinking I should make post like this in other forums. Somehow "After 30 minutes of using <insert distro here>, it's time to move on." Just doesn't work.
Don't forget Arch... I've been borrowing more patches lately from them than anyone else.
As Arch mostly builds packages as intended by upstream, without customization, doesn't target a zillion or archs and only patches when really necessary, which makes it similar to Slackware and very different from Debian in these respects, this doesn't come as a surprise to me. As an aside and for the same reasons when building a package if I don't find a SlackBuild available I oftentimes take as a basis a PKGBUILD from Arch (and convert it often to a SLKBUILD to save time, then using slkbuild to build the package). It often works with few if any modification.
PS Do you know how is named the script that builds packages in Arch? you guessed it, makepkg :-)
Last edited by Didier Spaier; 04-26-2021 at 04:07 AM.
Reason: PS added.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
