Look, I do not think that those things should be embedded in slackpkg, because it's not a panacea. And not all people uses slackpkg.

For example, I for one, may I create my own kernel packages this way, and I upgrade them locally.

Like I said already, for those who want to customize manually those things, there could be a config file, which disables at will those auto features. It's enough to edit a config file and never be bothered by those seamless updates.

Well first you absolutely should not customize kernel because you have no idea what you do:
example 1: 4GB modules
example 2: issues with elilo (in short I doubt that anyone here has AMD that could take an advantage of the ptch that broke elilo)

Just leave it, don't touch kernel or learn how to wich will spare you a lot of pain and this forum members reading some strong but uneducated (regarding kernel) posts.

@Didier Spaier
I never had an issue with kernel boot in Slackware so if this is the only major difference between your distro and Slackware this is not much. I do think that it is great to another distro (I could not do this) but on the other hand there is plenty already.

There are other distros that do what people want: get Artix which is Arch without systemd. Good for laptop, nice automation, a lot of customization.

For desktop I suggest Gentoo if one needs customization to the extreme (of LFS)

Slackware is what it is. I doubt that behind Slackware there is an ambition to be on the top of distrowatch.

Regarding Opensuse, I remember when installing grub on xfs completely f..ked up boot process because GRUB could not handle it (xfs that is).

Does Slackware needs some polishing? Maybe, but instead of waiting just move to other distro and I suggest this just because I don't think that Slackware will change (soon?).

If someone wants to change Slackware to Opensuse, it will cost less effort just to switch to Opensuse.

To answer the question "How important is to change to the generic kernel": well this will give OP more flexibility. Number of loaded modules depends on your hardware and some additional requirements that you (OP) may have. Performance wise neither is designed for speed more for stability.

4 members found this post helpful.

No, it is not the major difference

Did you actually read the documentation before arriving at your conclusion?

3 members found this post helpful.

Sooooo, yes,change to generic kernel! Right.

I didn't intend to start an internecine war. You all have years of experience and hard learned knowledge about Slackware. Many of you are in the IT field. You were all newbies at some point. I understand that Slackware is not for beginners. Fine, but the only way to stop being a beginner is to get you're hands dirty and wade in. I always start trying to learn Slackware, but have to fall back to Ubuntu or Lubuntu because I have to get some work done and don't have the time to wade through hours of not particularly human friendly documentation.
I'm not criticising. It's your distribution and you can do what you want. But maybe a little automation in changing from huge to generic kernel wouldn't be so bad. I'm just saying.

3 members found this post helpful.

FWIW, LuckyCyborg, I've never had any of those problems nor concerns. Even if I imagine a problem such as you've mentioned like CMOS battery failure or drive failure those are just too easy to solve, and the likelihood is so low that avoiding messing with an initrd is far more prevalent. Actually I find UUID so ridiculous that I'd sooner switch to LABEL as I vastly prefer to always know exactly what drive and partition I'm dealing with and UUID tells me nothing.

As for "just a legend"... why are you still here? Most of what you write in the Slackware subsection these days is negative. I mean if you find some other distro more to your liking that is perfectly valid but even though Ubuntu is FAR less than "beloved" by me, I don't go on that subsection to bitch and moan.

6 members found this post helpful.

Absolutely, try it and see if this is what you like. I vould suggest to test Slackware in VB. Keep Ubuntu until you learn Slackware and feel comfortable install Slackware on the hardware.

I would not pay much of attention to the hoopla here


Good luck

Personally, I'd argue that Slackware is a good distro for beginners, provided that they're prepared to do some reading and aren't afraid of the command line.

7 members found this post helpful.

Maybe you've missed it, but LuckyCyborg's been trolling here almost every sunday.
Probably just bored or something.

4 members found this post helpful.

FWIW here's my experience as a newcomer. I started using Slackware 14.2 stable in March 2021, I had no experience with Linux before that. (Why start with Slackware? That's another story...)

I used this https://docs.slackware.com/slackware:beginners_guide to configure my new system. About three quarters of the way down it explains how to use mkinitrd to switch to a generic kernel and gives a nice explanation of why you should (in a green rectangle). It's very well written by alien bob - but I didn't know who he was at the time. All I knew as a beginner was that it was clear, explained things well and worked. Features I soon learned were typical of Eric's work.

As a complete novice I had no problem with the process. After a while I messed up, running slackpkg without noticing there was a kernel upgrade, so did not run mkinitrd or lilo. Yes, the inevitable happened. But here's the thing - it was MY fault and I owned it and I learned from it.

For me this is part of why I have stayed with Slackware. I have never had a problem that I didn't cause myself by doing something stupid. And each time I learn something new.

If I wanted everything automated I would use a different distro - there is plenty of choice. I guess that is the whole point of this long-winded ramble. I like having the choice to do things myself.

Nowadays I run -current and just use geninitrd to regenerate an initrd after an upgrade, which pretty much automates that part anyway. Do I forget to run lilo? I'm an old man, I forget most things these days so of course I do. However it's not that much of a problem because I can recover from it quickly.

I have found Slackware a pleasure to use and it just works! Which is my way of commenting on its legendary stability - I have had very few issues and they were always my own fault.

10 members found this post helpful.

Thanks, amikoyan, for a thoughtful post. Although I've been running slackware (or derivatives) for some years I was once a newbie, and I agree with you that even a Linux beginner can learn to manage a slackware system, having a stable experience with few issues. If you don't run ahead but take your time browsing through guides, readme files, and changelogs (and ask for help when needed), you'll be fine.

Eric is one invaluable resource. Others help out here on LQ.

When it comes to the "green rectangle" in the beginners' guide, it might nevertheless be worth pointing out that it was probably written a few years ago (my italics):
1 GB of RAM isn't much today - I guess that most machines have at least 4, often 8, and even as much as 32 GB or more. OK, the kernel has grown, but the difference in RAM usage between huge and generic kernels is, I would say, negligible.

3 members found this post helpful.

Hello. Replying to the original topic. Using one kernel or another is the importance that you give it, neither more nor less.

I've been using slackware for a few weeks, I did a complete installation and it used the huge kernel, then I wanted to change to the generic kernel, creating a huge post here in the forum and the only difference I've noticed when using one or the other is that it starts a little The generic is faster than the huge, but only a little, nothing to write home about, the general operation of the computer remains the same, only that it turns on and off a little faster, nothing more.

That is why, in short, it is the importance that each one gives it, because there is a difference between one and the other, yes, in theory there is a lot, because the huge kernel is a huge kernel for total compatibility with everything and the generic kernel is smaller, but In practice, the difference between one or the other is just a few seconds, nothing more.

Regarding the rest of the debate, this is fortunately linux and everyone uses what they want. Who likes ubuntu, good for him, who likes fedora, good for him, who likes slackware, good for him.

It's like desktops, there are people who like kde, there are people who like gnome and there are people who like xfce, etc and they are all good.

That is precisely the beauty of linux, the freedom of choice, with windows you die with windows, because there is nothing else but windows, the same happens with Mac, it is only Mac and that's it.

I now tell my experience as a Linux user for years. It turns out that I've been using linux for years, but I have no idea about linux, for the time I've been using it I should know much more than I do, is it my fault? Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Manjaro, and now even Debian and Fedora.

Ubuntu has been very good for linux, but it has also been very bad, with that mania of wanting to look like Windows as much as possible, making everything super easy, that's very good, because that way you attract more people to linux, but you don't learn linux, you learn to handle different distributions, but since they give you everything done, you don't learn linux.

I think everything is being automated too much, there are already too many distributions based on it, which don't do any good, because you don't learn anything with them.

Even Debian and Fedora are no longer what they used to be, any novice installs them and at most, after installing them, googles what to do after installing debian or what to do after installing fedora and that's it, you've got it.

I think that the steps that Debian and Fedora are taking are not right, because for that there is already Ubuntu, Linux Mint and a thousand others.

For this reason, I think that the mother distros should maintain their essence, that is why I love slackware because it makes you learn linux from minute one and I see very well that it resists the passage of time and that it refuses to automate everything, because for that This is salix for example, but slackware maintains its essence.

It's as if in gentoo they automate everything, it wouldn't make much sense, their thing is that gentoo remains gentoo and if you want something automatic, there are also gentoo-based distros that give you everything done.

And now one thing that has happened to me, I have installed debian stable on the laptop and I have been very bored, but very very much and that is debian, everything is super easy and you use the terminal, because I installed debian xfce and it does not have a center of software and for example to update you already use commands, but nothing else, I leave it installed because I need debian stable on the laptop, but I prefer slackware a thousand times, then I went and turned on my other computer, the desktop one, with slackware and I started to enjoy from minute one, because it forces you to learn linux from minute one.

That's my opinion, so many automated derivatives, it doesn't do the Linux world any good and I'm glad that slackware stays true to its style now and hopefully always.

Fortunately this is linux and if you want to use other distributions for what you want, that is the main attraction of linux.

Greetings.

1 members found this post helpful.

The understanding of how to build a suitable initramfs.
Case in point. Not so long ago I wanted to create a portable USB device to boot into a Slackware system on some ancient hardware with limited RAM. For portability, I needed to use an initrd and UUIDS. (@bassmadrigal Thanks for that. I am missing you.) Would your robot have understood that I also needed the usbstorage and usa kernel modules in the initramfs?

Is bassmadrigal okay?

1 members found this post helpful.

Finally found the old but relevant post