How Linux got to be Linux: Test driving 1993-2003 distros

dugan · 01-04-2017, 02:15 PM

Another one by Seth Kenlon. Covers Slackware 1.0.

How Linux got to be Linux: Test driving 1993-2003 distros

notKlaatu · 01-04-2017, 02:45 PM

I'd like to see one historical summary article, like this, per major distro. Starting with Slackware, naturally.

aragorn2101 · 01-05-2017, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notKlaatu

I'd like to see one historical summary article, like this, per major distro. Starting with Slackware, naturally.

Yeah, that would be great.

For those out there wondering about the Linux family tree, check this out: http://futurist.se/gldt/

Cheers

montagdude · 01-05-2017, 06:27 AM

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...os-4175595801/

hazel · 01-05-2017, 06:33 AM

I'm glad he mentioned Red Hat 6; that was my first Linux. I didn't install it myself though. It was installed for me by a friend. And I didn't use gnome because it ran too slow on my machine. I used fvwm2, a window manager with a taskbar, which was also bundled and looked rather like Windows 95.

Didier Spaier · 01-05-2017, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hazel

I used fvwm2, a window manager with a taskbar, which was also bundled and looked rather like Windows 95.

It can still look like that if you want. But not here

ttk · 01-06-2017, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didier Spaier

It can still look like that if you want. But not here

Nor here ..

Didier Spaier · 01-06-2017, 02:46 AM

The bad thing about fvwm is it takes time to learn its distinctive features and how to set up its rather unusual startup+config file.

The good things about fvwm are its compliance to standards, its distinctive features and allowing to configure everything to the user's liking.

@ttk: by the way I just answered one of your posts.

ttk · 01-06-2017, 11:56 AM

To me, fvwm's most compelling feature is that it's safe and sane, forever. It's only being lightly developed, without world-breaking paradigm-shifting (bug-introducing) changes that one sees in some of the more actively developed window managers.

I can use fvwm secure in the conviction that ten years from now it will still be there, will still JFW, and will still look and act as expected. Just the features I want, and no surprises.

montagdude · 01-06-2017, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ttk

To me, fvwm's most compelling feature is that it's safe and sane, forever. It's only being lightly developed, without world-breaking paradigm-shifting (bug-introducing) changes that one sees in some of the more actively developed window managers.

I can use fvwm secure in the conviction that ten years from now it will still be there, will still JFW, and will still look and act as expected. Just the features I want, and no surprises.

The concern with all these window managers is what will happen if and when Wayland becomes standard. I think it's safe to say that X will still be supported for a number of years down the road, but eventually it will go away. I haven't heard of too many WMs outside of the major DEs that will support Wayland.

ttk · 01-06-2017, 12:31 PM

Fvwm has been demonstrated to run in Wayland's X compositor. If Wayland completely supplants Xorg (which it might, or might not) and if the X compositor isn't supported in perpetuity (which it might, or might not), then I'll shed a tear and woefully start kicking tires on likely-seeming window managers.

I don't expect it for at least ten years, though.

montagdude · 01-06-2017, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ttk

I don't expect it for at least ten years, though.

I agree, and if it does happen, we'll probably have plenty of good Wayland-native alternatives for all types of window managers by then. It would require giving up something you like, are familiar with, and have used for many years though.

Anyway, it's nothing worth worrying about now.

Gerard Lally · 01-06-2017, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didier Spaier

The bad thing about fvwm is it takes time to learn its distinctive features and how to set up its rather unusual startup+config file.

The good things about fvwm are its compliance to standards, its distinctive features and allowing to configure everything to the user's liking.

Austrumi's always had nice fvwm configs.

Didier Spaier · 01-06-2017, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gezley

Austrumi's always had nice fvwm configs.

Yes, I saw that running the most recent version (Austrumi64-3.5.6) in a VM. However they still ship fvwm 2.6.6 and the default config of fvwm 2.6.7 is way better.

EDIT: I see now that Austrumi64-3.5.8 has been released. I will try it.

Gerard Lally · 01-06-2017, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didier Spaier

EDIT: I see now that Austrumi64-3.5.8 has been released. I will try it.

They still use fvwm although a Softpedia review of December 2016 says they switched to Enlightenment.