Is considered heresy to use sbotools and slackpkg plus?
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.
One way to practice "heresy" in Slackware is to use other ways to get packages, in addition to the official source and Slackbuilds. Older Slackware users, conservatives, do not trust in other forms that make life easier for the user.
This makes sense, because when the system changes a lot, it tends to become flawed.
Using slpkg, slapt-get that are same to apt-get of Debian makes you lose all the grace and magic that have in Slackware!
WHAT?!? You stated the exact opposite of what I said. The "official" source and SlackBuilds are only what comes on the installation disk/drive. ANYTHING else has to be installed from something that isn't official (although, SBo is officially *endorsed*, but it isn't managed or monitored by Pat), so pretty much everyone has non-official packages.
I flat out said that it is the Slackware way to make the system your own and that includes using whatever software you want on your computer and whatever means you use to get it on there. No heresy there. If you're going to ask the question, at least read and try to comprehend the answers...
The slpkg is (one more) attempt to "herding cats" using a package manager to operate in a distribution whose characteristic is the installation of programs and resources via source code.
When using a precompiled package packaged in one of these "miraculous solutions of package installation " there is always the possibility that creators have used installation paths that differ from what you want, either because they are not correct, by trend or simply because you do not want them in a certain place.
The slpkg is (one more) attempt to "herding cats" using a package manager to operate in a distribution whose characteristic is the installation of programs and resources via source code.
How are you in any position to comment on what a Slackware based program can do? You aren't even running Slackware! slpkg offers the community a service. Members are free to use it or ignore it. I haven't seen anyone get shunned by using it. And just because SBo exists and is mainly used to compile programs, there's nothing that states that Slackware users should compile their own software... there's plenty of examples on SBo where it re-packages pre-compiled binaries into Slackware packages.
As I've said... Slackware users are free to use their machines as they wish. You can use pre-compiled binaries or compile everything yourself. Even two of the core team provide pre-compiled packages to the community, so your statement is blatantly false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pompous ninja
When using a precompiled package packaged in one of these "miraculous solutions of package installation " there is always the possibility that creators have used installation paths that differ from what you want, either because they are not correct, by trend or simply because you do not want them in a certain place.
Of course it's possible the paths aren't where you want them. This is why you should find trusted members of the Slackware community if you're going to install pre-compiled software. But even if you use SlackBuilds or run all the compiling commands yourself, there's still a possibility that programs won't be installed where you want them to be. Certain sites, like SBo, will go through and validate scripts to ensure they're following the convention they set up, but there is no "Slackware" convention for installing 3rd-party programs.
As I've said... Slackware users are free to use their machines as they wish.
Are you seeing a pattern here? Please stop speaking for the community when you aren't even running Slackware.
Seriously, run your pseudo-code next time to make sure it works before posting it!
Why so grumpy?
The "pseudo-code" is a draft made by a human (and) in human language, which simulate a programming language, heavily used to describe algorithms by programming teams in their discussions, and not only.
Pseudocode[1] is an informal high-level description of the operating principle of a computer program or other algorithm.
It uses the structural conventions of a normal programming language, but is intended for human reading rather than machine reading. Pseudocode typically omits details that are essential for machine understanding of the algorithm, such as variable declarations, system-specific code and some subroutines. The programming language is augmented with natural language description details, where convenient, or with compact mathematical notation. The purpose of using pseudocode is that it is easier for people to understand than conventional programming language code, and that it is an efficient and environment-independent description of the key principles of an algorithm. It is commonly used in textbooks and scientific publications that are documenting various algorithms, and also in planning of computer program development, for sketching out the structure of the program before the actual coding takes place.
Last edited by Darth Vader; 12-07-2017 at 10:39 AM.
Yeah, but they had no clue that @RadicalDreamer described a small algorithm using the pseudo-code and you suggested a correction, then they supposed you insulted him or made a joke, instead to google first.
And that happens in a thread which accuse them about going too religious with something technical by excellence. Oh, well...
Last edited by LuckyCyborg; 12-07-2017 at 10:52 AM.
The "pseudo-code" is a draft made by a human (and) in human language, which simulate a programming language, heavily used to describe algorithms by programming teams in their discussions, and not only.
Where's the joke? What @RadicalDreamer done is to describe a small algorithm using the pseudo-code.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg
Yeah, but they had no clue that @RadicalDreamer described a small algorithm using the pseudo-code and you suggested a correction, then they supposed you insulted him or made a joke, instead to google first.
And that happens in a thread which accuse them about going too religious with something technical by excellence. Oh, well...
No, that's not it. The joke was the suggestion that RadicalDreamer should run his pseudo-code to check for errors before posting it, but pseudo-code by definition cannot be run. That's what the winky face was supposed to be for -- to show that I was not being serious.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
