LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 10-31-2006, 02:02 PM   #16
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546

Quote:
Don't forget - Slackware isn't built for desktop-specific use. It's built to be solid, stable and reliable. It's primarily used on servers, not desktops (although I myself run several Slackware desktops).
Not according to Pat. I listened to his recent radio interview and he considers Slackware both a desktop and server OS.

Quote:
I don't understand why now, Slackware has been using /mnt for ages, if its an FHS thing then why do we need /mnt? why not just have /media? why do we need 2 places?
To understand the inclusion of /media, see the 'Nix Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS):

Media Mount Point

Adding the directory is merely adopting and promoting an existing standard. You need not use the directory. However, I manually created /media several years ago when I saw the handwriting on the wall. I have maintained my removable media mounting in that directory every since. So conversely to you, I was temporarily disgruntled when 11.0 added a bunch of unnecessary removable media directories to my /mnt directory.

Quote:
Slackware is turning into suse (its starting to do unnecessary things) slack was suppose to provide the user with a base which he/she/it can configure for themselves.
I think one problem was that Pat tried to straddle the fence with respect to 2.4 and 2.6, trying to cover both bases. As is typical with any compromise, something got lost in the transition. One reason I have not found the energy to move to 2.6 is that although I don't mind tinkering, the transition to 2.6 does include several fundamental differences from 2.4 and I do not possess the time (or desire) to explore.

I think Pat would have been better off not trying to partly support 2.6, should have left 2.6 in Extras or Testing, and instead issued a 10.3 version. Then 11.0 could have been the big shift to 2.6 and 10.3 would be the last version to fully support 2.4. Just my opinion, but I don't run the show!

Quote:
look in the /etc/rc.d/ directory there is even a symbolic link from .rcmodules-2.4.xx to rc.modules now.... WHY IS IT THERE FOR?
If you study the rc.S script, you'll see that you don't need the sym link. This is another one of those compromises with trying to support both 2.4 and 2.6. If you use one or the other, just delete the sym link and rename rc.modules-2.4.33.3 to rc.modules. The rc.S script will function just the same.

Quote:
As for the KDE not having HAL and DBUS if you buy a lot of music cds . . .
People who have not yet migrated to 2.6 do not experience these issues. Your statement ties into what I wrote that 2.6 contains fundamental differences from 2.4.

FWIW, I run old hardware and frankly, all of this new udev, hal, and dbus stuff is overkill. My boxes are quite static. The only dynamic hardware I use are removable (IDE) hard drive bays, and because my mobo BIOS is "old," I have to reboot anyway when I plug those drives into my box. I do not mind as I have been doing this for many years and I use those hard drives only for my backups. So rebooting once a day or once every other day is hardly an inconvenience for me compared to becoming a quasi IT person having to know and understand all of this new 2.6 related software.

Quote:
There has been so much wrong with Slackware, its like pat took all the sources and everything he has been doing for the last 14 years and threw it out the window, I can tell ya this much Slackware 11.0 is NOT Slackware.
Although I continue to use Slackware, I confess that updating to 11.0 was not one of my happier periods. I hope to soon post some of my own travails at my web site. I will not place the entire blame on Pat, however. Much of my frustrations derived from updating individual packages as opposed to the underlying structure. I don't think Pat controls his distro to that level of detail because he is well known for packaging software "as is" from the original developers.

Quote:
Part of your problem is trying to use UDEV and 2.4 together. In my mind, UDEV and hotplug has essentially abandoned the 2.4 kernel line.
I agree.

I think that as GNU/Linux gains popularity, developers are becoming more prone to push modifications out the door faster without quality assurance and exhaustive testing. The end-user is now the beta tester for a lot of this software. To a degree this is how things should be with free software, but on the other hand, I believe developers should proceed more slowly. This "latest and greatest" mentality is literally killing this planet but is a topic for another thread in another forum.

Packaging is a significant problem. For example, I like KDE a lot, but I disagree with the manner in which KDE is packaged and delivered. KDE is always an "all or nothing" update. End-users seldom can update only one tool---they always must update the entire desktop environment. For many years GNU/Linux remained largely a hobbyist environment but now that such software is being used for more "mission critical" applications---and that includes "mission critical" applications in the home, these bugs are becoming less tolerable for many people. Frustrations will continue to grow.

Usually Pat is cautious about updating to the next version of a package, but with 11.0 I think he was less cautious than usual. I notice he has updated Firefox to 2.0 already. Slackware is his distro, but updating so quickly is contrary to his past practices. I'm unsure why he is proceeding that way with some packages. Perhaps he finally is feeling the pressures to "modernize" his distro and is succumbing to those pressures. Perhaps too with another mouth to feed in the house he felt additional pressures to play the marketing game to push a new release to create additional revenues. However, I am not going to second guess his motives, nor should I. The underlying structure of Slackware is such that I can modify and "undo" much of anything I dislike with the stock distro---and I do.

I'm not going to hold Pat personally responsible for all of my updating related problems, but I will be more wary the next time I consider a major update. I pretty much have quashed most of the updating problems I encountered, but a few "dammits" remain that I haven't solved. I have been posting to LQ trying to resolve those issues and yes, I empathize with your frustrations when answers are not easily forthcoming. I suspect more people had issues with 11.0 than have publicly posted. However, I haven't updated my Windows (NT4) OS in what?---seven years, and yet nothing breaks (except Firefox). I think with respect to the major changes between 2.4 and 2.6, and KDE 3.5.x and the upcoming 4.0, I might just very well stop updating Slackware too, except for certain individual packages. One thing I learned with Windows is that there is a point of diminishing returns with each new release. I suspect that for me personally, I might be reaching that point with GNU/Linux too. The "latest and greatest" mentality is largely sales motivated rather than dependent upon actual pragmatism.

I will remain with Slackware for one simple reason. Even if an update causes me problems, and 11.0 did indeed introduce several distractions for me, I still can modify the underlying system far more easily than I can with any other distro. And I need not ever deal with the nightmare of patched kernels and the like. I momentarily considered Kubuntu because I like KDE, and being generally lazy, I prefer point-and-click rather than spending hours reading man pages. Yet after browsing the Kubuntu forums I realized how the developers have modified things to a point that any semi experienced GNU/Linux person likely would tear out a lot of hair trying to undo the way the developers have restricted user access to the underlying structure. Those mods include hiding various elements of the KDE Control Center. This type of "dumbing down" mentality is why originally I migrated toward Slackware: this is my box and I will use my box as I see fit, not as somebody else sees fit. As a side note, this is why I continue using my old Windows NT4 rather than update to W2K or XP: NT4 was the last of the breed with "uncomplicated" Microsoft software. NT4 just works and is not burdened by all of the nonsense that came with subsequent versions and is not burdened with ridiculous licensing either.

Slackware is much like an every-day human relationship. The more time and energy one commits to that relationship, the more likely one is going to see imperfections, idiosyncrasies, and irritants. But also like a healthy human relationship, success depends upon remembering the more numerous advantages rather than solely focusing on the blemishes. For me, 11.0 was not a painless update like previous versions, but life goes on.

I too am somewhat disappointed with 11.0, but I am past that now and most things are again working. In all, I wish Pat had not tried to straddle the fence with 2.4/2.6. But now that I finally have a broadband connection to the web, I hope I can participate more actively with Slackware and provide some of my own testing and feedback directly to Pat. At least then I'll have standing to mumble and grumble. And who knows---Pat might even endorse some of my recommendations.
 
Old 10-31-2006, 04:23 PM   #17
tuxdev
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2005
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 2,012

Rep: Reputation: 115Reputation: 115
I totally agree that many of Slackware's issues right now are due to Pat trying to support both kernel lines. I actually appreciate what he is doing. I like the flexibility to choose between the proven 2.4 kernel line, or the still semi-experimental 2.6 line. I think he is trying this gradual process so that the migration to 2.6 and all the whiz-bang tech it offers can be the most painless for mission-critical every-second-costs-$100 systems.
 
Old 10-31-2006, 05:00 PM   #18
Bruce Hill
HCL Maintainer
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: McCalla, AL, USA
Distribution: Arch, Gentoo
Posts: 6,940

Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
Originally posted by Woodsman
Quote:
Usually Pat is cautious about updating to the next version of a package, but with 11.0 I think he was less cautious than usual. I notice he has updated Firefox to 2.0 already. Slackware is his distro, but updating so quickly is contrary to his past practices. I'm unsure why he is proceeding that way with some packages. Perhaps he finally is feeling the pressures to "modernize" his distro and is succumbing to those pressures. Perhaps too with another mouth to feed in the house he felt additional pressures to play the marketing game to push a new release to create additional revenues. However, I am not going to second guess his motives, nor should I.
You actually did second guess Pat with those statements.

Waiting over a year to release 11.0, when his daughter was born
last December, does not equate to pushing a new release to create
additional revenues IMO. Pat's best motivator is still getting things
done right, and trying to optimize the number of satisfied users.
That's quite a tight rope to walk, considering the cross section of
those users.

There are numerous reasons for the issues which you have, and
unlike NT 4.0, when something is broken in Slackware, you can
either fix it yourself, find help on the internet, or as a last resort,
email Pat and he'll fix it for you. With NT 4.0 you must wait until
(or if) Microsoft decides to patch/update their software.

These are simply growing pains, and as you've alluded to, they
are less destructive and more easily fixed in a Slackware box
than with some of the other hacked distros.

As others have stated, I've been running 2.6 Linux kernels on
Slackware for over 2 years now. Just as with anything new, I've
now invested enough time to have a proper understanding. Some
who have waited on Slackware for their 2.6 kernel are now having
to learn not only how that kernel works, but other things which are
effected by it. Of course, that makes the learning curve steeper.
Which is another sound reason to have more than one kernel installed
so that you can test and learn, but go back to the old kernel when
you're over your head or tired of learning the new stuff.

One must think ahead -- this old hardware is going to die one day, and
a 2.6 kernel is also not going to be an option at some point.

I have a customer with servers which don't have any new hardware,
but which need a 2.6 kernel. They have 2 Xeon processors, so I installed
Slackware-11.0 and the linux-smp-2.6.17.13 kernel Pat provides. It will
be interesting in a few hours to see how well this kernel performs for
them. And for me, having 2.6 to rebuild (if necessary) on site will save
a whole lot of time over rebuilding a 2.4 kernel.
 
Old 10-31-2006, 06:26 PM   #19
Ilgar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Distribution: Slackware64 15.0, Slackwarearm 14.2
Posts: 1,156

Rep: Reputation: 234Reputation: 234Reputation: 234
I upgraded to 11.0 by following the instructions in the txt files. I'm using 2.6 kernel and everything works flawlessly. At least from my point of view there's no reason to think that Slack 11 is worse than the preceding releases.
 
Old 10-31-2006, 07:16 PM   #20
mrapathy
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Slackware,Debian
Posts: 366

Rep: Reputation: 66
think it would be better if things were divided up to two releases
one 2.6.x kernel slack and 2.4.x kernel. 32 and 64bit would be nice.

be great if Pat and linuxpackages.net packagers could get together and keep the distro a little more fresh but stable.

my current slack 11 install is broke with kde. gnome going bye bye sucked but I can understand gnome is a mess. only thing I like from gnome is gnumeric

havent tried gentoo but have tried others. the differences are crazily complex but more stable than windohs
 
Old 10-31-2006, 08:06 PM   #21
theoffset
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Location: Guadalajara, Jal, Mexico
Distribution: Slackware Linux
Posts: 211

Rep: Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
Udev, I can't even begin to say whats wrong with it on slackware, no wait I can, the whole thing is seriously f*cked up! Slackware no longer picks up any mice I have on my system and in X nor does the keyboard work, like I said I donno what pat did to udev, but its borked and borked badly.
lsusb picks up my mice, but there are no entres in /proc/bus/input (this is using the stock kernel and a modifyed kernel 2.6.18.1)
Udev has always been a mess, I really hope that the next 11.1 version becomes 2.6 only so Pat can take a look with more time to Udev (also, report this to Pat --I don't think he'll answer now as he seems to take "vacations" after releases--, so it can be fixed out.).

Have you tried using one of the alternates udev packages (under /extra IIRC)?

Quote:
/media, I donno if I am slow or what but, why on earth is there media and a mnt directory? there is no need to be. if I wanted 20 million mount directorys I would have made them as soon as the install finished.
This was added (at the last moment) because Pat was trying to make Slackware more compliant with FHS 2.3. I do feel like this was a bad idea, since nothing in Slackware requires it (but when he adds HAL --disgusting, IMHO-- it will be needed). But it really doesn't affect anything at all (other than changing autocompleting from /m<tab> to /mn<tab>)

Quote:
pre-extisting device nodes, like really what is the point of having udev of you are going to have static device nodes?
You NEED to have some pre-existing device nodes before launching Udev. Think about the boot process for a moment, and it will begin to make sense.

Quote:
Lack of dbus and or hal, it's only been out for 2 years now, Pat choose KDE and KDE is using dbus and hal for features that are very awesome that now no longer work.
I really like having a system without automagical-mounting... Although dbus will become a required package for running KDE 4.0, HAL is ugly and its developers have some weird ideas from time to time. Anyway, my guess is that we will see both of them at the next release.

Quote:
I guess Slackware 11.0 motto is not keep it simple, keep it slackware. But Keep it borked, keep it slackware!
It's, indeed, not as simple as versions <= 10.2, but it's still simple enough for me to understand it without the need to go too much behind courtines (mostly, because there are no courtines). And that's more than enough for me.

Quote:
Now before one of you attempts to take a swing at me, I have been using slackware since 9.0 and I loved 9.1, 10.0, and 10.1 but I f*cking hate 11.0. Before someone says "thats easy to fix" consider the time it would take to fix all this and probly more! (I just havent found it because this is already too much) and compare this to building a whole LFS and BLFS system, to me there is not really any differnce here, because the time it would take me with 4 virtualterminals to build LFS and BLFS would probly be the same as trying to fix Slackware in its current state.
Are you really THAT fast at building (B)LFS? Wow! :P

Quote:
I think it's time for this slacker to send his copy of slackware 2> /dev/null and either install another distro, or build LFS.
Do so if you feel like you want to, but please send some feedback to Pat. If you've ever been involved in a project of any kind, you should know that it is quite hard to do something when you don't have any kind of positive/negative feedback.
 
Old 10-31-2006, 09:00 PM   #22
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 4,421
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
if its an FHS thing then why do we need /mnt? why not just have /media? why do we need 2 places?
Ask the authors of the FHS. They specify that /mnt and /media should both exist on a compliant system. And despite what you may think, they do exist for different reasons. The FHS is very clear on that. Go read it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
And whats with all the mini usb devicenodes in /dev
Slackware provides a static /dev directory for people who choose to use a 2.4 kernel, because 2.4 doesn't support udev.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
Same with a floppy drive, but backwards, udev detects it and makes a device node, but one already exists...
Yeah, that's the purpose of udev. It auto-detects the available hardware in your system and provides you with a "contextual" /dev directory. If you're running udev, there will not be any entries under /dev for hardware which is not present in your machine.

Udev operates exactly the same way on every distro I've tried.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
slack was suppost to provide the user with a base which he/she/it can configure for themselves.
It still does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
if you use the media bar in konqueror you can rip your cds to MP3's very quickly, since pat decided to patch KDE to fall back on fstab support this no longer works anymore.
Huh?

You can easily do exactly that with Slackware 11. You need to click on "services" in Konqueror (the little flag) and then choose "Audio CD". It'll bring up a list of the songs on the current CD in the browser window which you can then drag & drop as ogg or wav files. You don't need to mount the CD to use this feature, so it has absolutely nothing to do with fstab or HAL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
now we have symbolic hell, look in the /etc/rc.d/ directory there is even a symbolic link from .rcmodules-2.4.xx to rc.modules now.... WHY IS IT THERE FOR?
Haha. You're too funny. It is there so that you can run either 2.4 or 2.6, because the rc.modules file for each is very different to the other. How does one (1) symbolic link make "SYMBOLIC HELL" ???
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
there is a 2.6.x kernel in the setup, so why can't I turn Udev on before the system is actully bootes up?
Ah, but you can. If you read the instructions on the screen at the point where it asks if it should enable hotplug, you'd see that choosing "Yes" enables udev as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
why are things like pcmica serives enabled by default?
You are given the choice as to which services you want enabled/disabled at boot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
I can tell ya this much slackware 11.0 is NOT slackware.
I can't see how it's any different to any past releases. (Excepting the fact that it's better!!!)
 
Old 10-31-2006, 10:49 PM   #23
davidsrsb
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Distribution: Slackware 13.37 current
Posts: 770

Rep: Reputation: 33
11.0(2.6) is much better behaved than Ubuntu Edgy on some of my PCs
 
Old 11-01-2006, 05:16 AM   #24
ProtoformX
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Distribution: LFS SVN
Posts: 334

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidsrsb
11.0(2.6) is much better behaved than Ubuntu Edgy on some of my PCs

I just tried it and I can't agree with you more on that one.

Okay I will give Slack another chance (since it's either slackware or LFS and since I don't feel like copy and pasting everything into one script and letting it run over night I will give slackware another go).

I plan on installing slackware 11.0 from the DVD release since i don't want 50 cds lying around. Can anyone give me some pointers, this is what i plan on doing:

Install Slackware 11.0 with DVD (Installing everything)
Downloading a new kernel 2.6.18.1 and compiling it.
Weeding out the udev scripts so it only creates what I need.
Uninstalling unnessary software I don't need (like loadlin)
Disabling services I don't need in /etc/rc.d/ and /etc/inet.conf
Uninstalling all the server like apps since I am using this as a desktop.

Slack is much easyer to configure as a server...lol all I used to do for a server install is install the base and gcc,make,glibc, binutils, and some little packages then compile all the rest I need. my server is around 120mb install with http/ftp/ssh/mysql (php is also installed) then when everything is to my liking install inet, tcpip and iptables
 
Old 11-01-2006, 09:27 AM   #25
ritziyap
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: Philippines
Distribution: Slackware 11
Posts: 15

Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidsrsb
The transition to 2.6 kernel is rather painful.
Hopefully by the time 11.1(12.0?) comes out Slack will be much cleaner again.
2.6.x might be in the next release..
 
Old 11-02-2006, 01:14 AM   #26
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546Reputation: 546
Quote:
I actually appreciate what he is doing.
I too appreciate what he attempted. However, possibly he tried to cover too much ground. Possibly he could have publicly stated his intentions and asked for additional people to test the Slackware-current tree to help expose potential bugs and problems. Pat lives and breathes Slackware-current, that is his livelihood, but many end-users do not participate in testing current. When those end-users update from one release to the next, things are going to break and the breakage is a shock to what was, the day before, a stable system. That can be expected but my own experience with 11.0 was more frustrating that past releases. Again, most of my problems were package-specific and that is why I want to avoid being harsh with Pat.

On the plus side for me, now that I have a broadband connection, I can more easily participate in the current tree. I no longer have to brace myself for a once-a-year massive update and hold my breath to see what might break.

Quote:
You actually did second guess Pat with those statements.
Fair enough---poor choice of words on my part. My meaning was that I could speculate all day long on Pat's intentions but that I do not want to engage in judging his motivations.

Quote:
With NT 4.0 you must wait until (or if) Microsoft decides to patch/update their software.
True.

Yet, for those not in the know, seven years ago the Microsoft people declared NT4 a dead OS. Obsolete! Which is hilarious because I still have my WFWG 3.11 partition intact (requires less than 512MB---including Microsoft Office 6), and that OS too is considered obsolete although perfectly functional. On my "old" hardware that OS is lightning fast. And yes, occasionally I still use that OS. Just last week I needed to use a DOS program to configure an old ISA PNP NIC.

Yes, proprietary software makes contractual slaves of anybody using that software, but on the other hand, abiding by the old 'nix principle of "one tool---one job," old software can serve people well for a very long time. That I cannot tweak or revise the underling code is irrelevant because the software does what I need. For example, I still use Word 97. There is not one single new "feature" that subsequent versions of Word provides that I need. Similarly with my "old" hardware---I have yet to figure out how to type faster than the hardware can display or save the text!

Quote:
These are simply growing pains, and as you've alluded to . . .
Growing pains indeed and I hope fellow Slackers understood my post to be a reflection of that. As I stated, I intend to maintain Slackware on my boxes. The underlying structural openness of Slackware is too powerful for me to resist based upon growing pains. Yet nobody likes to experience flawed or faulty software. When that happens just about anybody will spin a bit. Slackers are no exception. Slackers tend to "get over it" more quickly than typical computer users because they tend to be DIYers anyway, but nonetheless software issues are irritating.

Quote:
One must think ahead -- this old hardware is going to die one day, and a 2.4 kernel is also not going to be an option at some point.
Subjective. Many people consider the Windows NT4 kernel obsolete and yet I find everything fully functional. My primary computer is 10 years old and remains fully functional. My Northgate Omnikey Ultra-T keyboard is 16 years old and fully functional. Like many people, I have a fully functional 486 box sitting on the shelf that I wish I could put to use---16 years old. My pick-up truck is 18 years old and fully functional. My microwave oven, my clothes washer, and dryer are all 22 years old and fully functional. My TV is 27 years old and fully functional. I own hand tools that are more than 30 years old and remain fully functional. There are dishes in this house that were handed down to me more than 30 years ago, and those dishes were a dozen or so years old then---all still functional. The second law of thermodynamics is a harsh law, but that does not mean that everything decays or breaks in two years.

FWIW, I have posted my reflections with updating to Slackware 11.0:

Updating to Slackware 11

I hope this helps somebody.
 
Old 11-02-2006, 01:41 AM   #27
Bruce Hill
HCL Maintainer
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: McCalla, AL, USA
Distribution: Arch, Gentoo
Posts: 6,940

Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
Just want to make a few comments.:

First, you may be content using Word 97, but if I send you
a Word documented created on one of the three or so versions
released after that, your software can't handle it.
NB: I don't use Word ... it's hypothetical.

Second, the Windows NT4 kernel is not at all obsolete. It's
the same one they use in W2K and WinXP. There are only three
Windows kernels, btw.

Third, computer hardware doesn't last as long as some of those
things you've mentioned. And you're only one of millions of
computer owners -- most of the other's don't keep or use things
that long, or that are that old. Nostalgia does have it's place.

You may still run a very old version of Slackware on your oldest
hardware. The issue is, as you alluded to, the software which you
desire to use today. If you use what came with Slackware-3.3.0 that
was released in 1997, you could probably have a nice little server.

As for upgrading to Slackware 11.0, it wasn't required for any of
us. I follow -current on my test box, but keep my workstation, and
the other boxen I'm responsible for, stable.

Though I disagree with your statement that "Pat lives and breathes
Slackware-current," I would agree we need more testers. This is the
crux of OSS -- a community, rather than a corporation with bean
counters to tell the Board when it's feasible to patch the code.

And running -current, I've been bitten a few times. That's part of
the message, too -- it's considered development software.

To date, though I've done perhaps a dozen Slackware 11.0 installs
on customer's boxen, the only computer in my LAN I've updated is
my laptop. And on it I haven't experienced any of the problems
you've mentioned -- nor on customer's boxen.

Let's work together and not try to post publicly where Pat has made
bad decisions. It's better IMO to be part of the solution, rather
than part of the problem. Pat has graciously responded to my email;
both when he agreed and made a change (rarely), and when he felt
'my idea' was not in the best interest of his user base.
 
Old 11-02-2006, 03:34 AM   #28
danieldk
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 150

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProtoformX
lsusb picks up my mice, but there are no entres in /proc/bus/input (this is using the stock kernel and a modifyed kernel 2.6.18.1)
What about /dev/input?

Quote:
/media, I donno if I am slow or what but, why on earth is there media and a mnt directory? there is no need to be. if I wanted 20 million mount directorys I would have made them as soon as the install finished.
It's FHS dictated, and it makes much sense, especially if you are advocacting for the inclusion of HAL and possibly automounting.

Quote:
pre-extisting device nodes, like really what is the point of having udev of you are going to have static device nodes?

Lack of dbus and or hal, it's only been out for 2 years now, Pat choose KDE and KDE is using dbus and hal for features that are very awesome that now no longer work.
HAL requires udev, it is triggered by a udev hook. Besides that you'll want to be sure that device nodes exist before providing hardware abstraction to applications. Ergo, dynamic device nodes.

Quote:
I think it's time for this slacker to send his copy of slackware 2> /dev/null and either install another distro, or build LFS.
Believe me, you won't find many better distros under the sun. Most other distros are a lot more broken since they want to ride on the edge. I ditched Slackware because it's package management is not up to it anymore for my uses (though I won't say it is bad for others). In my experience the only contenders with comparable stability are CentOS and Debian, and of course, the BSDs. Of these systems, only the BSDs are as clean and simple as Slackware.
 
Old 11-02-2006, 03:40 AM   #29
Bruce Hill
HCL Maintainer
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: McCalla, AL, USA
Distribution: Arch, Gentoo
Posts: 6,940

Rep: Reputation: 129Reputation: 129
After your Slackware Linux Basics (great piece of work), and other
Slackware contributions; I wondered about CentOS in your LQ UserCP.
 
Old 11-02-2006, 04:30 AM   #30
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 4,421
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535Reputation: 2535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
One thing that became apparent to me after reading your upgrade notes is that you really like to make life difficult for yourself. I also get the impression that you're ultra conservative and like it that way.

Instead of upgrading it bit by bit, why not wipe a partition completely and start afresh? According to your blog, you have partitioned your hard disc to provide for such. So do it. A complete install of Slack is like 4 gigs. You could run a complete install and then remove everything you don't need/want. Or you can even hand pick the packages you want from the expert mode of the installer.

Anyhow, the point is that you're needlessly creating problems for yourself. They're caused by you. Not by Pat or Slackware.

If you're serious about firing up that 486 of yours, try this: http://www.freedos.org. It even has networking capabilities.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where Did I mess Up? xsithlordx Ubuntu 1 09-09-2006 10:15 PM
Slackware Installation MESS DieselBaby Slackware - Installation 2 07-21-2005 11:00 PM
How do I tell YOU not to mess my xine? bruno buys Linux - Distributions 4 06-03-2004 07:58 AM
mess with some pointers... raven Programming 5 06-24-2002 10:18 AM
ok, what'd I mess up breed Linux - Networking 1 10-02-2001 01:42 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:54 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration