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.
the next release will most probably have a new kernel from the 3.x series...
Which one is stable the 3.1.x or the 3.0 branch?
And what does the bump from 2 to 3 bring for us? USB3? or?
I imagine:
Slackware 14.0, still supporting the {Slackware release major}.{kernel release minor} scheme with a
3.0.8 kernel :^)
Given that 'current' hasn't even got started yet, the next Slackware is either going to be a 13.4 with only minor version bumps to what we already have, or it's going to be a long way in the future and will probably have something like a 3.3.x or a 3.4.x kernel. No point even thinking about it at this stage of the game.
For what it's worth. 3.1.x has been working well for me. 3.2 is going to contain a lot of changes, and anyone interested in stability will probably want to hold back on that one to let it settle in.
I'm running my "virgin" compile of 3.1.5 and figure that I have lots to wade trough until I can say I "really feel" it.
First impression:
I ripped off too much of "debug" so my syslog looks a bit too bare?
)
yeah... and release the 128-bit version of Slackware they have been secretly working on for the last year.
128 bit? maybe in time for the inevitable release 42 otherwise I doubt it.
But there are quite few Christmases out there...
Maybe we could expect a Easter-egg in the form of 13.37 repackaged with recent patches and a heap of slackbuilds for non-free packages on a "got from Santa" (== red and fuzzy on the edges) DVD?
It this too much to hope (even in vain) for?
Oh I wasn't even considering a new release... perhaps offical addition of Xfce 4.8/KDE 4.7 (I think?), maybe some other really cool packages, perhaps a upgrade kernel... who knows?
Beware of "in between" kernel upgrades with Slackware though:
I once made this mistake only to regret it bitterly:
The thing with running a server is You won't have down time,
and
The thing with upgrading krenel is You will have restarts and on occasion You will have troubleshooting configurations (= downtime)
So, in the end I got stuck with and "in between" kernel and the 11.0 Slackware all the time until 2011.
Where I managed to get all working with mainline kernel release, I would have the system upgraded all the time effort less as I upgraded the other machine...
My guess is, that Pat and the crew are watching and waiting for some current developments to settle. One question could be, if the next release will still have to include HAL, or if it is possible to get it out without it. Also, it may be necessary for Slackware to follow others on their path to Systemd. btrfs support would be an option.
Regarding desktop environments, Pat might be waiting for Xfce 4.10 (delayed) and for a KDE release, that migrates Email to the Akonadi based KMail more reliably than existing versions (cannot comment on 4.7.4, though).
All these things and a few more are moving targets at the moment, making it ever harder for a small team to create a consistent Linux distro. But after a while of diverging developments, there are indications that things are getting a bit more stable, though it will take a while. E. g., some time ago, there was a dispute, if Systemd or Upstart would get the edge. A few months later noone is talking about Upstart, anymore, except in the *buntu world. Maybe, Pat just wants to wait a little, for a point in time, when other things have settled a bit more, too, in order to avoid replacing proven technology with new stuff, only to have to replace it again with the release after the next.
And as we all know: Pat is extremely good in making this sort of decision!
gargamel
Last edited by gargamel; 12-28-2011 at 07:20 PM.
Reason: Corrected a typo.
And as we all know: Pat is extremely good in making this sort of decision!
gargamel
Yes! I am a relatively new user of Slackware (started with 10.0) and in my experience it is very clear to me that Mr. Volkerding has a very steady hand on the tiller as he navigates the choppy open source seas. I never worry about the evolution of Slackware, the next stable release will be well-crafted as per usual.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.