I find that to be true of a lot of documentation- that, or the fact that the author will make certain assumptions about what the reader already [should] know(s).

Noob-that-I-am, what I would really like to see is one authoritative, comprehensive piece which would give a thorough overview- i.e, first, break it down into the different classes of packages, and how to proceed with each class: e.g. official Slackware pkgs (those are easy!); Slackbuilds; third-party source pkgs; pkgs which can be converted from other distros (.deb; .rpm;...)

Then, a step-by-step overview of how one deals with each type of the above- from the downloading of the pkg to the actual finished installation.

It should include a discussion of the various ways to do the same things, if there is more than one way- including third-party tools- and what the advantages and disadvantages of the different ways are (like how using ./configure; make; make install will negate many of the advantages of Slackware pkg mngmnt).

Then (and only then) they could have a more detailed section for more advanced users/options- or simply refer such users to existing documentation or man pages. I say this because while I appreciate a wealth of info, the fact is, to a noob, struggling to get an overview and do something for the first time, the basic instructions and things you need to know, often get lost in a sea of advanced options.

I find Slackware to be as user-friendly and "easy" as any distro I've ever tried- except for the confusion surrounding package management. And it's not that Slackware package management is "hard", it's rather that there really is no one place to go which explains all the aspects of it, and in terms that the average non-technical user can readily understand.

Me? I think I'm going to concentrate on scr2pkg for the time being- since virtually everything I want/have wanted to install (which isn't much) is always only available as source and/or other distros repos. (Those of us who have come from Debian, are spoiled, due to the humongous Debian repos!)

There's nothing wrong with Slackware- I love it's simplicity and overall philosophy; and of course, it's PERFORMANCE. We just need better documentation for package management- specifically for third-party/source packages- something that the new user can look at, and say "O-K, I have this tar.gz I want to install....what do I do?".

@Sumguy I tackled all the all existing alternatives to making packages in my primary post of your first slackbuild thread ;P reread that one now!

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...4/#post5185835

The only thing i ignored would be forgetting about makepkg and all its still maintained wrappers and creating the package archive yourself. (Which is easy enough anyway.. For any user)

In addition aren't you enjoying the ride more this way? Rather than having some strict finite documentation (leaving for no interpretation) to hold your hand and disallowing/"making it redundant" for you to have "fun" getting down and dirty when learning the system.

Don't you remember those good old days trying to get x up in the 90s ;D.

Ah! I have that thread bookmarked, to use as a permanent reference! I've been reading a lot on this subject, and with all the different options and suggestions, it just hasn't all sunk-in yet. Literally, yesterday, I thought I'd concentrate on learning to make my own Slackbuilds (after the GREAT example you made for me, and seeing ho well it worked!!!); Today, I'm like "Maybe src2pkg is the way to go". [In reality, I'll likely do both... It bugs me when I am ignorant of things- I like to have a good comprehensive knowledge of things I interact with. I'm the guy who went from just learning to do my own brakes, to rebuilding engines, literally overnight]


Absolutely! A good part of the reason I got into Slackware, was because I knew it would force me to learn, rather than just "doing stuff automatically" and keeping the user ignorant. Maybe I'm a little too noobish in some respects; and not quite the intended audience for those who are writing the documentation- but that doesn't bother me. Most of what I know in life, I have learned this way- i.e. not by taking a course or even reading a beginners guide- but by diving right in, and reading the stuff the big boys write, and backtracking from there until I figure it out.

That is also why I'm resistant to using something like Slapt-get. I don't want to defeat the features which make Slackware so unique and so great; I don't want to take shortcuts.

Unfortunately, in the 90's, I was busy watching a little hour-glass spin around in WIN98, and trying to battle the resultant thoughts of suicide

Sorry to be slightly off topic, but you remind me this one:

i remember being a beginner in linux in general

first i went to "learn" with fedora (10? 9? cant remember), 'cuz people yell redhat all the time
documentation is horrid
it teaches you HOW to do something, step by step, with some special program
but it does not teach you what you are doing
so ofc i didn't learn anything about linux, i learned fedora (a bit, gave up)
(even went to learn python so i could learn how linux(fedora) boots... python..)

then i went back to slacware
and the slackbook made everything clear (along with README's scattered thru the filesystem, and comments in various scripts)
things like how to use a shell to set up permissions, network, X, mounts etc etc
it all came natural after i learned linux is not a GUI and that everything is a or is in a file


so ye, if you want mindless drones then try make the documentation idiot proof
if you want people to learn linux (and other unix/unix like OS's) then teach them how it works
it's simple really, when you get the general idea
and you won't get the general idea by c/p a bunch of commands (or clicking a gui)

while we are at it, the biggest things to learn as a novice are the file system and... basic shell and basic utilities
X is easy now and just works
network is a bit... but people install wicd or NM
what else..
in slackware partitioning at install is complicated for a novice
cant think what else (permissions ?)

That claim is correct. Slackware is built using generic tools for a reason. It's great that there are more specialised tools to help but it's also great that it's not an over-designed system that requires you to do so - you can do the exact same things manually or even roll your own tool to suit.

You can easily open existing packages and examine them using nothing but bash, gzip, and your favorite text editor. You can easily create them yourself using the same tools. Once you do that, it's appropriate to use something like makepkg to save time, sure. At that point you understand what the program is doing, it's no longer black magic, it's no longer a crutch or a blinder, it's only a timesaver, which is great!

If you are trying to hide these things from 'slackware beginners' I wont question your motivation, but I will certainly question your rationale. There are plenty of OSs out there where everything is 'use approved tool X' black magic. Slackware is better than that - why try to pretend it's the same?

1 members found this post helpful.

Exactly! That's one of things I love about Slackware. The deficiency is with me. Other have made me aware of the benefits you stated, and more....so even though I may not yet know what I am doing I know enough to realize what I need to learn, and to do it the right way, and not just look for some slick tools which will automate everything and make it "easy"...and will also end up making Slackware like e every other distro, and negate it's simplicity and beauty and efficiency. [To us noobs, it may not seem so simple and efficient at first- but that is just because of our lack of knowledge].