LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
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 06-10-2024, 01:58 PM   #31
marav
LQ Sage
 
Registered: Sep 2018
Location: Gironde
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,467

Rep: Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226Reputation: 4226

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser371038 View Post
If you read my other thread that tells of my current issues and gripes I have with arch and have read several recommendations for slack to perhaps better suit me.

Said all the main points there so please read that and comment here as I guess a new thread is better to keep it related to slack specific.
Don't blame a distro for breakdowns, unless your are not alone
Third-party packages are often the cause of many problems with updates, especially with distributions that have dependency tracking ;-)
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 02:24 PM   #32
litelinux
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2018
Location: Taipei/Taichung, TW
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 106

Rep: Reputation: 61
While as the other commentators said, Slackware is probably not for you if you don't like bloated systems (Slackware is bloated by definition), you'll probably find comfort with one of the Slackware derivatives, such as Salix, Slint or PorteuX. For the traditional desktop experience go with Salix or Slint (or Zenwalk), for speed and mininal installing go with PorteuX. PorteuX is quite nifty as it offers even more DE/WM choices than Slackware, but splits them up into different ISOs so that it isn't bloated.

That said, Slackware is suitable for no-nonsense desktop/development/graphic design/music production usage, especially Slackware -current which is essentially Fedora but with better stability and without SystemD.

(Also have you considered Alpine Linux?)

-- ltlnx

Last edited by litelinux; 06-10-2024 at 02:27 PM.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 02:52 PM   #33
BuckyKatt
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2024
Posts: 24

Rep: Reputation: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser371038 View Post
Just found this which is claiming 200mb. Comments?
This is very similar to the list of Slackware packages I used to make DNS servers a ways back... I had it down to 60~80Mb... but I didn't have luxuries like elvis, xz, bzip2, gnupg or the kernel packages, as I compiled my own minimal, fast booting kernel. IIRC, I seem to recall it being 23 packages. I also made minimal package setups for web servers, reverse proxys and load balancers... but I forget the exact size of those... less than 200Mb. Of course, that was a long time ago. If I had KVM running, I'd try building one with modern packages to see how big it is. I think my install script was lost to the ages, unfortunately... but it was nice, as I could ship a bootable CD or an image for a thumbdrive to the helping hands in the data center which would reformat, rebuild and uniquely reconfigure from scratch a malfunctioning system in about 10 minutes.

That said, a minimal system isn't much fun... and I don't recommend it for anything you intend to use interactively other than the system's sole purpose. It keeps your coworkers off the systems, though, as they complain constantly about how they can't live without this package or that package. ;-)

BK
 
Old 06-10-2024, 03:53 PM   #34
hitest
Guru
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Distribution: Void, Slackware, Debian, OpenBSD
Posts: 7,352

Rep: Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751Reputation: 3751
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser371038 View Post
Wow 17gb! I think arch prides itself on being able to be installed on only a few hundred mb. At least that was the case at one point a few years ago from what I remember.

I only have 64gb on this laptop I was recently gifted. Regardless of space limitation even if I didn't have them I would have a hard time justifying such space usage on programs I probably would not use. What is taking up all that space?
Maybe give Void a try. Use their XFCE ISO for a reliable installation(I use the glibc ISO) . I like and use Slackware and Void.

https://voidlinux.org/download/
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 07:53 PM   #35
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 4,489
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser371038 View Post
Hmm it was all sounding good until the required full install part. However someone below mentioned more minimalist distros built on slack which might fit better.

Seems wasteful to install a bunch of stuff I won't use. The modular approach is definitely up on my list of wants.
If you really can't get past that mental barrier, then I'd suggest that you're not going to enjoy Slackware.

There is a lot of functionality out of the box in a full Slackware installation. I'm sure that it includes lots of stuff that you may not ever use, but what does 16Gb matter when SSD storage costs $0.10 per Gb and HDD storage costs less than one quarter of that price?

Having stuff sit there unused doesn't make the OS any less responsive or secure. For the functionality you get, I'd say 16Gb is a bargain... particularly when you compare it to Windows, which needs 20Gb to give you nothing but a simple desktop.

The Slackware way is a different way of thinking about Linux, but having used it for almost 25 years I categorically say: It works.

You should note that the above are the opinions of the same guy who wrote this: Minimal Slackware installation for network appliance or virtual machine.

The article by Vincent Batts which you asked about earlier in the thread was written a long time ago. These days, that 200Mb is closer to 600Mb unless you compress the kernel modules. The kernel-modules package is 315Mb on it's own uncompressed.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 07:57 PM   #36
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 4,813

Rep: Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451Reputation: 4451
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser371038 View Post
How do you mean a full slack install can be less bloated than a barebones arch system?
This I see as an important question since it makes us question how we define bloat. Part of the definition it seems to me must include running essentials. As long as there is sufficient empty drive space, even a few hundred gigabytes of drive space in 2024 where 250GB NVME drives can be had for ~$20, I don't see how drive space is an issue at all since it has zero impact on performance. All that matters to performance is what the system and you think you require to be constantly running as base to accommodate your workflow.

Slackware allows so much user/admin control that you have the power to break stuff if you don't know what you're doing but that also includes minimal running essentials that you have complete control over. Example - It is common that many users consider KDE bloated, yet I can easily make it equal or even best default Xfce resource usage in Slackware. I can also run the same exact benchmarks on the same exact filesystems and compare performance and Slackware ALWAYS comes out on top. I should probably issue a conditional in that I've never compared to BSD, Apple, or BeOS but have to many dozens of Linux distros and several versions of Windows.

There is also a very serious advantage to having apps you might never use integrated and installed by default on Full Installation especially in a system that does not automate dependency resolution. It is all designed to work together and having apps you don't use does NOT mean you won't use their libraries whether you realize it or not.

That is a fact whether affecting how many dependencies you must manually resolve yourself installing an app you will use but how smoothly, like a well-oiled machine, the system runs as opposed to "crystal ball committee" algorithms requiring massive deletes and new dependency installs that seem to have little to do with the one new app you simply must have on such other. so-called "minimalist" distros. It doesn't take long to create a system of "spaghetti code" on self-resolving systems unlike Slackware.

That one base assumption made by Patrick, that he must not assume how each user will employ his system, is IMHO massively important. Not only is there no need, there is no advantage to what is perceived as minimalism on a system so well integrated to all work perfectly together as a whole.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 08:09 PM   #37
colorpurple21859
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: florida panhandle
Distribution: Slackware Debian, Fedora, others
Posts: 7,410

Rep: Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598Reputation: 1598
Quote:
Wow 17gb! I think arch prides itself on being able to be installed on only a few hundred mb.
So your current arch install is only few hundred mb?

Last edited by colorpurple21859; 06-10-2024 at 08:10 PM.
 
Old 06-10-2024, 09:57 PM   #38
the3dfxdude
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 741

Rep: Reputation: 367Reputation: 367Reputation: 367Reputation: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser371038 View Post
Hmm it was all sounding good until the required full install part. However someone below mentioned more minimalist distros built on slack which might fit better.

Seems wasteful to install a bunch of stuff I won't use. The modular approach is definitely up on my list of wants.
Don't believe the religion that is being professed where in slackware you only can use it with a full install. If that were true, then there would not be the options in the installer for less than full install!

I have _never_ used slackware provisioned in a full install in over 20 years.

The key question though, is what do you plan to do actually? When you answer that question, then you can spend the few minutes to select the packages you really do want. Honestly, no one really wants 5 web browsers, 6 emails clients, 7 sound mixer controls, and kpotatoguy all to choose from every day. I have a clean menu, of exactly what I want, and better yet, as others have mentioned, I really do have a distro here that doesn't change much -- I used Slackware 14.2 for 6 years on most of my systems, and that was mostly ok! The time certainly between releases was certainly long, but stability over that time gave me plenty more time not worrying about my distro changing on me. Although actually, I still have Slackware 14.2 on one machine that I use still everyday! (heh, maybe not much longer, just was low priority) Slackware releases have also trended to be maintained with patches as long as the enterprise distros, sometimes a bit longer! (kind of depends on the application of course)

Hard disk space? I mean ok, it wouldn't really hurt to have all the libraries for most every library in existence so you can throw any app at it. But if you don't care about running things randomly, then you can slim it down. Smallest Slackware 15.0 system I have looks like about 4 GB, with the largest about 10 GB. Trust me, I run alot more than you do, but that's not bloat to me to have support across most everything. You could shrink your system down to be an "internet appliance".

If you really want to slim it, just learn how things work, and you'll get it done. It has a solid package system after all. (modular!) vbatts is a core member of the slackware team, and if he does it, it's probably ok Just be aware his notes are out of date. There are recent instructions out there. But the key thing is I'm not going to predict what your needs are. You'll have to learn how to do it.

So use it, if you want.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 10:14 PM   #39
the3dfxdude
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 741

Rep: Reputation: 367Reputation: 367Reputation: 367Reputation: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
The kernel-modules package is 315Mb on it's own uncompressed.
Worse, the kernel firmware package is over 1GB now. I'd very much like to see that split up. Or perhaps it will get compression of the installed files on disk. However, forget modularity; there is no package manager that is going to predict what firmware packages you are going to need, so the average user is going to have to eat disk space in every distro until some kind of sanity prevails in hardware design to not have to need all these hardware blobs the size of an entire OS or a large application. (Yes, I'm old school, OS probably shouldn't be more than couple gigs, but whatever)

Remember selecting from a large set of precompiled kernels during install? Hah, let's leave it up to users to select firmwares now.

NOTE: I am not installing the firmware package anymore, skipping that on updates, and rolling my own. But that's not anything I care to teach people how to do.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-10-2024, 10:51 PM   #40
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 4,489
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580
Quote:
Originally Posted by the3dfxdude View Post
forget modularity
+1

Modularity is a nice ideal... but relatively impractical when you get down to the brass tacks of it.
 
Old Yesterday, 05:03 AM   #41
elcore
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2014
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,764

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
+1

Modularity is a nice ideal... but relatively impractical when you get down to the brass tacks of it.
It's cheaper for everyone downstream to look for modular things I guess, like 20 years ago you had to buy full price album on LP, cassette, or CD.. but now there's digital download.
Want just one song? You got it for cheap. ;]

And that's just one example; want a video game full price, or you want video game free and open source with a wide selection of non-free modules?
The majority of people are poor, so they will get the one that costs nothing and then maybe buy one or two modules later if they like it.
Same thing's going to happen with systems, sooner or later. I mean it's already like that with those "home" editions, stores and marketplaces where you get additional modules for your systems.
I don't see how, for example, having the whole SBo on Slackware DVD would be more practical for anyone. Or having wine in Slackware, with the entire AppDB included, that'd be funny.

Last edited by elcore; Yesterday at 05:05 AM.
 
Old Yesterday, 07:17 AM   #42
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 4,489
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580Reputation: 2580
^ you seem to have missed my point with all of those tangents.
 
Old Yesterday, 08:09 AM   #43
rokytnji
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: antiX 23, MX 23
Posts: 7,153
Blog Entries: 21

Rep: Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484Reputation: 3484
I've ran Slackel, SaliX, Absolute, On a 16 gig ssd for /. /home sat on a 64 gig sd card. This was on a Dell Chromebook II.

I was pleased with hardware recognition like sound, bluetooth, touchpad, etc......
Ram usage was higher than I was used to.
So I run AntiX 23 runit on instead presently.

My use case is different than yours probably. As this chromebook is a motorcycle saddlebag outdoor travel netbook
I ran the spinoffs to learn slackware a bit.

If me in your shoes. I'd do a full install with / sitting on your internal ssd.
Get a larger sd card and put /home on it.

There. Bloat in your mind taken care of.
 
Old Yesterday, 08:34 AM   #44
_blackhole_
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2023
Distribution: FreeBSD
Posts: 116

Rep: Reputation: 99
Providing a lot of useful "out-of-the-box software" is not necessarily bloat. The parts you don't use may be bloat to you, but not bloat to others. I actually like that Slackware pretty much provides everything you need to compile software from the off. As opposed to Debian where you're perpetually apt-get'ing the stuff the developers have decided no one should need...

https://tldp.org/LDP/Linux-Dictionary/html/b.html

Quote:
bloatware

n. [common] Software that provides minimal functionality while requiring a disproportionate amount of diskspace and memory. Especially used for application and OS upgrades. This term is very common in the Windows/NT world. So is its cause.
Bloatware is a term which is derived from "code bloat" - i.e. the phenomenon related to sloppy coding, feature creep, etc.

While the Slackware installation footprint may be large, once a Slackware system is up and running, it's actually fairly light.

On my Windows 10 workstation (at work), the WinSxS (Windows "side by side" cache for a kind of DLL (hell) swapping system) directory, containing lots of duplicate files, is 13.2GB. That's pure bloat.

It amuses me how so many people new to Linux, presumably previously users of Windows, become obsessed with saving on storage space. I believe this is down to a common fallacy, where space on the hard disk is incorrectly equated to physical memory and/or assumed to impact performance due to the assumption that many of these installed programmes run on startup and stay resident. In Windows terms, having a hard disk full of crap, did often equate to a "bloated" installation which had become unmanageable, with many potentially unneeded services, "background tasks" and tray applications running as a result, causing sluggish performance - and it was often better to just wipe and reinstall.
 
7 members found this post helpful.
Old Yesterday, 02:18 PM   #45
elcore
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2014
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,764

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
^ you seem to have missed my point with all of those tangents.
No I don't think so. For me the entire machine is a collection of modules, including cables and bolts.
And no mater how cheap 1TB drive is, it's still cheaper than 2TB drive. 3cell battery, cheaper than 6cell battery. 2G memory, cheaper than 4G memory.

I guess you're amused by a bunch of poor people struggling to meet the OS requirements, just like sir _blackhole_ here.
Kinda like poining and laughing at the bums out of your car window, isn't it? All fun and games until it's not.
 
  


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
Using comment symbol for matching comment sections Faki Linux - Newbie 9 11-03-2021 09:50 AM
LXer: Fit for purpose: The case for the purpose-built database LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-26-2021 05:22 PM
System sounds don't work as well as sounds through a browser Bagmeijer Linux - Newbie 1 03-03-2008 11:53 AM
system sounds, yes - media sounds, no bean target Linux - Newbie 3 02-14-2006 07:57 AM
Recorded audio sounds horrible, but the untouched line-in sounds ok? justin218 Linux - Newbie 1 10-14-2003 05:11 PM

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

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:27 PM.

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