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.
That would be fine, an "net-install-upgrade" ISO that would be easy to dump to a pendrive, allow to leave the system installed up to date, and even be able to install itself as a minimal Slackware system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier
Even better an ISO can include only a minimum set of packages beyond the installer to start the installation, then complete it fetching the other packages from a remote mirror. That is what is called a net install. This is easy to do, and this mini ISO can be an additional one, provided after the release of Slackware 15 not to delay it. It is also possible that the installer in this mini ISO fetches remotely packages it includes in case newer are available. Then this ISO would not need to be rebuilt during the life of the version, or very rarely. It is also possible to provide an already installed mini Slackware as an image, including just what is needed to run and be able to expand and complete itself after installation. Hint. Maybe these things could be handled by members of the community, as Eric does for liveslak.
Last time i tried it i had to install following series to be able to carry on from the network (with pkgtool):
A (base system),
N (networking, for obvious reasons),
L (few (very few) thinks here might lead to issues if omitted),
bonus:
AP (everything and the dog is here for the command line and it does not add much weight)
D (should be usually the first round one downloads over the network anyway)
there is a thread where the absolute minimal setup has like 140Mb in total, but that is a longer story i think. There is another cross linked in that one - a page back or forth. Both are good reads.
Still the quickest compromise are the complete A/L/N series and to carry on from there.
What requirements would sbotools and/or sbopkg need to meet to be included into a stock Slackware?
Historically, Slackware has never provided the ability to interact with 3rd-party repos (prebuilt or SlackBuilds) other than web browsers, wget, etc.
I'd guess getting over that and deciding to actually allow software in the system that's designed to interact with SBo is the biggest barrier, then it's just a matter of deciding which program is most "Slackware-Like".
Historically, Slackware has never provided the ability to interact with 3rd-party repos (prebuilt or SlackBuilds) other than web browsers, wget, etc.
I'd guess getting over that and deciding to actually allow software in the system that's designed to interact with SBo is the biggest barrier, then it's just a matter of deciding which program is most "Slackware-Like".
How about Python pip? IIRC pip was part of the 2.17 Python?
or was that easy-install (same difference)?
As of SBo quality - it is sometimes a hit and miss - but once officially supported i can imagine our BDFL could have a say for the quality threshold, not to mention a surge in popularity most certainly resulting in more maintainers (or at least i'd like to hope so).
How about Python pip? IIRC pip was part of the 2.17 Python?
or was that easy-install (same difference)?
As of SBo quality - it is sometimes a hit and miss - but once officially supported i can imagine our BDFL could have a say for the quality threshold, not to mention a surge in popularity most certainly resulting in more maintainers (or at least i'd like to hope so).
I guess I should've been a bit more specific that Slackware has never provided the ability to interact with Slackware-related 3rd-party repos within the base distro.
However, I'm not sure Pat wants to have a say in how SBo is managed... if there's software he wants at a certain level, he'll include it in the distro.
As of SBo quality - it is sometimes a hit and miss
From the innumerous SBo scripts that I've used, over more years than I care to recall, those which have needed some attention would not amount to more than a dozen. Mainly because I build for ARM achitecture and very few SBo scripts have been created without that in mind. I've never come across a SBo script that is fundamentally broken and I would say from experience that they are usually totally reliable, very good quality, and suitable for purpose.
From the innumerous SBo scripts that I've used, over more years than I care to recall, those which have needed some attention would not amount to more than a dozen. Mainly because I build for ARM achitecture and very few SBo scripts have been created without that in mind. I've never come across a SBo script that is fundamentally broken and I would say from experience that they are usually totally reliable, very good quality, and suitable for purpose.
Indeed,
let me rephrase:
Quote:
As of SBo quality - it is only sometimes a hit and miss
I can confirm SBo-s saved my sorry arse (a donkey, right?) quite a few times in my (few and much time in between) ARM adventures
I guess I should've been a bit more specific that Slackware has never provided the ability to interact with Slackware-related 3rd-party repos within the base distro.
However, I'm not sure Pat wants to have a say in how SBo is managed... if there's software he wants at a certain level, he'll include it in the distro.
I was not aware of that!
So the proverbial ball is in the SBO's courtyard to ask and pick a tool (or two (sbotools/sbopkg) ) for Pat to endorse to the official distro?
Life could be so much easier for us Slackers in the event of that to happen
As for 3rd party packaging tools, I don't use either sbotools or sbopkg, I use slackpkg+. Yes I know there are major differences.
Slackware comes with the tools to manage Slackware packages and only Slackware packages. If want want to use third party and have a tools that will help me out with that, then I will install it as I did with slackpkg+.
I don't think it's needed to include any of these. Install and use what you want.
Last edited by chrisretusn; 12-22-2021 at 02:49 AM.
So the proverbial ball is in the SBO's courtyard to ask and pick a tool (or two (sbotools/sbopkg) ) for Pat to endorse to the official distro?
sbopkg and sbotools are not SBo software. They were developed by others to interact with SBo. I don't think it's SBo's plan to officially endorse any tool that interacts with SBo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCerovec
Life could be so much easier for us Slackers in the event of that to happen
I don't find it that hard to pick your tool and download the package for it once booted. I've done it with my preferred tool for a long time.
NOTE: This isn't me being opposed to getting a tool for SBo included in Slackware, I just think it would be an unexpected change. Pat would need to decide that he's ok with including software to interact with SBo, which has never been done. He has only provided tools to manage official Slackware packages, and not 3rd-party Slackware packages/repos.
Last edited by bassmadrigal; 12-22-2021 at 10:33 AM.
sbopkg and sbotools are not SBo software. They were developed by others to interact with SBo. I don't think it's SBo's plan to officially endorse any tool that interacts with SBo.
That would make an interesting question
Quote:
I don't find it that hard to pick your tool and download the package for it once booted. I've done it with my preferred tool for a long time.
NOTE: This isn't me being opposed to getting a tool for SBo included in Slackware, I just think it would be an unexpected change. Pat would need to decide that he's ok with including software to interact with SBo, which has never been done. He has only provided tools to manage official Slackware packages, and not 3rd-party Slackware packages/repos.
Totally agrre on each point here.
It's just that historically the X.0 releases usually meant major changes (this i guess would apply as one of those, right?) and the following releases would usually mean polishing and bug fixing until the next major bump in the release number.
Now, since we had several other significant issues around this release, this might well end up for some 16.0 if the window of opportunity is closed for the 15.y series?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
