Hopefully we can get this thread to work with out A bob freak out. Stable means to me a channel.
What is a channel it is a path that Slackware 14.1 14.2 have taken. That means Patrick has selected a channel libraries that absolutely work with Slackware per version .
How is this a big thing using the SBOPKG tool. it is huge I can write a script and everyone can be on the same channel.
Slackbuilds take the latest greatest and lets you build it.
Such as dependencies of QT5 in Slack 14.1.
This for me pretty much took 4 years of work and flushed it using that tool.
Unless everyone takes a copy of my slackbuilds and then edits the tool.

since slackbuilds 14.0 14.1 14.2 is broken way broken. in 15.0 do you think you can do as slack 12 did and keep the environment as a tool and not herding cats.
That is why we have a devel branch in most teams. not in stable.
Not a rant it is a fact.

I like it how it works now. We get to have a nice stable base system (Slackware) while still getting the latest and greatest applications (SBo).

2 members found this post helpful.

Hi Drakeo, I gather you have a problem with building qt5 from SlackBuilds.org?

If you are running Slackware 14.1, use qt5-5.5.1. This has not changed since November 2015.

If you are running Slackware 14.2, use qt5-5.7.1. This has not changed since February 2017.

If you are running -current, you are a beta tester. If you don't like being a beta tester, please go back to 14.2, where qt5 has been stable for 471 days.

Thanks for the feedback!

1 members found this post helpful.

there is nothing stable on qt 5.7.1 , 5.6.3 is the stable one that is still maintained and 5.7.1 is an intermediate release with known problems (fixed In 5.6.3), end of life and unmaintained.

disclaimer: this has nothing to do with the thread topic since I do not understand what this thread is actually about, rather my usually rant about how SBo deals with Qt in the hope to see some improvements in future or that the maintainer will learn about the Qt versions ;-)

At one time there was an excellent discussion about using Slackware in business. In that discussion the topic was raised whether Slackbuilds.org build scripts should remain stable like the parent stock Slackware and be updated for security and major bug issues only or if the scripts should follow the most recent release. One idea was to have two branches in slackbuilds.org. No consensus was obtained nor any sought.

My personal approach is I don't update slackbuilds.org packages unless I have a reason. My approach and opinion are not worth two cents.

1 members found this post helpful.

In this thread could we please focus on listening to Drakeo, and solving his specific problem, instead of repeating other discussions? Please start another thread, or necrobump another thread, if you think there's something new to be said on related but different subjects. Thanks in advance.

1 members found this post helpful.

What is the specific problem then? Perhaps English is not Drakeo's native language, but the original post is murky at best. If this thread is a fork from another thread then perhaps those foundations should be explained here because not everybody follows every single thread or post.

If the thread is about compiling qt5, then the original post should have shared that focus.

The specific problem here is the OP tentative to use SlackBuilds.org packages in an enterprise and or business environment.

And, of course, the OP expects the SBo to be Enterprise Ready.

The policy at SBo is that upgrading or not the Slackbuilds is up to the maintainer, and there seems to be this trend since some months: many maintainers tend to upgrade either because they want to or just because users requested that. That's one of the reasons why George Vlahavas created the extra repository for Salix, that can also be used in Slackware and in Slint.

We have discussed this issue already, especially with David (55020). Maybe we could have two kinds (or branches) of SlackBuilds: one "devel" and one "stable", that would also be more thoroughly checked and tested.

That's just an idea and I don't know if that would be feasible, but here it is.

3 members found this post helpful.

Also: everything on SBo is tested on a a complete new -stable installation.

Or at least it's supposed to be.

Seems to me that whether slackbuilds.org is suitable for the enterprise depends on whether Slackware is suitable for the enterprise. Browse the Slackware in business thread for a nice discussion about that topic.

In that same thread is a split opinion whether slackbuild.org packages should target enterprise readiness or enthusiasts who want the latest and greatest. There is no policy or agreement how packages at slackbuilds.org should be managed.

I would enjoy seeing Slackware (and slackbuilds) better target enterprise users. Just my opinion. If that happened, great. If not then c'est la vie.

As a side comment to Drakeo, Slackware design tends to favor old style computer users, the do-it-yourself (DIY) crowd. The Salix folks, who got their start with Zenwalk, saw potential with Slackware as a base to provide additional features to the distro, such as adding GUI admin tools and package dependency checks when installing packages. The Salix folks target so-called "lazy Slackers." Being a small team and not wanting to provide large scale support, they lean toward not updating packages outside of security patches and major bug fixes. That design focus usually is what enterprise users and sysadmins want.

Perhaps if Drakeo wants to use Slackware in the enterprise, Salix might be a more suitable choice?

Just trying to help. I hope I am on target in this thread.

2 members found this post helpful.

Still No, for all the same reasons as last time.

This thread is filling with irrelevance and undefined words like 'enterprise'.

We are here to help Drakeo with a specific qt5 problem. I want to listen to his details: exact operating system version, which exact update broke which exact build with which exact dependencies and what the error message was. Just the normal questions.

We can come back to philosophy after we've fixed that. Thanks for your co-operation.

3 members found this post helpful.

for me the Slackware and SBo combination offers a good compromise. We have Slackware as a stable, conservative and very well tested base, combined with very recent and actively updated third party software.

2 members found this post helpful.

I gather I had a issue with slackware 14.1 and the dependency for qjackctl was qt5. Qt 5 was way unstable at the time. and if you put it on your system. the ldconfig in slackware caused issues.
Here is a fact slackware 14.1 had no use for qt5 slackware 14.2 has no use for qt5. It is the github make a slackware unstable or future. but let dev's make scripts to keep instep with that version of slackware.
it is called being responsible to that version.
Simple screen recorder builds with both.
you can be ponce and say cool that builds wow new is better.

sorry late reply like developing in slackware for slackware users. Kiss works least variables are better. but few months down the road and 14.1 had qt5 dependencies. It can break your system after brining this up ponce instead of looking at his blob and doing a roll back on git hub he said live with it for 4 years.
Qt5 is not the issue ask bob what he went through mixing both.
like it or not cmake is part of it also.
just call it ponce blob stuff builds no version.