I have a confession to make. I'm not a Slackware fanboi. I use it on my main workstation because it is the distro I know best which makes it more effective to use. Also I'm too lazy to change. I chose Slackware many summers ago because it was simpler than others and allowed me to understand what was going on.

Does that mean I dislike automatic dependency resolution or systemd? Not at all. For friends and family I install distros that are coined "beginner-friendly". For obvious reasons. At work I create Docker images based on Alpine, Debian and Red Hat. For different reasons.

So, peace! Let's contribute and make it better, and let's not shoot down people asking a question or voicing an opinion.

Let invite people - to listen to their complains - "horrific", "remove this, remove that". People will came here with long list of proposals how to make Slackware more Ubuntu-like, Debian-like , whatever distribution I used-like. Perhaps we need sticky thread: newcomers wishes and complaints.e

Edit: I forgot those full of good advises to Mr. Volkerding. Good people which really care for Slackware even if don't use.

3 members found this post helpful.

It isn't the opinion but the way it is conveyed which is the issue and some questions are obvious bait by trolls. The questions could be better worded like "when do you think the next Slackware stable will be released," or "How I think Slackware could benefit from dependency checking?" The best argument I can come up in favor of it is that it would allow Slackware to be installed on netbooks where hard drive size is an issue. Poorer countries may not have access to affordable terabyte hard drives. A person dual booting with a laptop with a SSD probably would value all the space they can get. At a glance there are cheap laptops on sale with 128 GB SSD drives on Amazon. That isn't much space.

I managed to say something in favor of dependency checking without devaluing Slackware. These threads show up in the search engine. I posted a screenshot from DDG that shows that "Slackware Linux Questions" had a "Is Slackware Dead" thread listed under it. Here is a guide for people who have issues with devaluing things: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...valuing-people

1 members found this post helpful.

I can somewhat understand why some think not having dependency resolution is a problem.

I for one do NOT view lack of dependency resolution a problem. I view it as a feature.

I've tried other distributions, usually the first thing that turns me off is dependency hell. I want to install program A, I note that the currently installed system meets the version requirements for program A's dependencies. Yet, I am told by the packager that in order to install program A, I need to install some development packages and a bunch of upgrades to the already installed packages and some new additional packages for some reason only known to the packager. This is just to install program A, not to compile it. It I want to compile I need to install more packages.

With Slackware, I simply build a SlackBuild script to download the source, compile it and create the package, I could even have the script install it. No upgrades to other packages, no additional unneeded packages are installed. Program A is now installed and working.

This is Slackware.

3 members found this post helpful.

Agreed. I also have tried a variety of distros that use dependency resolution and those systems are fine as long as they work. That is not always the case.
A full install of Slackware just works out of the box with all dependencies met. I like that. I do continue to try out other other operating systems as I am curious. There's no place like home. Slackware!

1 members found this post helpful.

I'm conviced the way you write/speak serves a purpose or shows your stupidity.

For the OP it seems crystal clear for me.

To everyone to make their opinion.

Life is a stack of objects.
Build your stack. learn Linux.
Then show the people your stack.
My stack is better than your stack.
If you manage your stack you now have become a stack manager.

It takes many stacks to make my package.
I know my packages because I built them.
Now I have become a package manager.
Sure be nice to have some kind of package tool
that would kept track of my installed packages.

Oh yes I found the greatest one around pkgtool.
His little buddy Slackpkg.
life is good.
I know my stack.
trust me there is thousands of stacks and packages.
Learn Linux.
or build your own tool.
I got my Slack Back.

1 members found this post helpful.

This endorsement means nothing in practical terms, since nothing Pat includes in Slackware is left to rot, while I have come across several slackbuilds at SBo that are abandoned or don't build, even on stable.

There should be some kind of Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 hierarchy at SBo, so that users can see which builds are maintained with the same care Pat shows his own builds, and which builds have been abandoned, or cannot be built because source is no longer available. SBo definitely strikes me as more of a hit and miss job than Slackware itself, endorsement of the BDFL or no endorsement.

That is a wonderful reply.
Until you want to take on a project like CEF3 or chromium
These teams set up to build with the Debian world.
then you take MIXXX latest they are using libraries that are built
against certain libraries and the Debian world has renamed them.

So at times I have to create SlackBuild script and build it.
That said you may get away with doing that do to the fact.
Slackware has built it already the way the developers that build things want things.
So you wonder why they do that. The dependency Hell.
example libopenmpt-modplug well I created a build for it just to stay instep with there team build.
Slackware current you really only need modplug.
enough said.

1 members found this post helpful.

@lovemeslk it's amazing. Poems about Slackware - o though Slackware. OS management in verses.

1 members found this post helpful.

If you're noticing broken builds, then you should notify the maintainer and/or the SBo mailing list. If the maintainers are gone and the builds aren't able to be patched to work, then the admins will remove them. If they are able to be fixed, then someone will usually push that fix and sometimes people will jump in to take over maintainership rather than leave the script abandoned (I've done that for some programs that I don't regularly use to ensure they remain active).

We SBo maintainers (nor the admins) can't fix what we don't know is broken...

4 members found this post helpful.

All true, but that doesn't address the core issue : Pat's endorsement of SBo means nothing in practical terms. SBo is not curated with the same care his own Slackware packages are, and, this long after a stable release, the mismatch is increasingly annoying.

Can't argue that!

Slackware allows upstream software to work as intended by the upstream developers. The package management works reliably for upgrades when SlackBuilds (3rd party) has been used. For included packages, security issues are provided in a timely manner. We see many distros often having to patch from upstream upgrades. Many packages end up being deeply patched in a distribution specific manner. Is it because they presumably have some issues in version upgrade?

This relates to the question in hand, because I would like to learn, if and when a distro drifts away from allowing upstream software to be vanilla, or is unable to upgrade to the latest upstream version, could the reason be, in some way, related to automated dependency resolution management?

1 members found this post helpful.

We need a thread of them!