LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
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 08-17-2019, 04:08 PM   #31
luvr
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Boom - The Home Town of Tomorrowland, Belgium
Distribution: Slackware, Xubuntu
Posts: 347
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 140Reputation: 140

Quote:
Originally Posted by ahlr View Post
I hear some asking, "Why is Slackware on 14.2 and the other system on 19?
I thought "the other system" (a.k.a "Windows") was still on "10"?
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-17-2019, 10:51 PM   #32
montagdude
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2016
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,872

Rep: Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425Reputation: 1425
Quote:
Originally Posted by tramtrist View Post
Drop kde4 for i3 imo... solves a lot of ... issues
They're not even in the same category.
 
Old 08-17-2019, 11:57 PM   #33
ttk
Member
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Sebastopol, CA
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 965
Blog Entries: 27

Rep: Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354
If I were to play silly versioning games with a distro of my own, it would be timed to be one version higher than CentOS, release a couple months before CentOS, and use most-stable package releases slightly newer than CentOS.

It would be a datacenter-oriented Slackware, so it would pretty much depend on peeling users away from CentOS/Suse to have any kind of following.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-18-2019, 02:16 PM   #34
Bindestreck
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 765

Rep: Reputation: 389Reputation: 389Reputation: 389Reputation: 389
Why numbers? Why not;

Slackware Windows First Edition
Slackware Windows Second Edition
Slackware Windows Ultimate Edition
Slackware Windows 10

and so on?

(Too many beers for me...)
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-19-2019, 03:51 AM   #35
Totoro-kun
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2010
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 231

Rep: Reputation: 122Reputation: 122
Actually, as a user I prefer very simple, sensible, progressive numbering, i.e.: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. Most importantly it indicates a stable version and enables to track releases historically. Ideally point releases should refer to the system which has received some updates, which did not had much impact on existing system "structure". Trouble is that this method does not go well with marketing at all and if you want to be popular it's not a great idea to use it. However, I would like this method even more now, that everyone seems to use random version numbers which are utterly confusing to humans :-)

Then again, I'm not a developer. They might have individual preferences for versioning stuff. Bottom line, as user I simply want to know if the software is stable, and if it's latest.

Last edited by Totoro-kun; 08-19-2019 at 03:55 AM.
 
Old 08-23-2019, 07:10 PM   #36
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 8,001

Rep: Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552Reputation: 5552
For those that don't know, Slackware already played the "increase version numbers to match competition" game back in the 90s.

Quote:
Q: Why the jump from 4 to 7?
The following was posted to the Slackware.com Forum by Patrick Volkerding (Slackware Project Lead), at 21:43 10-10-1999.

I've stayed out of this for now, but I do think I should lend a little justification to the version number thing.

First off, I think I forgot to count some time ago. If I'd started on 6.0 and made every release a major version (I think that's how Linux releases are made these days, right? , we would be on Slackware 47 by now. (it would actually be in the 20s somewhere if we'd gone 1, 2, 3...)

I think it's clear that some other distributions inflated their version numbers for marketing purposes, and I've had to field (way too many times) the question "why isn't yours 6.x" or worse "when will you upgrade to Linux 6.0" which really drives home the effectiveness of this simple trick. With the move to glibc and nearly everyone else using 6.x now, it made sense to go to at least 6.0, just to make it clear to people who don't know anything about Linux that Slackware's libraries, compilers, and other stuff are not 3 major versions behind. I thought they'd all be using 7.0 by now, but no matter. We're at least "one better", right?

Sorry if I haven't been enough of a purist about this. I promise I won't inflate the version number again (unless everyone else does again

SOURCE: http://www.slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php?faq=general#0
I think most people realize Linux distro version numbers are unique to that distro and I doubt he has nearly as many questions posed to him as to why Slackware is at 14.x when others are a higher number. So I don't think there's any need to artificially inflate Slackware's version number again, but then it's always up to the BDFL
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-24-2019, 03:10 PM   #37
Anonymo
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: The Woodlands, Texas
Distribution: Slackware, Archlinux, CentOS
Posts: 193

Rep: Reputation: 37
We should do Slackware 42 and 42.1 and then go back to 15.
 
Old 08-24-2019, 03:37 PM   #38
Poprocks
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 516

Rep: Reputation: 278Reputation: 278Reputation: 278
It's all arbitrary anyway. It's not like the major version numbers have any significant meaning - ie, it's not like 14.0-14.2 all use the same major version of the kernel, glibc, etc. I remember back in the days of Red Hat Linux and decimalled version numbering, the point-releases all had inter-compatible packages with one another as they used the same major version of glibc and (I believe) gcc.

I guess I can see the justification of using point-releases as kind of a loose concept if there haven't been sufficient major changes between releases to justify a major version-bump. But when versions are coming out 3+ years apart as opposed to a maximum of 1 year as was the case in the past, the case for using minor version numbering kind of disappears.

Again, I don't particularly care though, since the version numbers are arbitrary anyway.
 
Old 08-24-2019, 03:54 PM   #39
ttk
Member
 
Registered: May 2012
Location: Sebastopol, CA
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 965
Blog Entries: 27

Rep: Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354Reputation: 1354
RHEL and its derivatives are sort of like that, today. Software that runs on 7.0 is supposed to run on all 7.x releases. Slackware does more or less more or less the same thing, but without bumping version numbers. A stable Slackware release sees upgrades over its supported lifetime similar in scope and degree as a major-version RHEL release. Far fewer packages, though, and sbo packages are seldom upgraded.

Last edited by ttk; 08-24-2019 at 03:56 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-24-2019, 04:42 PM   #40
ehartman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Delft, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,674

Rep: Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885Reputation: 885
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttk View Post
RHEL and its derivatives are sort of like that, today. Software that runs on 7.0 is supposed to run on all 7.x releases.
Yeah, but RHEL "point releases" are more like Service Packs, they do NOT upgrade packages, just patch them for security or bugfix reasons.
So any 3rd party application can expect the same type and version of packages in all of the 7.* installations.
And of course the same is true for the corresponding CentOS releases:
they've even stopped versioning the iso's for the point release:
Code:
File:CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1810.iso	  4481024 KB 	11/25/2018 	12:00:00 AM
File:CentOS-7-x86_64-Everything-1810.iso 10491904 KB 	11/26/2018 	12:00:00 AM
File:CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveGNOME-1810.iso	  1439744 KB 	11/24/2018 	12:00:00 AM
File:CentOS-7-x86_64-LiveKDE-1810.iso	  1903616 KB 	11/24/2018 	12:00:00 AM
File:CentOS-7-x86_64-Minimal-1810.iso	   940032 KB 	11/25/2018 	12:00:00 AM
File:CentOS-7-x86_64-NetInstall-1810.iso   519168 KB 	11/25/2018 	12:00:00 AM
They've got a date (-YYMM, of the source release of RHEL it is based on) but not a 7.x version, just a plain 7

Last edited by ehartman; 08-24-2019 at 11:21 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-24-2019, 06:57 PM   #41
glorsplitz
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Distribution: slackware!
Posts: 878

Rep: Reputation: 199Reputation: 199
what I said in this post
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 08-24-2019, 08:09 PM   #42
darkstar61
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2012
Distribution: agnOStic
Posts: 46

Rep: Reputation: 12
i'd positively like 15.35 !!!
 
Old 08-26-2019, 04:30 AM   #43
aragorn2101
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2012
Location: Mauritius
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 552

Rep: Reputation: 273Reputation: 273Reputation: 273
Slackware is not trying to be like other distros. Slackware does not do rolling releases and it is best this way.

Version numbering is not a race. Concrete example: back in 2011, did it mean that Ubuntu 11 was better than Ubuntu 10 or Slackware 13.37? Not at all! So, version numbers are relative. It is just a counting system. And it certainly cannot be used as parameter for comparison across distros because everyone has their own standard.

So, eagerly waiting for Slackware 15. Whenever it will be ready.

Last edited by aragorn2101; 08-26-2019 at 04:32 AM.
 
Old 08-26-2019, 05:28 AM   #44
zeebra
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Distribution: Mageia, Slackware
Posts: 958
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 271Reputation: 271Reputation: 271
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by ahlr View Post
What do you think mates?
No. Slackware 19 will be released around the year 2035.
 
Old 08-26-2019, 05:32 AM   #45
zeebra
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2011
Distribution: Mageia, Slackware
Posts: 958
Blog Entries: 11

Rep: Reputation: 271Reputation: 271Reputation: 271
Quote:
Originally Posted by aragorn2101 View Post
Version numbering is not a race. Concrete example: back in 2011, did it mean that Ubuntu 11 was better than Ubuntu 10 or Slackware 13.37? Not at all! So, version numbers are relative. It is just a counting system. And it certainly cannot be used as parameter for comparison across distros because everyone has their own standard.
It's true, but in the "real" world companies and software is now actually racing in a fake race with these version numbers, pretending they are not irrelevant or relative. Among some examples are Apple, Microsoft and Google, but this race also suddently included Firefox which annoyingly started using a new version scheme when Chrome versions turned double digits and Firefox was something like 2.3.14 or whatever. Suddenly every minor bugfix is a minor release and any minor release is a major release. Who can get the highest number the fastest?

It's a rat race and people actually think version numbers matter when comparing different operating systems and software, because the companies pretend it does.

Last edited by zeebra; 08-26-2019 at 05:35 AM.
 
  


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
PPP woes in Slackware 10.0 on changing partition numbering gdiv Slackware 5 08-28-2004 10:05 PM
Version numbering standard? PsychosisNode Programming 3 08-26-2003 10:55 PM
Question about Software Numbering Pwcca Linux - Software 1 04-16-2003 06:30 PM
An interesting fact about version numbering Bluestreak Linux - Software 11 02-16-2003 09:35 AM
Partition Numbering question! concoran Linux - General 8 07-26-2002 04:55 AM

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

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:54 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