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.
Well, one of the reasons, why Slackware has become my favourite distro is exactly that: It requires less updates, and therefore less maintenance than any other distro I know of. It just saves me time!
That's just one dimension of Slackware stability. Another one is, that the way, the system is maintained has remained essentially the same for years. What I've learned years ago, still helps me to get things done in the latest and greatest incarnation of Slackware.
Slightly OT:
BTW, I just read an interview with Miguel De Icaza, where he said, that the arbirtrary and frequent change of APIs is the main reason, why Linux is still not acknowledged as a major platform for desktops. He is right, but he has learned that only recently, while the Patrick Volkerding and the Slackware crew promoted stability of interfaces for a long, long time...
...frequent change of APIs is the main reason, why Linux is still not acknowledged as a major platform for desktops. He is right, but he has learned that only recently, while the Patrick Volkerding and the Slackware crew promoted stability of interfaces for a long, long time...
Funny that miguel just now reaching that conclusion. At least he's catching on.
Now we have to ask ourselves "Who would want Gnu/Linux to fail as a major desktop platform?"
Nah, they'd never purposefully infiltrate and corrupt a competitor, it'd be unethical.
WeBTW, I just read an interview with Miguel De Icaza, where he said, that the arbirtrary and frequent change of APIs is the main reason, why Linux is still not acknowledged as a major platform for desktops.
What? Microsoft's APIs are extremely unstable. They break backwards compatibility every few years.
(Which is sometimes required to improve an API, of course).
As long as Pat keeps on top of security updates, all's fine with me.
I agree, which is why I'm getting a little grumpy.
Seamonkey hasn't been updated for Slackware 13.1 in a few months. It's now pretty far behind on security updates. I think the reason is that a newer version of Cairo and something else than what is in Slackware 13.1 is required.
Seamonkey also hasn't been updated for Slackware 13.37 recently, although it is several updates ahead of the version on 13.1. I just tried to build it with the 13.37 SlackBuild script and the newer source code, but it failed during make.
Similarly, we seem to be behind on Thunderbird and Firefox, but there are other threads devoted to those.
I am beginning to wonder if the Slackware team can keep up with the changes to Mozilla applications. They seem particularly hard to build and the get updated very frequently.
I am beginning to wonder if the Slackware team can keep up with the changes to Mozilla applications. They seem particularly hard to build and the get updated very frequently.
Keep the faith, man! I have no problem at all with Mr. Volkerding and the Core Team taking the needed time to get it right.
Be patient.
noticed today, while my rsync script was syncing 64-current with slackware.org.uk, it deleted all the content of slackware64/kde. Not sure, which server is updated first, but could be that big update is coming still today?!
PS ftp.slackware.com appears to still have kde 4.5.5 in slackware64 dir.
noticed today, while my rsync script was syncing 64-current with slackware.org.uk, it deleted all the content of slackware64/kde. Not sure, which server is updated first, but could be that big update is coming still today?!
Big updates are usually pushed into a hidden directory then mv'd over once everything is uploaded.
The hidden directories weren't always invisible, I even spotted a complete release once and grabbed the release notes and posted them on aols
Security support for Slackware is somewhat lacking if you compare it to some other big distributions, which can afford a big army of backporters and auditors.
Slackware inc. does not often backport the security fixes. Often, security updates will only be included if upstream provides the security fix (usually a new version for the app), Patrick finds the fix not too disruptive and if the fix does compile and work properly under that version of Slackware. If the fix fails to do any of these three points, you won't have the fix for your version. If the new Firefox fails to compile in an old Slackware, it won't be included at all.
From another thread, I got this:
Quote:
Take a look at the latest release: Unless you've taken some action of your own you'll still be running kernel 2.6.37.6 for which upstream security bug provision has already ceased. In fact it ceased somewhere around the time 13.37 actually came out. So if you take a hard-line, black & white stance, you could argue that: as Slackware doesn't have a kernel team back-porting fixes, even the latest release can already be considered as 'unsupported' - at least in-part. Of course, in the real world everything is shades of grey and it's not quite that simple. If a really significant issue came up, then I'm sure Pat would bump the stock kernel, but it's clear that he puts more value on stability than minor security issues, at least when it comes to the kernel.
I agree, which is why I'm getting a little grumpy.
...
I am beginning to wonder if the Slackware team can keep up with the changes to Mozilla applications. They seem particularly hard to build and the get updated very frequently.
I share your uneasiness when it comes to Browser updates. For most of us they're the largest attack-surface we present to the outside world and IMO are the one thing you definitely can't be behind on. Pat can take as long as he likes with Current, but when I see browser updates lagging in stable I worry.
I switched to Opera for mail+browsing, and though it wasn't the reason for switching, being able to keep up with new releases without having to wait for Pat to get around to it or to attempt a long-winded mozilla build from source myself was something that was certainly not lost on me.
Whilst I probably shouldn't bother mentioning this (given I am an Opera employee :P ), Salix seems to do a pretty good job of updating their Firefox package very shortly after each release and their packages are Slackware compatible.
For example, you can get a binary of Firefox 7.0 in Slackware package format here:
@Gazl: Regarding Opera, beside the Opera.SlackBuild from SlackBuilds.org (which is perfectly repackaged IMHO), Salix also has binary Opera packages (I actually look after these for them). And if you want to test our development releases I provide repackaged binaries here. The nice thing about these development packages is that they will install alongside Opera stable, using their own profile, so you can run both side by side.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.