LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
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 06-29-2020, 11:19 AM   #136
I.G.O.R
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2017
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 124

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponce View Post
??? can you elaborate why?
It used to be very popular distro. Nowadays, many people tend to thing that it's more obsolete than stable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponce View Post
TBH there can't be a delay if noone fixed a release date at first...
True, but look at the last 10 years
Click image for larger version

Name:	4905e799a1dac22b0d0229ef3a0025d7.png
Views:	48
Size:	3.8 KB
ID:	33538

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponce View Post
well, IMHO, it's still *not* a rolling release, it's the development version of Slackware, and the two other distributions you cite are different things (especially the second, that you have to build yourself)...
The difference between rolling release and development version is very subtle.

There is an option to install Gentoo from precompiled packages, and you can in turn build Slackware yourself. Gentoo also didn't switch to systemd. As I remember, eudev was created by Gentoo community and is used by them as well.

Now about the difference with Arch ... well, SBo scripts functionality are sometimes 100% copy of Arch PKGBUILDs

So, I believe that both distros are very close to Slackware by nature.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponce View Post
beside not existing a "rolling release model", why should old releases be dropped?
Slackware is, de facto, the distribution with the longest support for older releases, and this for anyone maintaining servers is a *BIG* plus...
That would be great to introduce some voluntary feedback script for collecting statistics about Slackware versions and packages in use. I guess there are very few <14.0 installations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponce View Post
I think you are assuming that your personal considerations are shared by the masses but maybe they aren't, at all.
I didn't mean that at all
 
Old 06-29-2020, 12:23 PM   #137
bassmadrigal
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: West Jordan, UT, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,151

Rep: Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820Reputation: 4820
Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
It used to be very popular distro. Nowadays, many people tend to thing that it's more obsolete than stable.
Just because some consider it to be obsolete doesn't make it obsolete. My desktop is running 14.2 and is chugging along perfectly fine. And the very lively forum before you seems to show that there are still a decent number of people who don't think it is obsolete.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
True, but look at the last 10 years
Attachment 33538
No one is saying that this hasn't be a long development cycle. It has been... the longest in Slackware history. But there is still work being done in -current and patches are still being provided for 14.0, 14.1, and 14.2 releases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
The difference between rolling release and development version is very subtle.
This is very false. The not-so-subtle difference is whether the platform is supporting actual releases. Slackware is currently supporting 6 releases, 14.0, 14.1, and 14.2, both in 32bit and 64bit form. If Pat stops supporting those and only has -current and does not intend on releasing another Slackware version, then, and only then, would Slackware be considered a rolling release.

-current is no different than a git snapshot (although, probably a bit more stable compared to some repos out there). It is a development version, nothing more, nothing less. I don't understand why people keep throwing the rolling release label out there, because the only similarity it has to a rolling release is staying relatively stable between updates. But since Slackware has supported versions, that AUTOMATICALLY makes it not fall into the rolling release category.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
There is an option to install Gentoo from precompiled packages, and you can in turn build Slackware yourself. Gentoo also didn't switch to systemd. As I remember, eudev was created by Gentoo community and is used by them as well.

Now about the difference with Arch ... well, SBo scripts functionality are sometimes 100% copy of Arch PKGBUILDs
They can't be a 100% copy because the build systems are VERY different. You have to use a system tool to run PKGBUILDs, where SlackBuilds are simple shell scripts that can be run on any distro (except they'll break due to the lack of makepkg). Much of the PKGBUILD is designed to be used with Arch's built-in tools. You can't "run" a PKGBUILD and get anything even close to building a package. SlackBuilds will do everything on any distro except for the final packaging, but the actual source will be extracted, any patches patched, and the program will be compiled and stored in a folder that could be used for packaging through that distro's tools.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
So, I believe that both distros are very close to Slackware by nature.
Pretty much every distro has a kernel and glibc. Almost all of them have Xorg. Many have build systems. So you can find similarities with each. But Slackware isn't designed to be built from source (just as gentoo isn't designed to be installed from pre-compiled packages). Arch's AUR is similar to many build systems, but that does not mean that Arch and Slackware are "very close".

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
That would be great to introduce some voluntary feedback script for collecting statistics about Slackware versions and packages in use. I guess there are very few <14.0 installations.
You freely admit that there are probably at least 13.x installations in use, but then say that Slackware is obsolete? There is a wide range of people using various versions provided by Slackware. I would imagine the vast majority are on 14.x installs. While -current tends to be pretty popular on the forum, a lot of people I've spoken to outside of the forum are sticking with stable releases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
I didn't mean that at all
You stated Slackware's reputation as a stable distro has "stepped back significantly". And that Gentoo and Arch are similar to Slackware -current. There's a large majority of replies in this thread telling you otherwise. Since many don't seem to agree with you, it seems they are just your "personal considerations" and not the hard facts you thought they were.
 
3 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-29-2020, 08:02 PM   #138
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2
Posts: 3,698

Rep: Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
It's written here.
@LuckyCyborg! You've changed!
 
Old 06-29-2020, 08:12 PM   #139
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2
Posts: 3,698

Rep: Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZhaoLin1457 View Post
UNIX was a real and particular operating system, made for the PDP-11 minicomputers from 1980 era.
The PDP-11/40 that I worked on in the late 1970s ran MP/M. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP/M
 
Old 06-29-2020, 09:19 PM   #140
EdGr
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2010
Location: California, USA
Distribution: I run my own OS
Posts: 379

Rep: Reputation: 169Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZhaoLin1457
UNIX was a real and particular operating system, made for the PDP-11 minicomputers from 1980 era.
I used Unix V7 on a PDP-11/70 as an undergraduate student in 1982. It was powerful but glacially slow. My Z80 was much more pleasant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Cranium
The PDP-11/40 that I worked on in the late 1970s ran MP/M. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP/M
I suspect you meant RSTS. I once encountered it as a teenager. I remember the joke that RSTS stood for "runs slower than snails".
Ed
 
Old 06-30-2020, 12:46 AM   #141
RadicalDreamer
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2016
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 1,124

Rep: Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549Reputation: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
The difference between rolling release and development version is very subtle.
I'm going to install Opensuse 15.2 for a relative when it comes out this week because the rolling release borked its install. They want to try the stable version. I have no idea what happened to it.
 
Old 06-30-2020, 01:29 AM   #142
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,506

Rep: Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
It used to be very popular distro. Nowadays, many people tend to thing that it's more obsolete than stable.
Have you got any hard data that supports this view?
Quote:
Originally Posted by I.G.O.R View Post
I guess there are very few <14.0 installations.
You're welcome to have opinions, but please stop presenting them as fact.

Re: Gentoo - Installing it is TFH and takes far too long. You can't compare it to Slackware for that reason. Slackware installation can be done in 15 min or less and at the end of it you have xorg, networking and a large selection of services right out of the box.
 
Old 06-30-2020, 02:39 AM   #143
allend
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Melbourne
Distribution: Slackware-current
Posts: 5,418

Rep: Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012Reputation: 2012
I am always amused by the release date argument. Keeping the name and releasing updates does not seem to hurt the gorilla.
Windows 10 - 29 July 2015
Slackware 14.2 - 30 June 2016
 
Old 06-30-2020, 04:58 AM   #144
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 2,855

Rep: Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935
Regarding a next Full Official Release maybe I'm over-reacting at a recent discovery that Intel plans to dump CSM this year and the huge impact that will have, both pluses and minuses, but I wonder if PatV finds himself facing a major decision - "Do I maintain backward compatibility for the many who still use 32 bit OpSys and older (non UEFI compliant) hardware and firmware or just make the next release fully modern but lose a large client base?" If that's so that's no trivial choice and a "wait and see" would likely be prudent.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-30-2020, 05:08 AM   #145
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,506

Rep: Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749
Enorbet, given that the 32 bit version of Slackware-current is still being compiled to run on a 25 year old processor, I think we all know the answer to that question...
 
Old 06-30-2020, 05:20 AM   #146
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 2,855

Rep: Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
Enorbet, given that the 32 bit version of Slackware-current is still being compiled to run on a 25 year old processor, I think we all know the answer to that question...
Since removing CSM altogether will apparently not run 32bit operating systems, that -Current still offers a 32 bit version could possibly amount to a placeholder. That doesn't require that the next Official Release remain stuck with the mix of UEFI and legacy compliant CSM. In some respects it is much like cities facing the choice to keep and maintain hitching posts (not to mention the clean up crew) after the Model T hit widespread use. Hitching posts weren't a huge problem when everyone used horses for fast transportation. Not having them wasn't a problem when most folks drove cars, but the transition is problematic. Oil? no problem. Water? no problem. Oil AND Water? Problem.
 
Old 06-30-2020, 05:26 AM   #147
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,506

Rep: Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
Since removing CSM altogether will apparently not run 32bit operating systems
There are still a lot of 32 bit computers around. I don't see why the current model couldn't be followed for the release if CSM is removed at any point in the future... even if only to support 64 bit machines with CSM. It works well enough now. What makes you think it won't in the future?
 
Old 06-30-2020, 11:56 AM   #148
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 2,855

Rep: Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935
I don't assume it won't work. I know that it will!.. but there are downsides to "neither fish nor fowl" conglomerates. My point was exactly that there really isn't a huge problem with legacy BIOS, despite some concerns over "security" (I often wonder whose security Intel and others are actually concerned with considering some of the blatantly insecure "improvements" that were introduced with UEFI) and UEFI on it's own is good too, but having both on one system creates numerous problems at the very least in implementation if not security holes nonexistent in either as standalone firmware.

In this vein I'd like to pass on an amusing and interesting video someone else posted recently (please forgive me for not citing credit... it's late and I'm going to bed) but this is pretty damned cool and at least a wee bit appropriate... although apparently it won't be possible soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS9hiSwL1KY

Enjoy!
 
Old 06-30-2020, 04:54 PM   #149
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,506

Rep: Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749Reputation: 749
Some thoughts about the future of Slackware

I don't understand why you'd ever try to use both at the same time anyway... That would seem to indicate a fundamental misunderstanding somewhere.

As amusing as that LGR video was, there are a couple of big problems with running MS-DOS on modern hardware. eg: It doesn't do power management at all so it'll run your CPU at 100% full time. Way to toast it.

Secondly, to even get it to boot, he had to use the Windows 98 boot disk. That's because the version of DOS he installed doesn't recognize FAT32. Furthermore, to get USB support, he had to use FreeDOS.

I admire the attempt, but I've not installed DOS on bare metal in more than 15 years... and with the great capabilities of DOSBox, I don't see why you'd need to anymore.
 
Old 06-30-2020, 07:07 PM   #150
Richard Cranium
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2009
Location: Carrollton, Texas
Distribution: Slackware64 14.2
Posts: 3,698

Rep: Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038Reputation: 2038
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdGr View Post
I suspect you meant RSTS. I once encountered it as a teenager. I remember the joke that RSTS stood for "runs slower than snails".
You would be incorrect in that suspicion. Every command available in CP/M was available on that system (including PIP, which allow us to send compiled object files to a terminal which would cause panic on that particular user when we were all scrambling to complete our projects.). We certainly did not login to a basic prompt.

It may have been the case that since that PDP-11/40 was installed at USMA (United States Military Academy) that the professor who nabbed the equipment managed to get an early copy of MP/M. I don't know either way; I do know that this particular system appeared to be a normal CP/M environment other than multiple users could log into it at the same time.
 
  


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



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

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:56 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
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration