I don' think that was the reason for dropping it. IIRC it was not being maintained and nobody wanted to step up and maintain it.

1 members found this post helpful.

I'm glad Slackware's installer is as well designed as it is too.

It's kinda hard to even believe ArchLinux and CRUX even had any level of a relation any more.

I decided to install Arch w/Xfce on my ThinkPad T61 over the weekend, and set it up as I would with Slackware and Xfce. I like it quite a bit, we'll see how long it lasts. I've broken Arch installations in the past, but didn't know as much then as I do now. I do also like pacman, probably more than any other package manager (toss up between it and portage).

Attached Thumbnails

 

Did the same-ish. This time it lasted a week.

Would be cool to have a Slackware with Pacman, something like Rubix Linux. http://rubixlinux.org/

@Anonymo: abandonwares put aside I think that Salix should be close to what you're looking for, if you value automatic dependencies resolutions more than Slackware specificities. But I neither expect nor wish to see that included in genuine Slackware.

1 members found this post helpful.

I've tried Arch several times and it's a good system till it brakes. Pacman can render the system useless after an update. Some say the Arch is more “bleeding edge” than Slack but I've found that Slack can be just as bleeding edge as you want it to be.
I run Slackware-Current on all my boxes and seldom get an update that brakes stuff other than having to rebuild a package once in awhile. On those occasions where an update does brake my system I can just point slackpkg at an older local mirror and down grade to fix it.
I keep two mirrors of Slack. One currently updated and the other a month old.
When an update goes badly for me it's easy to fix.
I haven’t been able to do that with Arch.

What I found while using arch (and I did it for 7 years!!), was that eventually my system got filled up by 'ancient' apps/programs that had been superceded by newer ones with different names. In the long run - I found that the best solution was a re-install. So the hype about "you never have to reinstall" is just that - a hype! You no longer just run 'pacman -Syu' but also have to watch up for replaced apps/programs and remove as neccessary - my time is more valuable than having to fight with that.
The systemd-thingie finished it off for me - from /etc/rc.conf to a myriad of conf-files ... no thank you! I'll never touch arch again! And yes - the somewhat haughty attitude as well ...

Clean orphaned

# pacman -Rns $(pacman -Qtdq)

Clean cache

# Pacman -Sc or -Scc

3 members found this post helpful.

Well, It looks like nobody has mentioned that the AUR repo is a bit "less secure" than SBo given the fact that your submissions to AUR are not reviewed before being published.

When it comes to either AUR or SBo, one better ought to read the PKGBUILD and the Slackbuild before installing anything from them.

I find the concept of community repository proposed by Arch to be close to what Slackbuilds.org provides, beside the lack of review of the user's submissions.

And that's why I've often found duplicated versions of a same package on AUR which leads the end user with potential sources of breakages.

3 members found this post helpful.

I often create a VM of Arch just to test various "new things" such as systemd, and bleeding edge versions of KDE and Gnome which I don't use at the moment.

Haven't tried Arch since it went over to the SystemDarkside. Might try it again in VBox, if I'm ever in a masochistic mood.

A fine glass or two of your favorite malt beverage may help to improve the experience. Just a thought.

Yeah, good idea. A bottle, rather than a glass or two. A rolling-release + systemd doesn't sound like the sort of thing I'd tackle if I'm sober.

Ballmer peak works for me.