The appeal of Slackware
I want to start this post by saying: I don't hate Slackware, and this is not intended to be an attack on it. This is just my personal experience and wonder in action.(Note: this will probably be interpreted as "I hate Slackware, and this is my attack on it." :))
I can't find an appealing aspect of Slackware. It has a large userbase, and people seem to love it, yet I can't figure out why. This makes me think it's something I'm missing, something dealing with me, not Slackware. It also seems like a lot of things I hear about being the "pros" of Slackware are contradictory to the actual system, but again, I'm thinking it's probably just me, and I'm asking for someone to shed some light onto my confused perspective. 1.First and foremost, I hear about Slackware being a "quick, basic" install, giving you only what you need, and letting you build your system from there. This is what I generally like to do with a Debian Net Install, so that was immediately appealing to me. When I boot the install cd, however, an install is "3+GB", and recommended. I imagine there's a way to slim down the install incredibly, but I'm really unsure about what's necessary and what's not, and there's one other thing that makes me think a small install with Slackware would be a horrid thing(read next point). 2.I have heard Slackware is "free from dependency hell" many times, yet in the handbook alone even it says that Slackware's package management tool doesn't check dependencies. A direct quote would be: Quote:
3.On the topic of attitude. People on these forums are generally very nice, but sometimes you wish for a more active, immdiately communicative environment, and that for me usually results in irc. I don't know why, but generally #slackware on freenode.net, to me, is full of the most cocky and non-informing type. Usually I wonder why some of them are in there. To type "RTFM" many times, while not even reading the fact that you've already read the manuals and are still confused about something? I don't account it to the number of users in the slackware channel, either, as I've used the #gentoo channel many times before, and it averages a higher number of users, and is generally much more friendly and helpful. I don't know if I'm generally just misconceiving this, and this doesn't really relate to the functionality of the distribution, but it bothers me. Why do Slackware users(in general, if I may) have a "greater-than-thou" attitude? 4."If you learn Slackware, you learn Linux." This statement makes no sense to me whatsoever. Slackware is different from every distribution I have used, just like every distribution is different from every other distribution. "Installpkg" to a .tgz file won't work in anything else, "xwmconfig" won't set up my window manager in any other distro. The only thing Slackware might be able to say, is that it forces users to do things the "hard way" and learn a method they might not be familiar with. I don't feel this is valid though. I learned how to compile a program for source just as well in Debian when something wasn't in apt, long before I had ever used Slackware. In most distributions in the past, I used the console to edit config files, because I felt like learning how to use the console. It seems that every other distribution has EVERYTHING Slackware has, and then some, and leaves it up to you if you want to do it the "hard way", or their easier way. Again, I'm going to say, I don't hate Slackware. I'm just confused by it. I know there's something good about it, something maybe I'm missing, but to me it just seems like the most basic, unnecessary form of an operating system ever conceived. I've read other topics similar to what I've just posted about, and none of them seem to have any valid points whatsoever. I generally see points such as "free from dependency hell"(mentioned above) "stable"(choice of versions of software usually determines stability...) "it just works"(what?? Every distribution "works" in a sense, and usually with much less effort than Slackware. This, to me, is a statement like saying "Well, I can't think of any really great attributes it has, but I suppose it can get basic desktop computing done.") If you managed to read through all of this, I salute you. All I ask now, if you're a Slackware user, is to shed some light unto my confusion, if you would be so kind. :) I would really like to believe Slackware is a great distribution that I could use daily over all of the other distributions out there. Tell me what you appreciate about Slackware, why you choose to use it over other distributions, and the frustrations you face with it. Tell me anything about Slackware you think I should hear. |
Quote:
|
Hi!
Alright, I'll try to tell you, what I like about Slackware and why I think it is better than any other distro ( well any other distro, I've tried. ) 1. You could just install packages marked as required during install to get a small distro and there might be people who don't have a fast internet connection to do a netinstall, or people who might still have some dial up connection which is paid per online time. But instead of those a debian net install might be something good. 2. There are some packages which have depencies that aren't really there - like just compiled with that library or that function, which requires something being installed. Because Slackware doesn't do depency checking I can install software anyway and use it exept maybe the one or another function, that I perhaps don't even need. It is possible to create a link to a library which is the wrong version and then check if a programm is running while it won't even install with depecie checking. I can for example remove my xserver without removing kde, which might be good if I think my xserver installation is screwed up or just needs an update or something like this. I can just temporarily install and remove software for testing or because I need a library for compiling which conflicts with something different and then install the previous version again without any trouble. I think it makes things easier since it is my choice what to install and what to remove, and not the choice of some packetmanager - though I admit it is sometimes nice to have a program like apt-get doing this for you. 3. Don't know about irc, since I have never been in #slackware, but I think users on the forum are great 4. Well Software in Slackware is the way it is intended by the developor, not by the distributor - so it is the way it should be. Since there are absolutly no nice gui-tools to configure something you have to work with shell and texteditors and read about config files. It might not always be neccessary with other distris like suse or fedora. Apart from that it is just the fastest and most stable linux distris I have ever used. Kubuntu had been almost as stable, but never taht fast, and the not set root password was annoying for me, though it is easy to change. Others like RedHat or fedora are so much customized that it has nothing to do anymore with how the developor wanted his software to look and feel - I just don't like that. To me it is as if someone is telling me what is wrong or right and I just don't have the choice. Hpoe I could help |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'd say that most Slackware users don't have this attitude, and many prefer to solve their own problems without help. Many of the people you see on IRC or forums are not representative of the general Slackware community. Regardless, if you read the Slackware forums here, I'm sure you will find them helpful. There are many Slackers here with lots of experience. Quote:
And BTW - If you think Slackware is basic, you should try a *BSD. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If, after all that, you still don't get it: You gotta have slack to "get" slack. ;) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I guess its what you alluded to namely that unfortunately Linux distros are now going through a bloatware phase. That is really unfortunate in my opinion because the first thing anyone notices when comparing Linux to Windows is the speed. I was so disappointed I put 10.0 back on my computer. I was also disappointed that 2.6 wasn't the default kernel. I think this should have been Slackware 10.3 not 11.0. |
I feel the need to chime in here about the "slacware makes you learn linux" part of your post. I think slackware does indeed make you learn somewhat. It doesnt have all the fancy gui config options, so you actually have to edit the *.conf file. Once you start learning about all the config files, you start learning more about how things actually work on your system. But thats just my 2 cents.
|
Quote:
What's with this "learning" thing? Doing routine system maintenance is not learning unless you plan to be a full-time system administrator or a Linux specialist. Equating learning = installing some drivers + making your sound work + configuring xorg and video + compiling applications is just stupid. Learning has more to do with doing something actually productive on your computer and not just routine maintenance. I get tired of this argument after a while. |
These topics are so boring -- whether they are "I hate" or "I just don't get it" or "I love it" type. Think a little. Linux is basically just the kernel, and a distribution is a kernel plus apps (GNU on most cases), so basically you're just arguing about something that is built up of the very same pieces as something you are not arguing about. Stupid, eh? Especially when you think that the things that make distributions differ from each other are not so big after all..they all get to the same goal: a usable operating system, and they all use the same pieces: kernel and programs.
It's like if you're arguing about a pizza - you're actually just arguing about the way it's laid, and that has nothing to do with you since you can choose a better layout. The pizza itself is just a flat thing with stuff on board, and if you don't like the stuff, switch it. Or alternatively, if you hate the flat thing itself, why even talk about it -- you could as well use that time on something that matters. Foolish.. EDIT: and if you want to know why you should like the stuff, or the flat thing itself, don't ask it from the others since they can't possibly know. Go and taste, if you don't like, switch the stuff and taste again. Or switch the flat thing and don't taste again. |
b0uncer I couldn't agree with you more. I dislike both the fanboy kind of posts as well as the "constructive" criticism kind of posts each targetting a particular distro or Linux in general.
But that's the bane of online forums... |
I have tried many other distros as well, but Slackware seems to be the only distro that I can actually configure, for the most part, to do what I need it to do. I have found it interesting that many many people feel that Slackware is difficult to install and configure, due to its very basic installation procedure, as opposed to those of the likes of SuSE and Fedora. I have tried to use these distributions, and have had nothing but trouble with them, so I have come back to Slackware each time. While the installation and/or configuration problems I have had with SuSE and Fedora Core are most likely machine-specific to me, Slackware has been much more user-friendly in my case. In a few words, Slackware just works for me! If it doesn't work for you, then as someone else suggested, find something that does. There is no sense, at least in my opinion, to add unnecessary frustration to your computing experiences.
|
My first slack was downloaded via 56k dialup. There used to be a guide that told you which packages you absolutely needed to be able to get up and running, although I can't find it now.
Total download was very small for an OS - around 100mb I think. But on the whole I agree with b0uncer here. If it ain't for you then that's ok. Just try other distros until you find what you do like. The main difference will be in package management and configuration utilities. |
The original question was
Quote:
|
blue, green, milk, burgers, ...
Hi there
I like blue and green but not pink (when it comes to clothes). I don't eat cheeseburgers. I like lemon juice. I dislike anything spicy. My brother in the other hand does not eat whitout chili... Can't see how different that is from the way people like Linux distros (and in general, operating systems and to a greater extent, everything). Every distro has a "focus". I think the focus here is to let you do pretty much whatever you want. In Slackware that's the way I feel it and that's the way I like it. In RH the focus is enterprise, in Mandriva the focus is easiness, in Kurumin is absolute easiness, etc. etc. Actually there is no distro that I like 100%. But Slackware is the closest. What I do NOT like about Slackware?... No GNOME, the default kernel is 2.4, it's mostly i486 optimized and all my machines are i686 (not a big issue, but that's the way I like things). So I remasterized my own Slackware. Have I considered using LFS to do that? Yes. But Slackware is pretty functional and I did not want to reinvent the wheel. I took what I liked, added what I needed, deleted what I didn't use. Keeping most Slackware features because I liked it that way. Hey, if you like orange+apple+grenade juice, mixed, don't you mix them and make some sort of cocktail? About the deps tracking: I like not having them checked. If you like to check dependencies, well there are plenty of utilities that could be "ported" to Slackware (or maybe should consider using Debian or something else ;) ). I like compiling from source and Slackware gives me a sturdy platform to play my games. If Slackware ceased to exist I would use a custom Debian. I have been in contact with Debian and I like it too (not as much as I like Slackware but I do like it; I "touched" Debian before knowing nothing about politics- to be honest I don't care about the issue of Debian and politics I just say it's technically good to me). About the looks and feel and easiness, ANY distro can be as easy to use as one would want and with modern desktop environments most of them look the same (even other OSes like Solaris, BSD, .....). But it's ultimately a matter of taste and that's why www.linux.org says distros are like "flavors" of Linux. As a wise man once said, have fun! (and make love, not war ;) ) Greetings |
I don't think that the "Slackware vs other linux distros" discutions are good...people are different all over the world...what I think it's best, someone else thinks it's crap...the same is with linux distro's...I find Slackware the best fit for me..it's not perfect but it's the best for me...instead of this maybe some slacker would tell me why the hell can't I install subfs file system on my fresh Slackware 11 with 2.6.17.13 kernel..PS: I tried all kernels and I cant install it..and it worked perfectly in my Slack 10.2...
|
high resistance
I forgot to add that Slackware is (and probably all Linux distros are) very good for all the people watching (legal) XXX stuff. No viruses, that's like going out having intercourse whitout protection being pretty much immune to anything! (except of course running out of memory)
Go XXX! |
I have been using Slackware since 8.0 and liked it and would not try any other distribution. However, just recently a Debian-based distribution piqued my interest: Ubuntu. So I ordered the CD, played with in LiveCD mode, but didn't quite like it. Kubuntu came along, so I gave it a try. Now Kubuntu is my main distribution on my laptop. I have the "distro scars" to show that I'm experienced with Linux and now it's time for me to actually use and not worry about configuring it at all.
I'll probably go back to Slackware once the 2.6 kernel and KDE4 are made defaults and not extras or test. |
Here are two examples of what I like about slackware, compared to the only other distro I have used a lot. Mandriva.
1. Once you get it running, it's easier to use. Example of installing software. Mandriva: Go to Mandriva control centre -> sign in as root -> go to packages -> go to install software -> search for package -> select package -> install package -. go back to control centre -> exit. Slackware: Download package -> installpkg *.tgz (as root). You can of course use urpmi from the command line, but I never learnt how to do that as it wasn't necessary. Which brings me nicely to my second point. 2. Dependency checking. Example - installing hplip for printer. If using Mandriva urpmi, it would automatically download and install all dependencies. For the hp-toolbox gui, QT and some kde packages are required. They are absolutely unnecessary, but as they are listed in the mandriva rpm package they will be added. They are solely for the toolbox which tells you how much ink you've got among other things. If you don't have kde on your system, this would involve a massive download including qt, kdelibs and kdebase. With Slackware you just installpkg hplip. There are two good reasons why I prefer Slackware to Mandriva (Mandrake). |
Quote:
It's like someone who buys a certain car because it's easy to do routine maintenance on it, whereas someone else buys the same car because they like the seats. The first person could very well say that this car helps one learn how cars work, whereas the second person takes it to a shop for every oil change. The second person could say the first is wasting their time learning something that they don't care about, but it doesn't change the argument that the car is good for learning. Anyway, if you don't like these types of threads why do you always seem to read them and respond? |
The appeal of Slackware
It allows me to run Dropline Gnome.:)
|
Quote:
|
I'd like to say, I'm glad this is causing at least some discussion, which is what I was hoping for :) Thank you for all the replies.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
b0uncer, I apologize for making a topic you don't like - and the reason I'm asking from others is that I'm interested in reading about people's views, experiences, and thoughts about Slackware. I have used Slackware before, and I have formed opinions about it, but I want to know what the appeal is to other people who use Slackware daily(which I don't do) and are experienced and knowledgeable about it. To everyone else, I appreciate your sharing. I hope this topic remains a civil discussion :) |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...d.php?t=453528 Celeborn, see my two posts in the above thread, especially my Ford pickup truck analogy. |
Well put LiNuCe.
I can't really figure out why Slackware users are so often asked to defend their choice of distro. Then when you try to explain why, they tell you you're wrong. Then when you get irritated they say you are full of yourself. Please, anyone else who wants to ask this question again, just go try Slackware yourself. If you like it, great. If you hate it, that's fine too. What ever you decide, just keep it to yourself. Please. :rolleyes: Quote:
|
In response to the OP:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And knowledge that someone gains from configuring and administering a Slackware system should help them understand any Linux distribution a little better. Is there any better way to learn about any OS than from the basics? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I apologize, I'm not asking for anyone to defend their choice of Slackware. I'm simply asking more experienced Slackware users to share with me(and others) their Slackware experiences - what makes it appealing to them, what difficulties they've found with it, how they compare it to other distributions, and what they'd like to be different about it. It's all simply a matter of opinion, and a request made by me, so do not feel obliged to reply, or read it, if you don't want to. As I said, I just appreciate the replies because I think it makes for interesting discussion :) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
These tasks are not productive tasks. They are routine maintenance tasks and I cannot see why people need to brag about it all the time as though it's some special achievement. And they get old when you need to keep doing them again and again. Learning is when human intelligence is used to understand and analyze problems. Not by typing or memorizing a few commands or editing config files. I get sick and tired of people saying "Oh, you need to understand how your computer works under the hood. You're in complete control of everything etc. etc. etc." If that's what you want, you should learn Microprocessor architecture and pursue computer hardware engineering. |
Quote:
I did some un-official research via google and discovered the following: Code:
Debian sucks: 682 hits |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Compare Slackware, Gentoo, RedHat and SUSE for instance-- all of them are completely different in terms of configuration. Each are different in their own right and Slackware doesn't kind of represent "Linux" as a whole. That is my point. So you have many differences... Slackware may be better - I'm not disputing that or even bringing forward that argument. I'm just saying that Learn Slackware = Learn Linux argument is old, outdated and sounds condescending and elitist. |
I edited my post from before in the thought of not wanting to double-post, yet I found many new replies already posted by the time I finished :D I like this progress :D
On a side note, Franklin, I really like your screenshots. I must admit the Slackware "S" logo looks better than many others, and fits well as a sort of start-bar button(only speculating - maybe it does something else) ;) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
In my book,learning is about using your brains to solve problems which lead to productive results. I don't say it's not fun. It might be fun the first time you do it. It just gets old very fast and using a text editor certainly does not count as learning in my book. Anybody who brags about using vi/vim or editing text files are sad people who constantly need peer approval for boosting their self-esteem. |
Quote:
I should update those as I have changed it a little bit. I didn't use that wallpaper very long - too XP-ish. ;) |
Quote:
To Learn is defined by acquiring knowledge or skills by instruction, study and or experience. It's also memorization, becoming informed and even then, you can learn something totally by accident. I think when people say "Slackware teaches you about Linux" is because manually editing a file gains you more knowledge of what causes the effect or change you just made to your system. Take this example. Say you have two computer users, they're already familiar or have learned how to use a mouse and navigate with it, point and click, click on panels and open applications. One installs Fedora and the other Slackware. Fedora has a configuration option to change the runlevel of your system by clicking on the menu, navigating to a system configuration application and simply clicking the runlevel by reading, assuming both users have learned or know how to read. But when the user clicks the new runlevel option, it changed a configuration file by processes already obtained from previous learning experiences using computers. Now the user who installed Slackware, if unaware of what file to edit has to search, read documentation, ask questions online and or learn to use a command line editor (unless they use a GUI application for text editing but then again, Slackware doesn't start X by default so they might not know how or what file to edit to change the runlevel) to edit the inittab file. I'm sure there are Fedora or any other GUI driven Distro's out there where the users don't even know what the inittab file is or does. In such cases, I would consider that acquired or knowledge obtained, so in essence, Slackware lacking the point and click tools that most distro's might come with is teaching the end user more about Linux and how it works by editing those configuration files instead of relying on the GUI interface, point and click, something they already know how to do. And this is why I think distro's like Slackware do in fact teach users how to use their OS. I can change a tire on my car, considering that changing a tire is knowledge, but that doesn't mean I need to know how they make the rubber the tire is made of. You'd be suprised at the amount of people who can't change a tire on a car, I'm sure some don't even know they have a car jack in their trunk that comes standard when they buy a car.. -trickykid |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Okay, let me see if I can do an informal proof of the statement "Slackware is a good distro of learning sysadmining in general".
There are essentially only two ways to configure a Linux system: GUI tools, GUI-ish tools made by the upstream developers (e.g. alsaconf, xorgcfg), or config files. GUI tools are distro-dependent, and thus fail to provide a general solution to configuration. Therefore, only text files can be used to learn Linux configuration in general. The GUI-ish tools that are provided by the upstream developers are not distro-dependent. These tools are also appropriate for learning configuration in general. Slackware, through sane and predictable placement of config files, and because of good commenting in config files to guide the sysadmin, is conducive to use of config files. Slackware has minimal distro-dependent config helpers. Therefore, no energy is wasted from learning distro-dependent knowledge, because there isn't any. Alternatively stated, Slackware is a good distro for learning sysadming in general. Whew. The next step would be showing that learning sysadmining in general is connected to learning Linux, but I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader for now. There are also two extra plusses to Slackware. Slackware is still extremely close to the progenitor of nearly all distros, SLS. Because of how Slackware is designed, the generic HOWTOs from tldp apply particularly well with minimal distro-dependent adjustment. harishankar, even though you may think that config files are boring, to me they are the easiest and fastest way to just get the job done with minimal fuss. Also, they are pretty much the only way to configure a server using SSH and no X Window System. P.S. OT: I've commented on a couple of your LQ articles as per your invitation. |
I certainly am not disputing the fact that Slackware is ideal for certain kinds of learning. But i also think that kind of learning is only applicable if you want to become a system administrator by profession -- which was the point I made in my first post. And you certainly need knowledge beyond config file editing if you want to become one...
The point I made was that as a normal user of Linux, I wouldn't consider all that system configuration as part of my learning. And forcing normal users to "learn" this way is what I think is wrong logic. You can give them other reasons to use Slackware, but telling them "you need to learn how to do this to use this system otherwise hard luck" is a wrong approach I think. Like the saying goes, you can take a horse to water, but cannot make it drink. Don't mind me. :) I use Slackware because I am a Linux enthusiast. Plain and simple... |
Quote:
Btw, when they say "learn", they mean learning as they understand it, not you. Let me remind that Celeborn did not ask us to explain whether we like other people's opinions or not. He wants us to explain why we do or don't like Slackware. Please try to give an answer to that one. |
Sorry for the late post, but
Quote:
|
@ harishankar
you haven't chosen the easiest distros out there either. why is that? maybe because they were more chalenging than installing fedora or suse? and did you only install them once and that was enough to never ever forget anything about how to set them up? with you, possibly, but i have only been using linux since february and only been using slackware since about 3 weeks ago, and until about a week ago i had no idea what system-v or bsd-like init scripts were. Microsoft has done a nice job of keeping people in the dark, so that when something goes wrong with a user's computer, there is a huge "mistique" about what happened. virus? spyware? bad drivers? who knows....but what they do know is that they have to take their computers back to the shop, or call a technie. and what happens after that? windows is normaly just reinstalled, like MS suggests it should when things go wrong, and the user coughs up 70€ maybe this sounds out of context, but its what i ised to do because i had no option. even when i installed fedora: when i screwed something up, i would just reinstall the etire system because i had no idea where to start fixing. after using slackware for this short period of time, i no longer panic if things go wrong and have to go through a tedious reinstallation proccess. by getting to know right from the start what makes the OS tick does make a difference. and because i have learned all his new stuff, i am compelled to learn more. i want to try gentoo in my christamas hollidays, and have already ordered a book on bash scripting. 2cc |
Quote:
1. I got Debian on a DVD a long time ago with a magazine. I only reinstalled once in 3-4 years and that too because I accidentally deleted the Debian partition when I was trying out Arch Linux. 2. I could download Slackware easier because it's just 2 CDs (and only 1 required for installing a basic system) while others are not and requires more CDs. 3. As for Gentoo, I plain admit that I was intrigued by it because it was different from the rest. As I said I am a Linux enthusiast, I've tried Fedora, SUSE and RedHat in the past and I finally settled on Debian. The only major distro I've not tried yet is Mandriva (or Mandrake). I unashamedly claim that I am not the average user... I'm a Linux enthusiast. :) All I am saying is that it's all very well to ask users to "learn" their system inside out, but the fact is a majority don't consider that as a "learning" process and I quite agree with that when it's not something that increases their idea of productivity. It's only a few users like us who actually want to learn how the computer works. For the rest, its a tool to get the job done. So yes, there are alternatives for everybody. The other thing I wanted to point out is that the fact that we're using Slackware is no reason to feel superior to other users just because we know a little bit more about the system. |
Quote:
|
Yes, so there's definitely enough choices for all of us. I'm definitely a newbie in many aspects of *nix. :)
|
Like a genious once said: It's all relative.
Slackware seems to catch your interest so what best way to resolve your problem than trying it? It wont do any harm! (or are you afraid to become a slacker? :) )
For me slackware == challenge, I guess that explains why I like it. Hard to learn, true, but when you now your way around everything becomes more clear. Slackware is like any other distribution, it has its own audience ;) Bottomline is use what you like. BTW: people with an attitude are everywhere, theyr like fungus, growing everywhere :p :p :p |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:34 AM. |