That argument is plain flawed as I've explained tons of times before. No, you don't learn linux because you learn to ./configure, make and make install neither do you learn Linux because you learn modprobe snd_intel8x0. A chimp can be taught to do that (no offence to a chimp's intelligence).

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.

No need to apolgize. My statement was more a general observation. I just find it odd.

I did some un-official research via google and discovered the following:
So, if anyone has some explaining to do it those pesky Ubuntu and Fedora fanboys!

with slack you also seem to learn a lot about editing config files and solving problems that are applicable in other distros that you wouldn't learn with just a gui distro, imo. you don't just learn ./configure, make, and make install.

Yes, I am :) I'm currently using my own GNOME 2.14.3 packages for Slackware 10.2 : when I switch to Slackware 11.0 (probably in one or two days), I will release GNOME 2.14.3 packages for Slackware 11.0. However, I don't plan to build GNOME 2.16.x package in the near future as it does not worth the trouble(s) : I don't have time for now and GNOME becomes more and more time-consuming to properly package from scratch.

No, actually Slackware's config file placement and formats are totally different from many distros. Also many other distros use SystemV init.d and Slackware uses BSD style rc.d scripts.

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 I'm just saying that Learn Slackware = Learn Linux argument is old, outdated and sounds condescending and elitist.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 I like this progress

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)

but i didn't say anything about their placement, did i? the fact seems to be that using slack encourages one to do bare bones text editing and configuring of apps that often doesn't occur in other more gui-based distros. if your experience is different, that's fine. have fun with what you like.

I do agree with that but what does that have to do with learning?

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.

Ya, I replaced that butt-ugly kmenu icon (ick).
I should update those as I have changed it a little bit. I didn't use that wallpaper very long - too XP-ish.

Actually, I have to disagree to a certain degree..

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

Let me say right off the bat that I always run a complete installation of Slackware. That gives you at least 90% of the requirements for most packages. Most of the stuff I've compiled myself has no special requirements outside the packages supplied with Slackware. It isn't hard to read a README file and find out a package's requirements and see if you have them.
Please provide examples.
Thanks for your apology.
Maybe your current mindset isn't suited to Slackware. To me, it sounds a lot like you're trying to apply another distribution's philosophy/methodology to Slackware and it just ain't working for ya.

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...

I don't think this is what the people here are saying. They're saying that they learned more with Slack, and that's why they like it.

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 If it's something you've never done, then it is productive, hence learning.