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.
As many times as you like! I'm a generous and patient man, Comrade Bass!
BUT, I wonder when you will notice that you loosed...
So, did you remember what you said me? That's IMPOSSIBLE for Slackware to switch to latest kernel, because reasons?
Guess what? It happened. This IMPOSSIBLE happened already.
Honestly, I hope that one day you will leave your glass castle made on top of Slackware 14.2 and you will enjoy the truly modern Slackware 15.0 - it's so far away from what you use that probably you will feel using an entirely different Linux distribution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal
What makes you, people, to believe that the next 5.13.x kernel will be in a better shape than the 5.10.x ?
Absolutely nothing.
Well, I believe that 5.13.x will be absolutely better than 5.10.x for the simple reason that it's NOT a LTS release, where they to throw all crap of half-tested code, like they do on any respectably LTS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal
Every new kernel is a roll of the dice. The developers might do a pretty good job of maximizing the chance that the roll will be a positive outcome, but it's by no means guaranteed. With Pat putting the next kernel into testing/, hopefully it will get the bugs knocked out, but if it ends up being a crap version, we're either stuck with a broken version until it's either fixed in newer updates or the next release comes out or stick with an EOL version.
It's sad that you believe us being some toddlers, so you can scary us with the Slender Man...
Come on, Comrade Bass! Believe or not, some people think!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal
I have absolutely no problem rolling my own kernel (I've ran 4.4, 4.9, 4.13, 4.14, 4.18, 4.19, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.10 on my 14.2 system, most with my own config) if some update breaks my system or I want extra functionality found in a kernel not included by my Slackware version, but not everyone is comfortable with tinkering with their kernel.
That's great! So, you will have no issues to enjoy forever your beloved LTS kernels.
Last edited by LuckyCyborg; 06-09-2021 at 04:18 PM.
In fact, there is no more LTS on Slackware - we are free of enterprise craps.
And this is fantastic! Thanks, Mr. Volkerding!
I don't think you get it, read the comment I was responding to, and maybe try re-reading the change log...
Code:
Sooner or later we will end up on an LTS kernel again, and at that
point we'll just roll with that one.
Most users don't give a shit whether it's LTS or not as long as it works,
so the installer needs to install one by default if a choice were to be offered.
I don't think you get it, read the comment I was responding to, and maybe try re-reading the change log...
Code:
Sooner or later we will end up on an LTS kernel again, and at that
point we'll just roll with that one.
Most users don't give a shit whether it's LTS or not as long as it works,
so the installer needs to install one by default if a choice were to be offered.
Yeah, you are right! I am a bit slow, probably...
Please explain this to stupid me:
Code:
It's unlikely that we'll see another LTS prior to
release, so the plan for maintenance is to keep following the latest kernels
as needed for security purposes. If that means we have to jump to a new branch
while supporting the stable release, we'll start the kernel out in testing
first until we've had some feedback that it's safe to move it to the patches
directory.
In my ignorance of noble art of English, I understand that our BDFL has the intention to release the Slackware 15.0 before there will be another LTS kernel released. And even he explain how there will be /testing on the stable release of Slackware 15.0
So, the ISOs of Slackware 15.0 will have NO kernel from LTS series - it will be added (hopefully, eventually) later on /patches after the release is done.
Please explain me, what option you want on that installer, when there will be no such LTS packages on those ISOs?
Last edited by LuckyCyborg; 06-09-2021 at 05:43 PM.
So, did you remember what you said me? That's IMPOSSIBLE for Slackware to switch to latest kernel, because reasons?
Guess what? It happened. This IMPOSSIBLE happened already.
Find a quote from me saying it's impossible. It's not there. All I said is it was unlikely because it hadn't happened in the past. Unlikely != impossible. It's unlikely until it isn't. This is not a "gotcha".
All people can do to guess on the future of Slackware is by basing it on what's in the past and what has been said by Pat and team. There weren't indications before this, so that led to me believing it was "unlikely". Before pulseaudio was added during 14.2's development, people would've said it'd be unlikely to be added as there were no indications it was going to happen. PAM wasn't as much of a surprise since there'd been talk for the months prior indicating it was something Pat had been toying with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg
I hope that one day you will leave your glass castle made on top of Slackware 14.2 and you will enjoy the truly modern Slackware 15.0 - it's so far away from what you use that probably you will feel using an entirely different Linux distribution.
I'm not sure why this is such a big deal to you... I plan to start using it once 15.0 is released. I might set up a VM once the RCs are released to start getting my packages built to make for a relatively easy upgrade. Why do you want me on -current so bad? 14.2 is working great for me after upgrading the kernel and the few packages associated with mesa. I don't feel any aging issues as everything I try and run works fine once I got my GPU from a few years ago properly supported (which I think I told you elsewhere only required upgrading 3 to 5 Slackware packages).
When tracking 14.2, I don't need to worry about an upgrade of poppler, boost, icu4c, python, perl, etc breaking my non-official packages that were built against them.
I doubt it will feel new to me other than the changes switching to Plasma5 (I handled the KDE3 to KDE4 transition fine and I'll manage KDE4 to Plasma5 fine). I've been through at least 10 version upgrades of Slackware without any major issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg
Well, I believe that 5.13.x will be absolutely better than 5.10.x for the simple reason that it's NOT a LTS release, where they to throw all crap of half-tested code, like they do on any respectably LTS.
And that is a belief that may or may not actually be true. We have to wait and see. Some on the forum had issues with 5.11. Not being an LTS release doesn't guarantee that the release will be smooth and being an LTS release doesn't mean it will be broken. In the past 5 years (since 4.4), I can only remember two LTS releases that people had issues with initially, 4.14 and 5.10. I know there have been other kernels that were problematic when released, but since they were non-LTS, the issues didn't last since the new kernel came a few months later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg
It's sad that you believe us being some toddlers, so you can scary us with the Slender Man...
Come on, Comrade Bass! Believe or not, some people think!
It's sad that you believe that everyone wants a bleeding edge kernel. My HTPC is still chugging along with a 4.19 kernel and I have no desire to upgrade it (until 15.0 is released). My desktop will probably continue to have kernels that diverge from the patches that Pat will include in 15.0, but that's my choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyCyborg
That's great! So, you will have no issues to enjoy forever you beloved LTS kernels.
You seem to be missing that there's a lot of non-LTS kernels in that list. I never said I only want to run LTS kernels. I don't believe everyone should run LTS kernels. I just believe that Slackware releases should be tracking an LTS kernel, not the latest stable. This is to try and minimize the chances of a broken kernel release breaking a stable system. I guess Pat's plan to stick with the latest stable until the next LTS release is a happy medium for a lot of people. If I had my choice, 15.0 would ship with the latest LTS as the main kernel and offer the latest stable in testing/. However, it's not my choice, and this isn't some do or die thing for me, so I'll be fine sticking with Pat's decision. I'll still happily install 15.0 on my systems no matter what kernel it is using.
I will also continue to run whatever kernel I feel like (LTS or not) and may or may not track what's provided by Pat... as should anyone who feels comfortable with that.
Please explain me, what option you want on that installer, when there will be no such LTS packages on those ISOs?
The obvious answer is that it would be the previous LTS that was being used added back to the ISO, allowing people to choose between the two. It really wasn't that hard to figure out...
That is rather the point. Some version of a non-LTS kernel is more likely to have bugs at some point than the late versions of an LTS kernel, because the LTS kernel absorbs more debug/deploy cycles without large (and proportionately bug-inducing) changes being introduced.
That's a big call. Bugs can surface after 10 years.
Meanwhile, I've got a non-LTS kernel running on a pre-alpha release of Slackware64 (installed from the -current tree in July 2019) which powers a critical piece of infrastructure in my office... Crazy, right... But guess what? It hasn't failed once in the (almost) 2 years since I set it up. Current uptime is 91 days, because I had to power it down 3 months ago to move the box to a new physical location within the office. I might consider upgrading it when Slackware 15 is released, because it'll probably be due for an upgrade by then anyway.
Not sure why, but after the last major update in -current (kernel/kernel-firmware/gcc) almost a gigabyte of free space was freed up on my system partition. Does anyone know the reason?
Not sure why, but after the last major update in -current (kernel/kernel-firmware/gcc) almost a gigabyte of free space was freed up on my system partition. Does anyone know the reason?
Nope, it's not the kernel.
Believe or not, it's the GRUB, which in the previous package version had some huge boot images included.
Last edited by LuckyCyborg; 06-10-2021 at 10:24 AM.
It's unlikely that we'll see another LTS prior to
release, so the plan for maintenance is to keep following the latest kernels
as needed for security purposes. If that means we have to jump to a new branch
while supporting the stable release, we'll start the kernel out in testing
first until we've had some feedback that it's safe to move it to the patches
directory.
In my ignorance of noble art of English, I understand that our BDFL has the intention to release the Slackware 15.0 before there will be another LTS kernel released. And even he explain how there will be /testing on the stable release of Slackware 15.0
So, the ISOs of Slackware 15.0 will have NO kernel from LTS series - it will be added (hopefully, eventually) later on /patches after the release is done.
Please explain me, what option you want on that installer, when there will be no such LTS packages on those ISOs?
Nobody's calling you names, but you miss the point then start to argue for the sake of arguing
IF the ISO's were to offer more than one kernel (hypothetical scenario in the comment I was responding to)
then a sane default (in other words, an LTS) makes perfect sense for most users who wouldn't know the difference or
have no idea what kernel is right for them.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
