The previous Slackware releases

w1k0 · 12-02-2011, 08:45 PM

Inspired by the reappearing threads* such as Next Slackware Release? (>13.37) I ask when we’ll see the previous Slackware releases: 13.3[0–6], 13.2, 6.0, 5.0, 3.[7–8], and 1.1.1. It seems there’s lacking here** at least thirteen*** Slackware releases. Who owns them? Where they are? What they do?
_____________
* reappearing threads are boring.
** “here” is the shortened name of the real world.
*** you can believe in unlucky numbers – I’m not superstitious.

saulgoode · 12-03-2011, 12:22 AM

Those version numbers have been reserved for internal, private usage by Slackware recipients.

onebuck · 12-03-2011, 06:31 AM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by w1k0

Inspired by the reappearing threads* such as Next Slackware Release? (>13.37) I ask when we’ll see the previous Slackware releases: 13.3[0–6], 13.2, 6.0, 5.0, 3.[7–8], and 1.1.1. It seems there’s lacking here** at least thirteen*** Slackware releases. Who owns them? Where they are? What they do?
_____________
* reappearing threads are boring.
** “here” is the shortened name of the real world.
*** you can believe in unlucky numbers – I’m not superstitious.

Slackware releases.

Who owns them? Notice the copyrights for 3.3 & 13.37 evolution;

Quote:

excerpt from Slackware 3.3 COPYRIGHT.TXT
The Slackware Installation scripts are Copyright 1993, 1994 Patrick Volkerding,
Moorhead, Minnesota, USA. All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use of this software, with or without modification, is
permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

1. Redistributions of this software must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED
WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO
EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF
ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

-----

Slackware is a registered trademark of Patrick Volkerding and Walnut Creek
CDROM. Permission to use the Slackware trademark to refer to the Slackware
distribution of Linux is hereby granted if the following conditions are
met:

1. In order to be called "Slackware", the distribution may not be altered
from the way it appears on the central FTP site (ftp.cdrom.com). This
is to protect the integrity, reliability, and reputation of the Slackware
distribution. Anyone wishing to distribute an altered version must have
the changes approved by volkerdi@ftp.cdrom.com (i.e. certified to be
reasonably bug-free). If the changed distribution meets the required
standards for quality, then written permission to use the Slackware
trademark will be provided.

2. All related source code must be included. (This is also required by the
GNU General Public License)

3. Except by written permission from Walnut Creek CDROM, the Slackware
trademark may not be used as (or as part of) a product name, company
name, or registered domain name.

Note that you can still redistribute a distribution that doesn't meet these
criteria, you just can't call it "Slackware". Personally, I hate restricting
things in any way, but these restrictions are not designed to make life
difficult for anyone. I just want to make sure that bugs are not added to
commercial redistributions of Slackware. They have been in the past, and
the resulting requests for help have flooded my mailbox! I'm just trying to
make sure that I have some recourse when something like that happens.

Any questions about this policy should be directed to:
Patrick Volkerding <volkerdi@ftp.cdrom.com>

Quote:

excerpt from 13.37 COPYRIGHT.TXT;
The Slackware Installation scripts are:

Copyright 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 Patrick Volkerding, Moorhead, Minnesota, USA.
Copyright 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 Slackware Linux, Inc. Concord, CA, USA.
Copyright 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 Patrick J. Volkerding, Sebeka, MN, USA.
All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use of this software, with or without modification, is
permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

1. Redistributions of this software must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED
WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO
EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF
ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

----------------

Slackware is a registered trademark of Patrick Volkerding and Slackware Linux, Inc.
Permission to use the Slackware trademark to refer to the Slackware distribution
of Linux is hereby granted if the following conditions are met:

1. In order to be called "Slackware", the distribution may not be altered
from the way it appears on the central FTP site (ftp.slackware.com). This
is to protect the integrity, reliability, and reputation of the Slackware
distribution. (Note that moving entire directories like "source" or
"contrib" to a second CD-ROM is allowable, but leaving them out and
distributing a single source-free disc is *not*, as indicated below)
Anyone wishing to distribute an altered version must have the changes
approved by volkerdi@slackware.com (i.e. certified to be reasonably
bug-free). If the changed distribution meets the required standards for
quality, then written permission to use the Slackware trademark may be
provided.

2. All related source code must be included. (This is also required by the
GNU General Public License, and other licenses)

3. Except by written permission from Slackware Linux, Inc., the Slackware
trademark may not be used as (or as part of) a product name, company
name, or registered domain name.

4. Any approved use of "Slackware" must be followed by a circle-R, and must
acknowledge our ownership of the mark.

Note that you can still redistribute a distribution that doesn't meet these
criteria, you just can't call it "Slackware". Personally, I hate restricting
things in any way, but these restrictions are not designed to make life
difficult for anyone. I just want to make sure that bugs are not added to
commercial redistributions of Slackware. They have been in the past, and
the resulting requests for help have flooded my mailbox! I'm just trying to
make sure that I have some recourse when something like that happens.

Any questions about this policy should be directed to:
Patrick Volkerding <volkerdi@slackware.com>

Where they are? Official List of Mirrors
What they do? Slackware - Wikipedia

w1k0 · 12-03-2011, 07:30 AM

saulgoode,

thank you for the answer. Could you define the term “Slackware recipients”?

onebuck,

you quoted the excerpts from the COPYRIGHT.TXT files provided with the official releases of Slackware 3.3 and Slackware 13.37. I asked about Slackware releases that are the complement of the official set of releases.

allend · 12-03-2011, 09:42 AM

Ahh young grasshopper, your question reveals a mind still trapped in the rational number field. You must learn that the mind of the great creator works in the infinitely larger transcendental number field where versions such as 13.37 Release candidate pi also occur.

Quote:

Sun Mar 27 08:28:47 UTC 2011
There have been quite a few changes so we will have one more release
candidate: Slackware 13.37 RC 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716.

Where the novice perceives an illogical gap, the great creator realises a logical increment.

GazL · 12-03-2011, 10:07 AM

Ahh, yes the lost Slackware releases!

Some believe that they were so full of awesomeness that the creator concluded that the world simply wasn't ready for them and just like Arthurian legend, they will return to us when our need is greatest. Others believe that he just skipped some numbers for the fun of it (A rose by any other name and all that), However this later belief is somewhat implausible and those who hold it are inevitably mocked to within an inch of their lives for even mumbling it.

What do I believe?
...that this forum always gets weird when current goes quiet.

sycamorex · 12-03-2011, 10:36 AM

Some people say that the lost Slackware releases do exist buried deep down the Cave of Kyre Banorg; some people say that they were only released in Matrix; yet some other people say that those releases never existed in the first place. Whole books were devoted to this topic. Marcel Proust's "In search of Lost Slack" and Samuel Beckett's "Waiting for Bob" are just some of the examples. We have only bits and pieces of information but what we know for certain is that at some point those releases will resurface and humankind will be be happy again.

onebuck · 12-03-2011, 12:25 PM

Quote:

What do I believe?
...that this forum always gets weird when current goes quiet.

HAL: PV, the lost versions please

PV: Is that you Bob?

Hal: No Pat, Hal

PV: I thought you were lost

Hal: Versions please

PV: Ok, I bet you are Bob reincarnate. Uploading.... _......

Hal: 01010000 01110010 01100001 01101001 01110011 01100101 00100000 01000010 01101111 01100010

PV: Praise Bob

onebuck · 12-03-2011, 12:48 PM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by w1k0

<snip>
onebuck,

you quoted the excerpts from the COPYRIGHT.TXT files provided with the official releases of Slackware 3.3 and Slackware 13.37. I asked about Slackware releases that are the complement of the official set of releases.

The changes between releases beginning with 3.3 copyright was presented. 13.37 copyright was provided as references for the current stable so a comparison can be made. Progressive changes between the stable releases for earlier versions is very apparent if you look at each version. Functionality between each was dependent on the kernel and upstream software along with PV's script changes. PV did make changes to the scripts between versions, notice the copyrights for the scripts in 13.37 now. If you look back to version 3.1 the copyright notice was included from there on. I happened to have the 3.3 open at the time of these posts.

If you are speaking of the 'stable versions' for each release then look at RELEASE_NOTES, UPGRADE.TXT & CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT(this text file was added starting at ver 11.0). At 11.0 onward to 13.37 read the text files to discern the content differences between the text files to provide a detailed map of changes.

Versions for historic Slackware 1.0 to 3.9 you will need to do some digging.

For Slackware version RC(release candidate) just do a search for the Slackware version # along with RC;

Quote:

DuckDuckGo Search: Slackware historic 11 release candidates

One example;

Slackware 11.0 release candidate 3 [LWN.net]

You can get information if you use good search keywords. The RCs for each version are very interesting.

HTH!
__________________

Regards and God speed,

Gary

The Magic is in the Magician not the wand! ©

Slackware®-Links | Slackware® Unofficial Announcement Repository | Slackware® Home
Slackware® Essentials | Slackware® Basics | How to Ask Questions the Smart Way
Linux Counter # 249288 Get counted!

audriusk · 12-03-2011, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onebuck

Hal: 01010000 01110010 01100001 01101001 01110011 01100101 00100000 01000010 01101111 01100010

For those who do not speak binary, here's Python translator:

Code:

>>> data = '01010000 01110010 01100001 01101001 01110011 01100101 00100000 01000010 01101111 01100010'
>>> print ''.join(chr(int(b, 2)) for b in data.split())

GazL · 12-03-2011, 01:56 PM

hmmm. I always had the feeling that HAL would have spoken EBCDIC

w1k0 · 12-03-2011, 05:31 PM

Hi gals and guys,

thank you for your jokes. Not all of them are equally amusing but I’m grateful for your attempts to say or write something funny in reply to my question.

Hi sycamorex,

I like your answer the most – at least so far. Thank you for the deep cultural background as well as for the optimistic vision of the future of the humankind. I like “Waiting for Bob” and the other Beckett’s works. Maybe I should try now “In search of Lost Slack”?

Hi onebuck,

you tried twice to be serious – in posts #3 and #9. Unfortunately you missed twice the topic of that thread that isn’t serious at all. I respect your knowledge and your eloquence but the present thread isn’t the place for such kind of the knowledge and the eloquence. Fortunately in the post #8 you managed to be amusing so thank you for that post.

Hi Anonymous,

you found my post #4 unhelpful. I don’t know certainly who you are though I have some presumption. If you still think my posts are unhelpful feel free to find the present post unhelpful too.

onebuck · 12-03-2011, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GazL

hmmm. I always had the feeling that HAL would have spoken EBCDIC

Actually HAL is one letter ahead of IBM!

onebuck · 12-03-2011, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by w1k0

Hi gals and guys,

thank you for your jokes. Not all of them are equally amusing but I’m grateful for your attempts to say or write something funny in reply to my question.

<snip>
Hi onebuck,

you tried twice to be serious – in posts #3 and #9. Unfortunately you missed twice the topic of that thread that isn’t serious at all. I respect your knowledge and your eloquence but the present thread isn’t the place for such kind of the knowledge and the eloquence. Fortunately in the post #8 you managed to be amusing so thank you for that post.

<snip>

Historically PV has treated version numbers lightly. If you look at ver .99 & then the jump to 1 then on to 1.1.2. His leaps to 7 major were to satisfy users that had the sense version numbers actually mean something;

Quote:

excerpt from Slackware - Wikipedia;
In 1999, Slackware's release number jumped from 4 to 7. Patrick Volkerding explained this as a marketing effort to show that Slackware was as up-to-date as other Linux distributions, many of which had release numbers of 6 at the time, and Volkerding expected them to reach version 7 by the time of the jump

I understood your intent but I took the opportunity to provide users that should read this thread with some useful information. Joviality is good but to know the origins is better.

Praise Bob!

R3V0LV3R · 12-03-2011, 06:37 PM

They are in the bush.

Getting stronger.