Again, the differences between Slackware and RHEL are so high that there are no such terms for comparation. They are in totally different leagues.

It is like excusing a brilliant but alone boat carpenter that he does not finished a yacht even after 4 years, saying that also the US Navy needs more than 5 years to build a new nuclear battle ship.

1 members found this post helpful.

Why "even"? Do you consider 4 years too long to hand build a fine yacht or a superb operating system?

As a reference to my POV on this, for several years I owned and ran a fine woodworking shop specializing in antique furniture and art. For the many TLDR clients I posted a sign which read....

Superb Quality!

Fast Delivery!

Low Price! ....


Pick two.

1 members found this post helpful.

Well, if I'd would have to go hysteric, it would be more about the unforeseeable aspect than the duration of the cycle. If Slack is now a rolling, ok. If 4 years is seen as a decent cycle duration for the future, all right. 18 months is just what I'd like (the rule being that the more your cycle is short, the easier it is to stall big things between each releases, but the shorter you have to maintain the releases if you don't want to drown). It's a mere wish/suggestion, not the main point.

They're both Linux distributions that put out a new stable release every several years. It's perfectly valid to compare them.

Even in your rather poor analogy, it is totally "excusable" for the carpenter to take that long, since he is methodically hand-crafting a beautiful machine with little help. It's not like he needs an excuse, anyway. He can build his boat at whatever pace he likes.

1 members found this post helpful.

No, it is not valid to compare them, because they have different business model, philosophies, target audience and features set.

For example: Slackware relies on the kernel.org shipped kernels, while RHEL relies in their own heavily customized kernels, where they keep a particular release and with RedHat's almighty man power, they heavily backport bugfixes and features - at least according with some friends of mine, who uses RHEL in the servers from companies where they work.

True! And that's exactly WHY I am disappointed by seeing your excuses.

Because I believe that that particular "boat carpenter" does not need and does not want those excuses.

If you can quote where I made an excuse, your comment would have some validity, but you can't, because I didn't. You are arguing for the sake of it about something that isn't even the topic of the thread. Grind your axe elsewhere.

2 members found this post helpful.

I am looking forward to KDE5 and XFCE 4.14. When that happens we may have a beta release.
I may need to read my tea leaves or speak with a Druid to determine the release date. Heh.

1 members found this post helpful.

I'm not sure what the fuss is about. It was not my intention to make RHEL seem "bad" or anything. It's a pretty good server OS, and the de facto world standard OS for enterprise infrastructure. Just pointing out that Slackware's release schedule isn't even that long compared to some.

Yeah, wasn't reading it right. Thinking of updates.

It isn't. Just comparing ITS release schedule with that of Slackware is like comparing apples with oranges. Both are nice fruits, but not like each other.

1 members found this post helpful.

I agree, from user perspective there are no much differences.

However, there are some. Default 4.14 looks a bit better because it completely switched to gtk3. With 4.12 I need gtk-xfce-engines to tune it to look not that depressive. Also, 4.14 has tasks grouping in a task bar. Xfwm4 is a bit better (fixed issue with gray splash when compositor enabled)

As someone pointed somewhere that Slackware 14.2 is like Windows XP, I would name such Slackware 15.0 with KDE4 and Xfce 14.2 as Windows XP SP3.

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't care 15.0 release anymore. I got tired of waiting and switched to -current.

After 15.0 is released I will stay on -current. This way I wouldn't have to think about 15.1, 15.2 or 16.0 :-)

And frankly, Slackware -current is of better quality than any stable release of debian. So, I'm ok with it doing updates 2-3 times per month.

1 members found this post helpful.

Distrowatch lists XFCE as 4.12.5 for slackware-current..is it true? No XFCE 4.14 yet in current??

Not yet. I expect we'll get 4.14 in the next while.