Slackware is inherently secure by the simple fact that it is an open book. By being an open book it insures the administrator knows what is going on.

With other distros you hope and pray with Slack you know

It's probably safe to ignore ciol. According to my mail archives, he's the guy who thinks Slackware should be on a "rolling release" schedule (ala Gentoo), that older stable releases should get the latest versions of major software suites (such as kde) in /patches, and that every time someone finds a *possible* "security" hole like a local system DoS, even if it requires non-standard configuration and even Al Viro says it's "difficult to trigger," Slackware should release an updated package, regardless of what else it's possibly/probably going to break. I'm still waiting on a report of a Slackware system that was compromised due to something that wasn't fixed in an update to /patches...

I agree, rworkman:-) I think ciol is best ignored.
With regard to the future direction of Slackware I read the intel current changelog on a regular basis and I'm very happy with the direction that Slackware is going. Mr. V. introduces changes in each successive Slackware release when new programs, additions have been thoroughly tested. I know from prior experience that when the next version of Slackware is released it'll be stable, secure, and bullet-proof:-)

I read with interest the comments posted by the Slackware users and I regret to note that what started off as interesting discussion on what lies beyond the horizon for Slackware seem to have degenerated to a discussion of what is to be included in Slack and when. Frankly I do not see the benefit on this discussion for the obvious reasons that a competent user can modify his installation to his taste or go for a Slack derivative install – Dropline Gnome, Slamd, or even Zenwalk and VL.

Clearly the concern I would see for a professional Slackware administrator have higher implications than these. One has to consider that Slackware is not backed up by huge commercial interest that other distros enjoy. Any organization investing would need to know the financial standings of Slackware. Clearly this is not available, and then it is also clear that Slack rests totally on one man’s shoulders and a few selected and trustworthy volunteers. I do not see any faults with such a set-up, but it would look risky for a long-term investment.

Will Slackware still be here in five more years? We cannot say but I certainly hope so.
Will Ubuntu still be here in five more years? I think so.
Will RHEL still be here in five more years? I definitely think so.

Now suppose you need to invest some money on one of the above, which one would you choose?

I use Slackware because it much more fun than any other distro I can think of, but when you need to take corporate decisions, you need to substantiate your arguments.

What I would like to see is not a Roadmap for the Slack 13 or 12.2. That would be nice to have but not very useful since the releases are quite regular and coherent already. The users trust Pat enough and I don’t not think that a release roadmap is really needed. What we need is a longer term plan. Are there any mitigation plans if Pat goes sick or simply decides to have a long holiday? Are there any dates by which support for a particular release expires. We all agree that Slackware is high quality Linux distro, but we only have technical arguments to substantiate them. How would one project these terms to an accountant or a lawyer?

I consider my self lucky that I am able to install, run and hack my Slackware, but will I be able to show it off to my daughter in five years time when she has reached the age of unraveling the machine behind an OS? I am already looked upon as dinosaur by other Linux gurus who use other respectable distros like Gentoo and Ubuntu. The lack of support of dependencies gives this perception. I just live in the faith that truly this is only a perception and that Slackware will strive on as the default KISS Linux distribution for the ambitious newbies and professionals alike.

Ubuntu is a free product because Mark Shuttleworth chooses to inject his own cash into it. Will the "free" Ubuntu be here in 5 years? That is up to Shuttleworth. I'm guessing it most likely will be.
RHEL will be be here in 5 years.
Slackware is Mr. Volkerding's livelihood. Slackware will be here in 5 years.

Why?

I worked for a company that made a sizable investment into SCO and the hardware that would run it. Look at where SCO is, now.

-JJ

Dear JJ,

It was part of my training - to check the financial stability of a company before entering into a long term relationship. Probably some women do it as well, I need to ask about that :-).

Chris

I would think twice before consider using RHEL for a small business
Not accounting that RHEL year subscription (the basic one) costs 10 times the Slackware year subscription,
when you use Redhat, you are tied to it in some way, there are Redhat specific ways how to configure system, servers, etc. The knowledge you acquire is mostly valid for Redhat only, I admit this is not neccessarly a bad thing though, if you don't want to change. But in my opinion, there are too much dependencies.
I see Linux as an open system, if I choose to run Linux in my company, it would be for that reason, but I guess I am biased, I know some programming languages, I know how to configure the servers I use without GUI, so I don't see the point of using Redhat for my part

Thank you ChrisAbela, for making my original intentions with this thread more clear.

BTW, I stumbled on this little gem: http://slashdot.org/interviews/00/03/17/1120205.shtml

It's pretty old, but still good reading.


/Thomas

That's a fairly standard thinking in large businesses. However, I'm not sure that it carries as much weight in an OpenSource environment as it does with the more traditional closed source providers.

If you invest in a closed solution, SCO for example, and SCO do something stupid like get themselves involved in frivolous lawsuits and go out of business (Oh, Wait!... ) you're out of options and you're screwed. If you've invested in a Slackware solution, you have all the source, all the build scripts and should the worst happen, you can either call on your in-house support guys to keep things ticking, or contract in some additional expertise if and when you need it.

If you no longer have a good in-house tech team because you outsourced / off-shored it all to the cheapest bidder in Bangalore in order to save a few bucks, then I'd suggest a revolver to the temple and serves you right for not thinking ahead.

These are some really good questions. It would be nice if Pat addressed them, or perhaps if he already has then could somebody share this with the rest of us?

However, even if Pat discontinued development with no successor I think (in a way) Slackware would still live on. Sure, it might not be called Slackware, but I am confident that there would be people who would band together and try to keep it alive. There are already so many derivative children distros of Slackware that I find it unlikely that it would slip away in the night. I think it would take a long time for it to be completely gone. So, lawyers and accountants may scoff that the Slackware company is small, but even big companies can topple over quickly. Slackware has a longer history than any of the other distros, and it has been more stable over that history than any other. There is no official "Slackware certification", however, and that may make some companies uncomfortable

I think quite a few people would like this, and Robby has a pm-utils testing thread that should be of interest to those people. If a lot of Slackware users with sweet laptop setups share enough configuration settings with the community then perhaps some eventually might be included in the distro.

I think any one with a discerning eye would take in to consideration that Slackware is the oldest. Many distribution have come and gone but Slack has stayed. The fact that Slack is so vanilla insures that Most Linux users with any experience, of worth, can work on it.

To be more specific I think the age and history of Slackware is convincing, in of its self, that Slackware is here to stay.