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.
However, from my experience Debian was incredibly unstable on the above mentioned system. I installed it using the 40 meg Internet install .iso CD. I told it to install the basics, Xorg, kde, gnome, and the rest of the goodies to go along with it.
...
However, the GUI was very unstable, whether I used gnome or kde.
In 4 tries, using the internet ISO, I couldn't get a Debian install with a working X right out of the box either. I always chalked it up to Xfree86 being borked, not Debian though... (back then Debian hadn't switched to Xorg).
Gotta ask, if this was intended to be just a file server, why set up a GUI at all? My little Debian server, which sounds to be slightly less capable than yours doesn't even have a monitor hooked up. Only problem with that is my wife assumes it's not turned on and unplugs it once on a blue moon.
Which brings me to Debian. I installed Debian three separate times on a system I had cobbled together from parts I got from repairing computers for customers. Anything they didn't want back after system upgrade was up for first dibs of the tech that did the repair. The system in question is a PII-450, 500 megs of RAM, two DVD ROM drives (one is a burner), two PATA drives (20 gig for Slackware, 80 for XP), and a SATA 160 gig (half NTFS, half FAT32). It is presently a file server that dual boots into either Slackware or win2K. It runs Slackware like a champ, albeit a slow champ. The recompiled kernel chopped to the bare bones helps it run a bit faster, but it is what it is.
This same system also had Debian installed on it. I can say that I love Debian's package handling. There is no other distro that is so well supported from a pre-compiled programs point of view. Literally, if it exists in source code, someone somewhere has turned it into a .deb file.
However, from my experience Debian was incredibly unstable on the above mentioned system. I installed it using the 40 meg Internet install .iso CD. I told it to install the basics, Xorg, kde, gnome, and the rest of the goodies to go along with it. The first time I installed it, the installation failed while setting up have the libraries for X-windows, and when I say, "failed," I mean the computer locked up solid! After a hard reboot, it went back to where it was when it tied up, and started over. When it did finally finish, X-windows would not work at all. The second time I tried installing it, it locked up again, but when it finished after it was restarted, kde did come up, but it was very unstable. The third time, it went all the way through without a failure. However, the GUI was very unstable, whether I used gnome or kde.
I define that instability in many ways. It had video problems. It had networking problems. It had sound problems. You name a subsystem, it was problematic under Debian. I told the set up program to set up the stable version. Long story short, I wasn't impressed. Ironically, the Ubuntu family sets up and runs just fine on that system. Strange but true.
Blessed be!
Pappy
Thank you for the reply.
Did you ever determine what caused the instability in Debian? I run Etch at home on a Plll 667 with 256 MB RAM, it runs flawlessly. I also run Debian Etch on 9 computers at work; the computers range from a Pll 266 with 192 MB RAM up to a P4 with 684 MB RAM.
They all function perfectly. There is the possibility that you may have had some hardware incompatibility in that unit of yours, or you may have mis-configured the unit. That isn't the fault of Debian as there is excellent documentation about supported hardware at the Debian site (they also have a great forum here). I find it a bit odd that you have written off Debian based on your experience with one machine.....Each to his own:-)
But, sure, feel free to use Slackware 11, it is a robust, stable system ( I ran it until 12 was released). I run Slackware 12 on two Plll 800 IBM units at home; I've found 12 to be a welcome upgrade, it functions flawlessly.
Cheers:-)
I re-read the posts and I think most where wondering where you had problems (except for rkelsen).
Actually, I was too.
The biggest problem so far seems to be communication. Pappy has done nothing to specify exactly what his problems are. The only explicit statements he has made to date are that "Slackware 12 is crap," that "Debian is unstable," and that Slackware 11 works the same as the version he tried in 1994.
There have been no explanations, no trying any of the advice provided by myself and others and no answers to any of the requests for further information asked by those of us who have tried to be helpful. Just paragraph after paragraph of rhetoric.
If he really wanted help, there are several willing people (myself included) who've posted in this thread and others.
Thank you for the reply.
Did you ever determine what caused the instability in Debian? I run Etch at home on a Plll 667 with 256 MB RAM, it runs flawlessly. I also run Debian Etch on 9 computers at work; the computers range from a Pll 266 with 192 MB RAM up to a P4 with 684 MB RAM.
They all function perfectly. There is the possibility that you may have had some hardware incompatibility in that unit of yours, or you may have mis-configured the unit. That isn't the fault of Debian as there is excellent documentation about supported hardware at the Debian site (they also have a great forum here). I find it a bit odd that you have written off Debian based on your experience with one machine.....Each to his own:-)
But, sure, feel free to use Slackware 11, it is a robust, stable system ( I ran it until 12 was released). I run Slackware 12 on two Plll 800 IBM units at home; I've found 12 to be a welcome upgrade, it functions flawlessly.
Cheers:-)
hitest
No, I didn't. It could have been the system itself not jibing with something in Debian. I have heard many people tell me they have never had a lick of trouble with Debian...or at least the general crop of software glitches that infest all code, no matter the manufacturer of the machine that runs it. Of course, the machine that runs software is also less than perfect.
I might consider trying it again sometime, but I will have to get a hold of a faster and more generic computer. I use my laptops for business, and now that I have their operating systems set just how I want them, I don't want to do any experimenting.
Actually, if there is a real Linux project I want to bring into being, it's actually getting Gentoo to work properly. Now there's a project worthy of a computer with speed to spare. I have tried five times to get it working right, but I am hamstrung by not having a system fast enough to compile a full system with KDE, and all the goodies, including Koffice.
The biggest problem so far seems to be communication. Pappy has done nothing to specify exactly what his problems are. The only explicit statements he has made to date are that "Slackware 12 is crap," that "Debian is unstable," and that Slackware 11 works the same as the version he tried in 1994.
There have been no explanations, no trying any of the advice provided by myself and others and no answers to any of the requests for further information asked by those of us who have tried to be helpful. Just paragraph after paragraph of rhetoric.
If he really wanted help, there are several willing people (myself included) who've posted in this thread and others.
Anyhow, have a nice day!
Actually, I did list my problems. The initial set up on this particular machine (Toshiba Laptop) resulted in strange video problems in X-windows. I am pretty sure it was something wrong with the new Xorg libraries and video drivers. When I tried to call up KDE, the screen turned into sixteen blocks of white rimmed in black about two inches square. Xorgsetup, xorgconfig, and manually editing xorg.conf did not bring it out of that state. I could not get the GUI to work, no matter how I tried. It was most likely a refresh issue, but nothing I tried cured the problem.
I then installed it on my desktop system. It did install, and it also did start the GUI. It didn't start it as I had configured it, but it did start. Once started, I could access the FAT and NTFS partitions through konqueror, but I couldn't see the DVD ROM drives, or the native Linux drive. I got the error message as listed in the report on this issue. After adding my user name (root) into the /etc/group file, the message changed, but the fact that I couldn't access the drives didn't.
If I took the advice of hints and changes, and shut off hald, then I could see the hard drives, but I needed to physically mount the DVD ROM's through a konsole session.
As far as adding another user and using that account to log in, why should I be forced to do that? I use Slackware specifically because it has the root user account. I want to be able to put files where I want, and not have to ask the computer for permission. Hal means I have to go against that personal preference. Once again, it's a downside.
I appreciate the offers for help, but I am really not interested in playing with Slack-12 at the moment. I need to wait until I get a hold of a faster machine that isn't a laptop.
As my to rhetoric, thanks for noticing.
I am sorry sharing my opinion has caused so much consternation. It wasn't my intent to ruffle any feathers. However, I still fail to see why I should, for the edification of others, put a piece of software on my machine I find substandard.
It's just an opinion, people! I still dearly love Slack-11. I am using it right now to type this message. If it works, why change, especially if the upgrade doesn't?
In 4 tries, using the internet ISO, I couldn't get a Debian install with a working X right out of the box either. I always chalked it up to Xfree86 being borked, not Debian though... (back then Debian hadn't switched to Xorg).
Gotta ask, if this was intended to be just a file server, why set up a GUI at all? My little Debian server, which sounds to be slightly less capable than yours doesn't even have a monitor hooked up. Only problem with that is my wife assumes it's not turned on and unplugs it once on a blue moon.
Because I like GUI's, especially Linux GUI's. While I don't necessarily need to have the GUI up, when I do use that particular computer for some other operations I do with it, I like to have the GUI already up and running. It's a personal preference, nothing more.
I first started playing with computers when they were game systems with keyboards. The computer I had as a kid was a TI-99/4A. In order to get it to do anything other than play games, you needed to program it in BASIC; very basic BASIC. From there, I eventually graudated to DOS, then to DOS and Windoze 3.1. I also found Linux at that time. At that time, I used the console much more since Linux GUI's of that time were fairly limited.
Now, there are all kinds of GUI's for Linux. So why limit myself to console sessions only? I am not afraid of the console, I just prefer using a GUI.
At first, I couldn't understand the benefits of running as a non-root user either. This article explains a few things which you probably should be made aware of.
No, I didn't. It could have been the system itself not jibing with something in Debian. I have heard many people tell me they have never had a lick of trouble with Debian...or at least the general crop of software glitches that infest all code, no matter the manufacturer of the machine that runs it. Of course, the machine that runs software is also less than perfect.
I might consider trying it again sometime, but I will have to get a hold of a faster and more generic computer. I use my laptops for business, and now that I have their operating systems set just how I want them, I don't want to do any experimenting.
Actually, if there is a real Linux project I want to bring into being, it's actually getting Gentoo to work properly. Now there's a project worthy of a computer with speed to spare. I have tried five times to get it working right, but I am hamstrung by not having a system fast enough to compile a full system with KDE, and all the goodies, including Koffice.
Blessed be!
Pappy
Thanks for the reply, pappy_mcfae,
Yes, one day if you wish you may want to try Debian. I have seen on occasion that Debian has trouble with hardware. But as you know, any Linux distro has oddities. I heartily recommend the stable branch of Debian. Any low end P4 will be more than fast enough for Debian, it runs faster than Ubuntu.
Enough of my Debian rant:-) I've enjoyed our discussion.
Yes,I know what you mean about needing a fast system. I once successfully compiled KDE 3.5.6 on FreeBSD, but it took 3-4 days. As I run older Pllls I now compile smaller programs. Unfortunately Gentoo is a bit out of reach of my computers. I'm eagerly awaiting the release of FreeBSD 7.0 which should be released in the next few days, weeks (it is in code freeze now). FreeBSD is also a worthy project to consider.
At first, I couldn't understand the benefits of running as a non-root user either. This article explains a few things which you probably should be made aware of.
Hmm...that's some interesting stuff. I think I'll do a bit of experimentation with that idea in mind.
Yes, one day if you wish you may want to try Debian. I have seen on occasion that Debian has trouble with hardware. But as you know, any Linux distro has oddities. I heartily recommend the stable branch of Debian. Any low end P4 will be more than fast enough for Debian, it runs faster than Ubuntu.
Enough of my Debian rant:-) I've enjoyed our discussion.
Yes,I know what you mean about needing a fast system. I once successfully compiled KDE 3.5.6 on FreeBSD, but it took 3-4 days. As I run older Pllls I now compile smaller programs. Unfortunately Gentoo is a bit out of reach of my computers. I'm eagerly awaiting the release of FreeBSD 7.0 which should be released in the next few days, weeks (it is in code freeze now). FreeBSD is also a worthy project to consider.
Take it easy:-)
hitest
It's no rant. I know that after testing fifteen different Linux distros, there were definitely some winners and some real losers. Some set up hardware flawlessly, but had other minor glitches, like Slackware. Others couldn't find certain pieces of hardware. Others wouldn't set up at all. There truly was a rainbow of nuance of the experience of each distro I tested.
That is what I found completely fascinating about Linux, that one system could have so many variations, sub types, and such. Things had really gotten interesting in the time between the first time I geeked out with Slackware and this time of playing with some of the current Linux biggies. I really didn't expect the Linux scene to be nearly as active as it is. I was quite pleased that Linux had seemingly come into its own.
On the servers I'm using only 64 bit software. 32 bit software, like the Flash Player, I'm using on my work station without any problems.
I have used Slamd64 before but is not maintained anymore. As far I can see, they have not released the version 12. I need up to date software, support and security updates. Bluewhite64 is offering all this.
Not maintained anymore? Wow. You people don't read http://slamd64.com do you?
It clearly states on there he's working on Google Summer of Code.. specifically KDE4 related software enhancements.
What can be considered a fork? You need some platform to build your tool chain from. I have ported Slackware 12.0 to MIPS and used a preinstalled version of Debian to do an LFS and build everything from the ground up.
I am also porting it to SPARC at the moment using the same procedure with a Debian SPARC install. Does this mean I have forked Debian? The only thing I can say is that it's a long and hard thing to do since SlackBuilds are only a recipe to build a distribution. It needs some "cooking" (recompiling over and over again) time too before it becomes stable and usable.
I would personally use OpenBSD on all my systems as that OS represents truly free OS without any compromises.
But to play some latest games and to have trouble-free desktop experience I use Slackware. Slackware is rock in the chaotic sea of Linux. GNU/Linux gets so much changes and goes everywhere at once it's no wonder that somethings aren't stable and not working as they should. So far Slackware has proven it to be stable, up-to-date Linux distro.
I currently run Slackware only on my desktop. My laptop runs on OpenBSD and my server will follow as soon as I get my RAID-card to it. My only regret was that I wasn't persuasive enough to get Slackware on my workstation. I used my company's own version of Red Hat on it which run quite well but was quite irritating to update. Slackware would have been a valid choice as one of LQ slack member had already compiled binary packages for all the software I needed at work on our internal ftp-server
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
doesn't even have a monitor hooked up. Only problem with that is my wife assumes it's not turned on and unplugs it once on a blue moon.
