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.
Interesting thread. I do not see the post as trolling or click-bait, especially in light of recent threads where so many people offered Pat suggestions about improving Slackware. I hope this thread can be used as a continuation of that process.
I assure you it is was posted with good intentions. I am trying to understand other peoples motivations to understand better mines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by upnort
I have streamlined the "bloat" removal process as well as streamlined the desktop configuration.
Your post was very insightful. Would you mind sharing more about this process? Maybe I can learn something new and apply to mine setting.
I haven't stopped using Slackware it is my heavy duty workhorse, my spearhead, etc., but I do have 2 more distros (Debian and Ubuntu) and FreeBSD in my PC.
Given that you have tried a more complete repository and the convenience of the debian package manager what is still motivating you to use Slackware?
Wonderful! This thread is turning out to be informative and very interesting. Thank you.
Indeed, the knee-jerk low star ratings were premature. I still voted - 'good' - it's not quite excellent - but certainly interesting. People should think twice before voting [I hope they do that in all cases... or maybe not.. explains a lot].
Distribution: Slackware/Salix while testing others
Posts: 1,718
Rep:
This is an interesting thread, and at the same time it does have a hint of trolling. Why, because the assumption behind the question is that there is something wrong with Slackware. This has been rehashed many times over the years, and also is not unique to Slackware, you see similar threads on other fora. Why did you stop using Ubuntu? Why did you stop using Debian? etc....
A more productive question would be (and has been asked before), why do you use Slackware instead of other Linux distros or BSD etc...?
1) Why did you stop using Slackware?
I haven't.
2) Are you going to switch back again and why?
Still using it. I do test other distros in VM's and sometimes other partitions, and I am quickly reminded why I use Slackware. So I guess that counts as "going/coming back". Windows is rightly confined to a VM like the little bastard child that it is.
3) Which distribution did you switch to and why?
As long as Slackware is supported/offered, I don't think I would switch. If I did, it would probably be one of the BSD's (perhaps FreeBSD).
PS: Things like this has the philosophy of Slackware reign supreme: In Debian and its legion of derivatives the package maintainers make really silly decisions. Try to install Xfe and it pulls in among other things Audacious as a recommended dependency. Ref: https://packages.debian.org/stretch/xfe
So yes, dependency hell is still around and if you throw in systemd, dependency hell is ever growing. Also, I trust smaller repos because it is easier to ensure they are secure, the larger the repo the greater the risk of insecure, unmaintained, poorly packaged or outright fubar you can encounter. Again Debian SSL fiasco rings a bell. Also ponder the thought that if you have 50,000 packages and 1,000 packagers, that means on average they maintain 50 packages each. Oh and then there is the entire split every package as if it is an atom. https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0605102807.htm
In Debian and its legion of derivatives the package maintainers make really silly decisions
The way they prepare packages is very annoying. Preparing more of your system by yourself might be time-consuming; but undoing preprations made by others is just absurd.
It also happens in Slackware with the stock packages and scripts; but it doesn't compare in magnitude and multitude to other distros.
The single annoying package preparation in Slackware, for me, was the one for sudo; Pat just threw every single insult set into it for some reason, haha.
Anyway, I still think that there are sensible reasons to use other distros; I am aware that Slackware has its limitations in terms of serving some use-cases. It just fits well with mine.
Your post was very insightful. Would you mind sharing more about this process? Maybe I can learn something new and apply to mine setting.
Yes, I could share Ubuntu streamlining, but this is the Slackware forum.
Big picture -- and this strategy applies to Slackware too, I have used a shell script that tweaks certain things, such as displaying logs in text format, not using the silly so-called predictive network card names, removing and installing specific packages. I don't use the script much these days because after I pruned the bloat and disagreeable design decisions I created partition images. Now when I want to create a new system I manually partition the disk and copy the images.
At one time I had a similar script for my Slackware installs. As the years progressed I had my Slackware installation so fine-tuned that I seldom perform fresh installs and with my backups, never fear losing my tweaks.
With respect to "learn something new," I have opined previously, somewhere, that all operating systems suck. My opinion only. The reason is computers are incredibly complex tools. Just find the operating system that best satisfies your needs and work flow and sucks the least. Then learn to work around the warts and blemishes.
At home Slackware works best for me because Pat does not presume how I use my computer and at the moment, is not designing an operating system for the bell curve masses. I get to massage Slackware into the operating system I want. I think this is a point many first time users and click-bait reviewers do not understand about Slackware. Slackware is a foundation or building block distro. This approach works for me -- and I presume most Slackers, but does not work for many users. Thus upstream distros designed for the bell curve masses include everything including the kitchen sink. For many users this is a sane design choice and includes Windows.
Since I started using desktop computers in the early 1980s I have disliked upstream default design choices. I tend to be rebellious and non conformist. That's my "problem" and not everybody else's. That is, I am the one who has to adjust to avoid trouble. Thus I accept that such a design succeeds for many if not most people. I don't mind that I am a square peg among round holes. Some distros do support "minimal install" ISO images and that might be a good starting point for users like me. With Ubuntu MATE (and other distros I use at work) I kind of did the reverse and started full and pared the bloat. Now that I use partition images the point is somewhat moot.
I don't know if that helps.
Quote:
Things like this has the philosophy of Slackware reign supreme: In Debian and its legion of derivatives the package maintainers make really silly decisions.
From my usage I think much of the time the packagers do just fine. That does not mean I occasionally do not roll my eyes with dependency decisions. Once in a while though I get really riled at the packager. Once again, all operating systems suck, just find the one that sucks the least for you.
PS: Things like this has the philosophy of Slackware reign supreme: In Debian and its legion of derivatives the package maintainers make really silly decisions. Try to install Xfe and it pulls in among other things Audacious as a recommended dependency. Ref: https://packages.debian.org/stretch/xfe
In fairness (at least to this one specific program), audacious is already a part of Slackware. So, if xfe requires it (or if it is an optional dependency that the maintainer made required), that dependency is already satisfied with a full install of Slackware.
Granted, there are definitely examples out there where maintainers add optional dependencies that some may feel aren't required, but that happens everywhere, including on SBo.
As for the OP, I've never felt a need to stray from Slackware. I only use it in my home and, unfortunately, don't use Linux in my professional life (government work where I'm stuck using Windows).
I started with Redhat 7 in college (not RHEL 7, the original Redhat 7 back in the early 2000s). When I tried to install it on my old laptop at the time (Intel Celeron 400MHz with 160MB of RAM -- 32MB onboard and 2x64MB sodimm expandable), I installed everything and then found the cd drive didn't work. I had no troubleshooting knowledge of it and decided to just go back to Windows 2000. I had helped my buddy with Linux a few years later and he was working with Slackware. I decided to take the plunge again, either with 10.1 or 10.2. I had to recompile my kernel like 10 times that first week to get my wireless working on my slightly more modern laptop (Dell 700m with the lovely IPW2200 that wasn't included with the kernel at the time). I was sucked in and have been with Slackware ever since.
I've used other distros on occasion, usually when helping someone with a problem, but I've never felt a desire to find something else. Slackware has fit my needs and has pushed my desire to continually learn more. While topics can sometimes be quite divisive on here, I feel the technical knowledge is quite high and we can help a lot of people.
Distribution: Slackware/Salix while testing others
Posts: 1,718
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassmadrigal
In fairness (at least to this one specific program), audacious is already a part of Slackware. So, if xfe requires it (or if it is an optional dependency that the maintainer made required), that dependency is already satisfied with a full install of Slackware.
Granted, there are definitely examples out there where maintainers add optional dependencies that some may feel aren't required, but that happens everywhere, including on SBo.
According to Salix package search, these are the dependencies for xfe https://packages.salixos.org/#! :
bzip2 expat fontconfig fox-toolkit freetype gcc gcc-g++ glib2 glu harfbuzz libX11 libXau libXcursor libXdamage libXdmcp libXext libXfixes libXft libXi libXrandr libXrender libXxf86vm libdrm libjpeg-turbo libpng libtiff libxcb libxshmfence mesa xz zlib
Again, package maintainer silliness. Oh, I forgot to mention other distros patching packages willy nilly, and thinking they know a program better then the developer.
In fairness (at least to this one specific program), audacious is already a part of Slackware
The devil is in the details. The issue is not the presence of audacious in a system; but the fact that a music player is marked as a dependency for a file manager.
The devil is in the details. The issue is not the presence of audacious in a system; but the fact that a music player is marked as a dependency for a file manager.
That might provide the ability to preview an audio file within the filemanager the same way that mplayerthumbs was used for KDE video thumbnails a while ago. This is the first I've ever heard of xfe, so it's just an observation from an outsider.
I'm not saying it's right, but the maintainer may have had a valid reason to include the dependency... or they may have not. As I said, the same things happen on SBo. Some complain because too many dependencies are required while others complain that some optional dependencies should be required.
That might provide the ability to preview an audio file within the filemanager the same way that mplayerthumbs was used for KDE video thumbnails a while ago. This is the first I've ever heard of xfe, so it's just an observation from an outsider.
It's an Orthodox File Manager. Together with Krusader, the only one that is bearable to use on Linux.
Quote:
I'm not saying it's right, but the maintainer may have had a valid reason to include the dependency... or they may have not.
The answer to that might be in the developer's own words:
Quote:
Why yet another file browser?
Yes, it's a good question. Why another file manager when many excellent choices exist already? Why not use a full-blown, animated, bells-and-whistles file manager like Konqueror, Nautilus or Rox?
The answer is quite simple: Although all these file managers are feature rich and cleverly designed, let's face it, they are huge! If you're a console addict, light desktop user or have an older system, resource hogging file managers just aren't the way to go. Especially since most file managers are Desktop dependent (KDE, Gnome, Xfce, etc.), requiring you to load all kinds of unwanted bloat onto your system.
So, to a certain extent, to mandate other libraries is to show contempt for the developer's intention.
1. I started using Slackware back at V4 as a hobby, stuck with it for a while but moved away because I perceived that I didn't have enough time for the care and feeding that Slackware needed. That perception was probably more due to my own ignorance than anything else. When I decided to switch from Slackware 9, I went to Debian.
2. I switched back because I really liked the simplicity of Slackware compared to the behemoth that is Debian and its derivatives. Granted, the Debian system is very well done and fills the needs of a zillion users, but I honestly missed working from the command line (a heritage of my 8 bit days.) I found that Slackware really took less care and feeding than I originally understood. I also discovered Slackbuilds, which is a huge advantage in time saving. My needs are pretty simple compared to many (most?) folks here: writing programs for fun and using some applications for operating ham radio. I use C and also FreeBASIC (which works for me on Windows and Linux with no changes to the code) for programming.
3. As I mentioned, Debian and then Linux Mint. I think I started with Debian slink. A big repository, easy package handling and software installation. Later, I switched to Linux Mint when I ran into a problem with one of my radio applications being too out of date in the (at the time) stable Debian distro. Mint has some nice extensions over Debian and Ubuntu (the update manager is pretty handy.) But eventually I decided to go back to Slackware, running Slackware 64 14.2 and very satisfied.
As an aside, I use Linux only as a hobby; I am an electrical engineer and the software packages I need for my work only run on Windows. So I also have a Win10 64 laptop.
I hazard that the Slackware forum is not the best place to ask why persons have stopped using Slackware. It is probably not where such a question would find the audience it seeks.
I've used many distros, some on bare metal and some in VMs.
I can say that Debian and Mageia have long been my second choices after Slackware, but I have always had at least one Slackware box in my house, because no other distro matches the elegant simplicity of Slackware.
I started with Slackware and Slackware taught me to understand Linux. Once you grok Slackware, no other distro will ever intimidate you.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.