Yes...I have.

It has nothing to with the slackware documentation or team. The discussion was about WHY users are advocating a full install. As in, their own reasons, and why they consider them to make sense. Irrelevant to the slackware documentation.

Which is completely fair enough, and the best reason I have heard so far.

I will point out two things though.

1. reading through the slackware revised book online, I did not find anywhere recommending a full install.

2. There is an install option newbie, which avoids having to have a full install, and also teaches a bit on the way. It goes by installing series of packages, rather than individual packages, and is very simple for a new user to understand.

See here: http://www.slackbook.org/html/instal...p.html#AEN1054


Well, yes, I am. I have been a newbie with Slackware, and I have worked with many different unices and seen many different situations and installs. In this discussion, I am only being objective, and considering the new user point of view. Just because you disagree with what I am saying, does not negate this fact.


No, its not. Considering the disadvantages I outlined earlier, I definitely think it is *not* the best, although could be in certain situations.


I have, quite a few times.

Newbie install, or installing package series. There is a reason it is called the newbie install.

If a user is new to Slack, but not new to Linux, then I would think Menu is the best.

I agree with the limitations of a new user that you pointed out, and they don't apply to the newbie install, where you can install package series.

Can you explain why a full install is better than this?

Simplistic? How is my view more simplistic than "just install everything"?

Heh.

There is a middle ground as you say, and it is preferable to the full install.

You seem to think that it is only a full install, or the most difficult route. This is not so.


I actually work with new users quite often, and am convinced the only reasoning for a full install is slight convenience. Nothing more.

As I said, this has nothing to do with the slackware team, but this discussion was involving the userbase.

Anyway, interesting points all round. I guess nothing has changed, but this discussion may give people something to consider or learn from.

Well...one thing is indeed certain...."recommended" is by no means "required". You are free to intelligently handle the install as you see fit according to your needs.

Hi,

Black & White;

Documented but it really doesn't matter does it? BTW, it does have something to do with the team as they are the ones that write the documentation therefore to assist some fairly and precise we/I do follow the docs.

'Slackware® Essentials' is rather dated and well be released as a update soon. When was the last time you read through the 'Newbie Install'? Much easier to tell the newbie to do the full install.

You say your a newbie, alright then why not do the newbie install and see why. Sure your presented with information. Decide then why not recommend the full. From a green newbie a full install is still the best option. That is unless you don't have the space requirements then that should be addressed.

I can see some objectivity but from your point of view. You are prejudiced or slighted by the UNIX experience along with Linux usage in the past. You said that you used Slackware 7/8. Yes, I do disagree with the points. As I said, get involved with helping here on LQ, present your solutions along with your standings. That's what makes LQ great, we are a mix of people helping each other.

The newbie install will add time to the installation along with the user potentially not setting the system to thier desired desktop. So less chance of having potential problems when a FULL is suggested.


I really cannot explain it any better than the above excerpt from the documentation.

I'll admit that my statement of a full install is a simplistic statement thus formed to allow the install so as to create a working desktop for the newbie. It works!

No, this discussion is related via the documentation that is used to support the user base. Thus the team is involved. It's more than a slight convenience, help others here and you will soon understand what I've been saying. You need to remember that the people you are assisting directly are likely to be familiar with you thus traits, communication and social barriers won't be in the mix.

Experiment, set someone down with a newbie install and someone with a full install. If your intent is to teach someone about that install then the newbie install will be worth the time difference. The full install individual will have the system up albeit using more hdd space but up. Then the questions from that person can be addressed.

Now the newbie install person may retain/comprehend from the messages then present some questions along the way or after the fact. What's gained? Some toggling of yes/no and hopefully that person does read the presentation(s) for understanding.

My right along with your right to agree that we both have our viewpoints. Thankfully the discussion will benefit everyone.

You don't seem to "get it".

This has nothing to do with the team or documentation.

The fact that you keep interjecting the documentation does not change this.

I was asking the users. If some users wish to follow the documentation, then that is fine, and that can be their reasons. The discussion itself though, has nothing to do with the documentation or team, but only with the thoughts of the community.

No, it is just more convenient, but at an expense.

What is your gripe with the newbie install, exactly?

For someone who has never used Linux before and comes from Windows, the newbie install is not harder, if anything it is a slightly better learning experience. The full install is only more convenient, not easier.


I am not prejudiced. Just because you disagree, does not make it so.

Objectively, the full install has more disadvantages than advantages, even for a "green newbie".

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here.

I help out a lot of people with slack, but more on other forums and the IRC channel then LQ..., by the time I check out LQ, other people have generally responsed. Although I have helped some people.

How does helping people on LQ relate to the discussion though?

No, not really.

It won't add any significant amount of time, and not sure what you mean by not setting a desired desktop...

The fact that you mention the time difference shows that the full install is only more convenient/simpler, not actually easier.

Is that documentation accurate? Newbie mode does not ask you to confirm every package...that is what menu or expert mode does. Newbie mode asks you about package series, of which there are not so many.


Sure it works. It's just not the best alternative, when presented with the option of a newbie install.

No, it is not.

That is how you interpret the discussion, but it is never what I asked when I started the thread.

You can take it that way, but the documentation is largely irrelivant here, unless people use it as their reasoning like you do.

I am interested in peoples reasons, not what the documentation says or "official policy". Stop confusing the two.

You keep bringing up how you keep helping people on these boards, as though implying I have not helped as many people or some such nonsense. Well, I help an awful lot of people, which is WHY I advocate the newbie install over the full install.

Just installing everything for the sake of simplicity and convenience is NOT the best option.

You are imagining the time difference to be far more significant than it is.

The user of the full install would likely have everything running smoothly and would not have so many questions. I would wonder, if they are not so interested in learning, why choose slack, and if they are interested, why install so much unnecessary cruft in the first place, instead of taking a bit of extra time to do the newbie install.

That is based on a whole lot of assumptions.

I'd actually say they would learn quite a bit. Do you really think people would be incapable of remembering anything they would learn if they choose to not install everything?

I first used Slackware in 1999, I believe, as a fairly new computer user not used to Windows or the Unix way. My first install was a "menu" install, just because I wanted to see what software was available in detail. I didn't do a full install then, because I knew there were applications I had no need of just by reading the description. I didn't install all the libraries, and suffered a few problems because of that, but I quickly learned how to find what was needed and install it.

I had no expectations, other than hoping to create a better user environment than the Windows 3.1 that was on the computer before I wiped it in disgust. And no, I didn't expect things to just work, and yes I did expect to have to read documentation because I was a newbie, and an old one at that.

I really don't see why Slackware should advocate a full install for inexperienced users, just because some people no longer want to read documentation and have everyting "just work". There are other distributions and Os's for that; except that none of them actually "just work"...

Hi,

Josh, I'm through with trying to show you the advantages. Recommend your way and I'll do mine. Documentation is important to understand what the author has attempted to do. This conveyance is beneficial as we all cannot be clairvoyant. Your original post to the thread with your points which clearly can be misleading to the uninformed with the statements throughout the thread.

Enough said!

onebuck,

1. This thread originally had nothing, or at least little to do with the documentation
2. Nothing I have said is misleading.

Cheers for the interesting points though.

Leaving aside the documentation, this issue is all about personal preferences. On a par with: which distro/DE/editor is best? What is/are your favourite colour/pizza toppings? All subjective, all just opinions, no "better" or "best" about them. What someone else judges as "cruft", I might not. I believe I know best what I want put on my computer.

I'll admit I used the full install first time through. I hadn't really used Linux before, but figured I"d be safe with the full. I've used most everything that was included. And added a few others.

I mostly used the full because it was late at night and I wanted to start it and go to bed and get back to it in the morning and wasn't sure what the other modes did -- I didn't want to get stuck saying yes to even each package set.

On the other hand, the menu option is really handy... Select the series and then it asks what packages within each series you selected and then installs everything that's selected. I've never gone through "Newbie" mode and never remember seeing it...

For me, even the full installation is not enough And hey, I can choose to install a, ap, d, l and x if I want. The default option doesn't bother me.

when i started out on computers on my c64 it was like ifa$=,thengoto,you could spend days on a script that made something scroll across the screen,and the code came from a computer magazine that you got from your friends older brother who told you a very famous hacker wrote it.when win 95 became standard i started looking at linux.but 98,nt,2000,xp alongside mac osx.
now ive been using only linux for a couple of years.
i started using slackware from 13.0 and it gives me that old feeling i missed it makes me work,think,and solve things on my own.
i did the full install i wish it to be bigger .
you can trim it yes and alienbob has various options for netinstall so downloading just the base system works too.
slackware is secure and stable with a full install ive tested my system with backtrack 4 and sinse i dont do crypting,have anything to hide and connect to the internet via wireless and plug in cellphones,usb sticks,ext hdds,im pretty exposed.
slackware is great,the support and the community is great

I like the basic Slackware install. I check off the KDE packages, emacs and bsdgames (not a fan of the fortune thing) and then do a full install. It gives me a full stable robust set of basic libraries and applications.

Much better than wasting time, building from the ground up with automatic dependency checking and packages that may or may not even be stable. Sorry I have no love for the Arch model. It's a nice hobbyist distro I guess but I don't have the time and worry for it.