LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


View Poll Results: Would you like to see more graphical tools in Slackware?
Yes 24 13.71%
No 124 70.86%
No, there are enough already in KDE 27 15.43%
Voters: 175. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 10-06-2010, 10:31 AM   #76
slackass
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: SE Texas
Distribution: Slack64-14.2
Posts: 908

Rep: Reputation: 89

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob.rice View Post
crtl+alt+f6 type "root" type "root's password"

unless you have changed /etc/initab to run gettys for all 6 virtual terminals in run level 4 and 5
then it would be crtl+alt+ f1 to f6
After I made that post I had a sneaking suspicion you'd mention “crtl+alt+f6 “ which is of course faster because one doesn’t have to go to the menu to select the terminal before starting. However I was comparing gui to cli. Now, I don't know much about linux but what I do know I learned from right here on this forum from “Slackware” users and tutorials by AlienBob and many others .
One or two years ago I learned to set-up a samba server using Eric's guide which is all cli. Since then I have set-up several of them in just a few minutes each time.
A few months ago I was messing around with openSUSE which is a fine distro for those who like a gui for everything but for the life of me I was never able to set-up samba using there gui.
So:
I'll continue to learn the cli and let those that are smarter than me have there gui.
I don't think Slack needs anymore gui's as there are plenty other distros that provide them for those who like becoming dependent on them.
 
Click here to see the post LQ members have rated as the most helpful post in this thread.
Old 10-06-2010, 10:40 AM   #77
ponce
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Pisa, Italy
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 4,327

Rep: Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261Reputation: 2261
FYI
Code:
su -
it's equivalent to a login shell in a tty: you'll get the correct environment.
 
Old 10-06-2010, 02:42 PM   #78
rob.rice
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 1,036

Rep: Reputation: 185Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmiorim View Post
This is going a bit offtopic but sudo has a couple of goodies if compared to "su -c" such as the possibility to restrict/set the environment properly (eg. make sure that users are running things in a trusted PATH like /sbin/fdisk rather than /home/joe/bin/fdisk) and better control over who does and when something can be done (eg. i want to allow webdeveloper01 to restart apache but i don't want him to do anything else).

Not saying that it's "better" or "worse" than su -c, it's a good tool for those who need its features and no one is forced to use it either.
It's kind of hard not to bring up the limitations of graphical configuration tools as opposed to the total lack of limitations when loged in as root
graphic configuration tools all have a narrow focus or they have a huge tree that makes the setting you need or want to change a pain to find
with slackware's package manager keeping all of it's records in plain text
you can figure out witch package the program you want to control came from by looking at the list of files in the packages and finding the configuration file or files along with the man pages
every thing about slackware makes graphic configuration tools unnecessary and configuration by CLI easier than it is in any other distro (good thing to there was a lot more that had to be configured just to get the system working with your hardware than there is now )
the best thing to do all of this is midnight commander and the find file command in it
so my whole point in all this rambling is how to reach the configurations from the CLI is not that far off topic
 
Old 10-06-2010, 02:50 PM   #79
rob.rice
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 1,036

Rep: Reputation: 185Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackass View Post
After I made that post I had a sneaking suspicion you'd mention “crtl+alt+f6 “ which is of course faster because one doesn’t have to go to the menu to select the terminal before starting. However I was comparing gui to cli. Now, I don't know much about linux but what I do know I learned from right here on this forum from “Slackware” users and tutorials by AlienBob and many others .
One or two years ago I learned to set-up a samba server using Eric's guide which is all cli. Since then I have set-up several of them in just a few minutes each time.
A few months ago I was messing around with openSUSE which is a fine distro for those who like a gui for everything but for the life of me I was never able to set-up samba using there gui.
So:
I'll continue to learn the cli and let those that are smarter than me have there gui.
I don't think Slack needs anymore gui's as there are plenty other distros that provide them for those who like becoming dependent on them.
I could not agree with you more
my example of crtl+alt+F6 comes pretty close to being a CLI vs GUI way of doing things
 
Old 10-06-2010, 03:07 PM   #80
brixtoncalling
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2008
Location: British Columbia
Distribution: Slackware current
Posts: 403

Rep: Reputation: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob.rice View Post
IF the configuration file is known and it's in plan text it's much faster and one hell of a lot easier to edit it than walking the trees in a GUI configuration editor to find the setting you want to change
Yeah, I totally agree with you there. But my post wasn't about the relative merits of GUI or CL tools, but rather that most posts here are of the "two-legs-good, four-legs"... sorry ... "command-line-good, GUI-bad" variety. As if Slackware is the Platonic ideal of a GUI-less distro and any addition of GUI tools will pollute its pure nature (refer to the various posts above).

I couldn't care less if Pat decides to add some more GUI tools. I don't use them personally -- ok, ok, I'm a daily user of wicd and sbopkg (yes, that's a GUI too my friends) -- but why do people get so upset at the thought of there being the option of a GUI tool? Even in Slackware?
 
Old 10-06-2010, 04:03 PM   #81
maxmiorim
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2010
Location: Brazil
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 43

Rep: Reputation: 8
I think it's kind of understandable that some (most? :P) users are against these tools because developing a good GUI requires a lot of resources -- resources that could be used somewhere "for a greater good" instead of appealing some people that want to do the same thing in a different way.
 
Old 10-06-2010, 04:37 PM   #82
rob.rice
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 1,036

Rep: Reputation: 185Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by brixtoncalling View Post
Yeah, I totally agree with you there. But my post wasn't about the relative merits of GUI or CL tools, but rather that most posts here are of the "two-legs-good, four-legs"... sorry ... "command-line-good, GUI-bad" variety. As if Slackware is the Platonic ideal of a GUI-less distro and any addition of GUI tools will pollute its pure nature (refer to the various posts above).

I couldn't care less if Pat decides to add some more GUI tools. I don't use them personally -- ok, ok, I'm a daily user of wicd and sbopkg (yes, that's a GUI too my friends) -- but why do people get so upset at the thought of there being the option of a GUI tool? Even in Slackware?
what I see going through the posts in this thread is more the fear of not being able to configure by command line and being forced in to using a GUI tool for there configuration
 
Old 10-06-2010, 09:33 PM   #83
brixtoncalling
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2008
Location: British Columbia
Distribution: Slackware current
Posts: 403

Rep: Reputation: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob.rice View Post
what I see going through the posts in this thread is more the fear of not being able to configure by command line and being forced in to using a GUI tool for there configuration
I don't get that notion. No amount of GUI will ever take away the ability to configure by the command line. A related point: the amount of command line configuration that you can do in Slackware is no greater than you can do in other distros (Ubuntu included). GUIs add an alternative way of configuring; they do not remove the ability to edit via by the command line.
 
Old 10-06-2010, 09:49 PM   #84
hedron
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2009
Location: NYC
Distribution: Slackware, Bluewhite, SARPI
Posts: 254

Rep: Reputation: 26
If Slackware ever took the advice given by that blog, with the except of a recent manual (I thought it had one?), I would switch to arch or just continue to use 13.1.
 
Old 10-06-2010, 10:56 PM   #85
T3slider
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1
Posts: 2,366

Rep: Reputation: 836Reputation: 836Reputation: 836Reputation: 836Reputation: 836Reputation: 836Reputation: 836
Quote:
Originally Posted by brixtoncalling View Post
I don't get that notion. No amount of GUI will ever take away the ability to configure by the command line. A related point: the amount of command line configuration that you can do in Slackware is no greater than you can do in other distros (Ubuntu included). GUIs add an alternative way of configuring; they do not remove the ability to edit via by the command line.
There comes a time when a graphical tool becomes good enough that the developer of an app may cease to support pure CLI configuration, or when parts of the distro rely on settings configured by a GUI app. I don't know if it's still the case, but the xorg.conf file in OpenSUSE had many comments stating "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE!" and practically insisted that you used their GUI configuration tool. You could probably have modified xorg.conf anyway, but there's one example where text-based modification was explicitly discouraged, and I could easily imagine situations that would break compatibility with text-based configuration in favour of graphical tools. Additionally, graphical configuration tools often add a lot of extra cruft that isn't needed but is set as a default...my ideal graphical tools would simply be graphical interfaces that end up creating a human-readable (and modifiable) configuration file that would not differ much from a properly configured hand-written file.

An example -- configuring CUPS by hand would be a painful process, and I'm not sure if it is possible (though I suppose it must be). Considering printer setup is a fairly complex task, especially in Linux with ppd files or sketchy binary drivers, this isn't the end of the world -- but if more applications adopted a graphical-only configuration tool then it would be unfortunate, to say the least. That example is application-specific but I'm sure it could be expanded to distribution-specific modifications as well.
 
Old 10-07-2010, 12:13 AM   #86
slackass
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: SE Texas
Distribution: Slack64-14.2
Posts: 908

Rep: Reputation: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by T3slider View Post
There comes a time when a graphical tool becomes good enough that the developer of an app may cease to support pure CLI configuration, or when parts of the distro rely on settings configured by a GUI app. I don't know if it's still the case, but the xorg.conf file in OpenSUSE had many comments stating "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE!" and practically insisted that you used their GUI configuration tool. You could probably have modified xorg.conf anyway, but there's one example where text-based modification was explicitly discouraged, and I could easily imagine situations that would break compatibility with text-based configuration in favour of graphical tools. Additionally, graphical configuration tools often add a lot of extra cruft that isn't needed but is set as a default...my ideal graphical tools would simply be graphical interfaces that end up creating a human-readable (and modifiable) configuration file that would not differ much from a properly configured hand-written file.

An example -- configuring CUPS by hand would be a painful process, and I'm not sure if it is possible (though I suppose it must be). Considering printer setup is a fairly complex task, especially in Linux with ppd files or sketchy binary drivers, this isn't the end of the world -- but if more applications adopted a graphical-only configuration tool then it would be unfortunate, to say the least. That example is application-specific but I'm sure it could be expanded to distribution-specific modifications as well.
Ya know, you make a good point that I had not considered. I rely on hp & cups gui's for printer setup and sharing. If I had to go to the cli for that stuff I'd be screwed.
 
Old 10-07-2010, 09:44 AM   #87
molhar
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 1
I hadn't even seen this thread until a few minutes ago. Like dagmar & Jeebizz, I prefer cfdisk to fdisk (but only because I imprinted on cfdisk back in my Debian days over a decade ago), and smiled when I read dagmar's "Damn Ubuntu actually got UGLIER!" because I thought the same thing when I did my annual "let's see how Debian-Fedora-openSUSE-Ubuntu-FreeBSD feel this year" run.

(And off-topic: for the first time, FreeBSD would not properly install on my old tried&true x86 lappy, even after a second download (verified with md5sum & sha both times) and multiple disc burns...ah, *sigh* 8.1...what have they done to thee...and the latest PC-BSD will install but the kicker menu doesn't respond. X works, the mouse moves, the keyboard works, but the kicker just sits there, unengaged. Ah, *sigh* 8.1, you remind me of the dark days of 5.0 only worse...)

Back to topic: I'll repeat what linus72 said since I didn't see any other ref to it (and somebody might miss it)...for extra GUI-ness (and a quickie multimedia codec install) there is SalixOS, after all (and a nice job it is, guys). Jeebizz hits the nail on the head when he says that multilib (which I, for one, don't use) could be slipped into /extra. That's the point of Slackware. We all get to build it up into whatever we want -- a wonderful exercise in Freedom Of Choice (wait! what's that?! Does anyone under 40 not know that it extends to more than "Do you want fries with that?"). What members of any other distro forum at LQ pipe up with The Nine Billion Ways to Root? I love the Slackware way!

Maxmiorim says again what I always point out...that developing a good gui requires resources which can otherwise be used "for the greater good" elsewhere in Slack. And some day, when I'm confident, I'll actually submit slackbuilds for that greater good. With both x86 and x86_64 machines, I really have no excuse not to test something on both arches. It's just confidence in my own ability "for public consumption" that I lack...I have no lack of confidence when adapting slackbuild scripts for my own use, though. And kudos for reminding the original poster about what slackbuilds.org is all about (chances are he never read the description to begin with, which is the core 99% of misunderstanding about what Slackware's all about anyway).
 
Old 10-07-2010, 09:58 AM   #88
molhar
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Distribution: Slackware64-current
Posts: 36

Rep: Reputation: 1
And I forgot to mention to slackass...using the cli to configure a printer's really not that difficult. Yes, I use the CUPS interface on Slack, but on FreeBSD up through v 7.3, neither the old Canon printer nor my current HP5150 were hard to set up via cli. And the HP was a castoff from a relative who got a new all-in-one last year, when I put Slackware on his new x86_64 desktop. (That makes one uncle and then my father both of whom I've set up Slack for...my uncle uses KDE...my dad uses Xfce...and I haven't had to troubleshoot either box since their systems were installed. Just security updates & OS upgrades to both. Both men are computer less-than-average users, one just over 70 yrs, the other just below...so standard Slack can pass the Grandma Test...
 
Old 10-07-2010, 10:20 AM   #89
slackass
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Location: SE Texas
Distribution: Slack64-14.2
Posts: 908

Rep: Reputation: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by molhar View Post
And I forgot to mention to slackass...using the cli to configure a printer's really not that difficult. Yes, I use the CUPS interface on Slack, but on FreeBSD up through v 7.3, neither the old Canon printer nor my current HP5150 were hard to set up via cli. And the HP was a castoff from a relative who got a new all-in-one last year, when I put Slackware on his new x86_64 desktop. (That makes one uncle and then my father both of whom I've set up Slack for...my uncle uses KDE...my dad uses Xfce...and I haven't had to troubleshoot either box since their systems were installed. Just security updates & OS upgrades to both. Both men are computer less-than-average users, one just over 70 yrs, the other just below...so standard Slack can pass the Grandma Test...
Hmmm,
You've just given me an idea of what I need to learn, I'm off to dig through Eric's stuff again.
 
Old 10-08-2010, 02:00 AM   #90
T0sh1r0
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2010
Location: Ličge, Belgium
Distribution: Debian & co
Posts: 51
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 9
I've chosen Slack because of it's lack of graphical tools...

A graphical tool is just a tool and should just do its job as it should. Nothing more, nothing else.

I started with Slackware a few days ago. One main reason I have chosen it is the lack of graphical tools forcing the admin to play with the command line and edit the configuration files. I think it's the best way to learn, to really know my system and have it configured as *I* want, and not as someone else thought I would like to have it.
Other people prefer systems working out of the bow after a few clicks and rely on the packagers of their distribution. Why not? It's their choice but not mine. And this is not the Slackware philosophy.

By the way, can't we say the command line is also a graphical tool? At least on my system I still have to look at the screen to use it. ;-))
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Powerful graphical tools for Ubuntu Linux LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-17-2008 04:50 AM
Setup Network Card using terminal instead of graphical tools singchan Linux - Networking 2 09-12-2006 11:56 AM
DNS Graphical tools shipon_97 Linux - Newbie 3 06-27-2006 11:59 AM
Enable to start graphical root-tools xpucto Linux - Software 1 09-19-2005 12:39 PM
Enable to start graphical root-tools xpucto Fedora 0 09-19-2005 07:51 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration