Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Slackware Linux 14.1 Released

samzenpus posted about 8 months ago | from the brand-new dept.

Linux 136

An anonymous reader writes "According to the official announcement, Slackware 14.1 includes the following: 'Slackware 14.1 brings many updates and enhancements, among which you'll find two of the most advanced desktop environments available today: Xfce 4.10.1, a fast and lightweight but visually appealing and easy to use desktop environment, and KDE 4.10.5, a recent stable release of the 4.10.x series of the award-winning KDE desktop environment.' Installation ISOs can be found here."

cancel ×

136 comments

amused that they talk about the DT environs (3, Informative)

themushroom (197365) | about 8 months ago | (#45362697)

when real Slackware users only use command lines :)

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (4, Funny)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 8 months ago | (#45362753)

when real Slackware users only use command lines :)

Real Slackware users use a Desktop so they can run command line shells in six xterms simultaneously.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363169)

You don't need an entire Desktop Envrionment just to use a Window Manager. Fluxbox still does everything I need.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (1)

SigmundFloyd (994648) | about 8 months ago | (#45363351)

Hi, I'm a real Slackware user and I run ctwm and GNUscreen.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (2)

evilviper (135110) | about 8 months ago | (#45363389)

Real Slackware users use a Desktop so they can run command line shells in six xterms simultaneously.

You only need a window manager (like Fluxbox, fvwm, xfwm, sawfish etc) to manage multiple xterms, not a full desktop environment.

And you don't need X11 at all, since tmux will allow you to do all of that from a text console.

eg.: http://tmux.sourceforge.net/tmux3.png [sourceforge.net]

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (4, Insightful)

farrellj (563) | about 8 months ago | (#45364079)

Actually, us Slackware Users us whatever the fsck we want, because we know how to do it all! CDE, KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment, raw X, screen, and anything else we can dig up. We not only know how to use it, we customize it so that other users on the same machine have a hard time time using it! What's more, we probably also know how to use Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, SUSE, Debian, Arch, *BSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Mac OS (7-10), and another dozen operating systems that most of you haven't heard of! We can even make Windows useful! We Kick OS BUTT!

All single OS users must cringe in the shadow of our awesomeness!

Really!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45364749)

How fat are you?

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366131)

It is not about the length around the waist, it is about how much of the beard that covers the belly.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (1)

goarilla (908067) | about 8 months ago | (#45366443)

He's not fat, he's highly specialised for the job.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (4, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 8 months ago | (#45366847)

If he's a Slackware user, he's not fat; he's most likely ext2.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (1)

Trigun (685027) | about 8 months ago | (#45367953)

I would just like to take the time to point out that we have a 3-digit User ID here... So by default he knows what he is talking about.
He remembers the 23 disk A-series of slackware.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (4, Funny)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 8 months ago | (#45363931)

No, real slackware users use punch cards for input and have a single red blinking LED for output. Although I used to know this guy that shaved, thought he was better than the rest of us... he had a green LED. Fucking pretentious asshole he was.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45364495)

... use punch cards for input and have a single red blinking LED for output.

I thought it was the other way around: use a single blinking LED for input and punch cards for output.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45364133)

http://www.nerdyshawn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/tmuxCentOS-ssh.png

You can run a terminal multiplixer on any terminal device.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45365611)

except your terminal has blurry bits. maybe your multiplexer if not working

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (1)

Skapare (16644) | about 8 months ago | (#45365137)

Six?? ... no way ... I use seventy two xterms.

Re: amused that they talk about the DT environs (2)

captjc (453680) | about 8 months ago | (#45366789)

Pfft, noob. Use real professionals have over 9000 xterms open and each one of those has screen running with over 9000 command prompts. Every one of those command prompts has over 9000 commands running as background tasks!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 8 months ago | (#45365685)

That's what screen is for.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366133)

you think Real Slackware users don't know about 'screen' ??

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366863)

Why is this modded funny? I'm a slackware user, and he's exactly right. A simple desktop environment (like xfce) makes running multiple xterms all the more productive.

Slackware is about taking the best of the "old" (i.e. traditional unix) and the best of the new and creating the perfect harmony. It's an acquired taste that most linux users can't appreciate until they have a solid 10 years under their belt.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (1)

arfonrg (81735) | about 8 months ago | (#45368315)

Only six? Amateur!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45362961)

All 5 of them?

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363391)

I agree with you and thought the same thing. My thoughts as my eyes scrolled the text here were "Don't care about that, don't care about that either, don't care... maybe I'll just stick with my installed base of ~60 12.1 machines if there's nothing really new. Yay command line!" /not trolling - all truth.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs (3, Interesting)

slack_justyb (862874) | about 8 months ago | (#45364891)

They put it there for the casual on-lookers. For whatever people bang on it, when you say Linux in an interview and they ask you which distro, you say Slackware. If you know how to hold it together with Slackware, things like installing 3rd party drivers from the command line on Ubuntu or SuSE or knowing the entire purpose of everything in /proc is the kinds of things they know you do 300% better asleep and drunk than most admins could muster running full steam.

Here's to the release of yet another amazing version of the best Linux distro to date.

"Award-winning" (5, Funny)

krkhan (1071096) | about 8 months ago | (#45362749)

Please stop using arguably the most useless of marketing slogans. Every desktop environment which has been around long enough has won an award of some kind. (Yes, even Gnome [linuxquestions.org] .)

Re:"Award-winning" (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 8 months ago | (#45363291)

If necessary, the marketing department will simply *create* an award in order to give to their product. Usually they can dredge up something a little less blatant, though.

Re:"Award-winning" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366151)

Please stop using arguably the most useless of marketing slogans. Every desktop environment which has been around long enough has won an award of some kind. (Yes, even Gnome [linuxquestions.org] .)

Your comment is great.
Here, have an Award.

Re:"Award-winning" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366553)

If Gnome can even win an award for environment of the year, I am so sure my new Toolbars Environment [spiceworks.com] will be a hit with the people!

Panic! (0, Flamebait)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 8 months ago | (#45362779)

Another version of Linux released!

SystemD vs SysV (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45362831)

I read both of the threads (in entirety) of how many people are opposed to systemd.

I am still learning Slackware (I am not what I would call an expert yet), and I enjoy/respect everything about it. The simplicity is superb, and its capabilities/power make you feel like a ruler of your box.

I would hate for systemd to ruin what I have come to love in Slackware.

If you don't like systemd, if you want to stick with "old school" then start brainstorming ways to improve upon sysvinit to give it a "new life" without sacrificing it.

If everyone just sits around complaining about Systemd it WILL happen.
It will slowly but surely take over the linux universe.

Does this mean systemd is better? NO

But does it mean that it has more people who are behind the vision of selling it?

Yes.

In short we do not need 15,000 threads flaming the creation of systemd, rather we need every developer who hates it to come together and figure out a way for sysvinit to be updated, or modernized (without losing it's original essence) so it can be sold as the BETTER alternative to SystemD.

Complaining will get you no where.

Brainstorming ideas for making what you love better WILL.

Competition breeds cooperation.

If you hate Systemd enough, maybe it is time for a rebel alliance.

If you do not want Systemd to be the future of linux maybe it is time to come up with a revisioned version of sysvinit or something better based upon it.

Otherwise there is no reason to complain.

It would be great if we could start a list of changes that sysvinit would benefit from.

Re:SystemD vs SysV (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363195)

The project you are looking for is OpenRC. Help spread the word!

Re:SystemD vs SysV (0)

fisted (2295862) | about 8 months ago | (#45364197)

Use a BSD instead of reimplementing half of it in Linux. Help spread the word!

Re:SystemD vs SysV (1)

epyT-R (613989) | about 8 months ago | (#45364415)

openRC supports both already. Last I checked, none of the bsds use it, and the only linux distro to use it as a default is gentoo.

Re: SystemD vs SysV (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366265)

Alpine Linux also uses openrc by default.

FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk (0)

hodet (620484) | about 8 months ago | (#45362867)

The 3472 1.44MB floppy disk set will be available immediately. :-) Ah the good old days downloading 30 diskettes all night on my dialup connection.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45365437)

Laugh if you want, but this is the only distro that puts most of its joy on DVD. I *WISH* ubuntu would have dvd downloads. Instead, they stick to CD's (and the only reason I keep CD's is for this, I store basically everything else on DVD or hard disk). And the kicker? Right after downloading Ubuntu, you must keep your network connection because it needs to download more stuff. Why not just dump more to a bigger disk? Argh! There isn't even an option to "Go DVD" as opposed to being forced to "Go CD".

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45365887)

You know you can burn a CD iso onto a physical DVD?
I have been doing this for many years with K3b with no special or extra steps.

But yeah, I wish they did full dvd isos.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk (1)

hodet (620484) | about 8 months ago | (#45368037)

I'm not laughing but reminiscing. I am going to d/l it and give it a spin. Nothing but respect for slack, even if I haven't used it in ages. Time to correct that.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk (1)

Salafrance Underhill (2947653) | about 8 months ago | (#45367413)

Been there, done that, was amused.

packages (2, Insightful)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 8 months ago | (#45362965)

I used slackware from 97 to 2000 -- too long ago -- so I was curious about the state of package management:

One of the major complaints by new users is the fact that Slackware does not automatically track dependencies and install dependencies when you install a file. To many this may seem like a negative mark against Slackware, but I prefer to know exactly what is installed on my system and what it is for.

So, no, thanks. I'll stay with my Debian based distros. Which btw I know exactly what is installed... I'm not sure why one would assume automatic dependency installation imply the dependencies are installed secretly. :p

Re:packages (2, Interesting)

mark-t (151149) | about 8 months ago | (#45363165)

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently... which means that if you want to uninstall a package, and you don't want to keep around any other packages whose only purpose for being installed was to support the package that you no longer want, if you had to manually install those dependencies in the first place, you are in a good position to be able to know which packages you should be removing as well.

Re:packages (2)

seyyah (986027) | about 8 months ago | (#45363193)

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently... which means that if you want to uninstall a package, and you don't want to keep around any other packages whose only purpose for being installed was to support the package that you no longer want, if you had to manually install those dependencies in the first place, you are in a good position to be able to know which packages you should be removing as well.

The problem with automated dependency checking is that when it breaks you are often fucked. So it's not so much that dependency checking is bad, but that it is very hard to get absolutely right, more so when you throw in extra repositories into the mix.

Re:packages (5, Informative)

rusty0101 (565565) | about 8 months ago | (#45363251)

Good dependency management keeps track of such things for you over the long term as well. apt-get _will_ tell you of libraries that were installed in support of applications that you've since removed, and gives you the ability to remove those libraries as well with the auto-remove function. It does not automatically remove them with the application, which can leave cruft on your system, but has the advantage that if you've found the library handy for some program you're writing, but haven't explicitly toled the package management system that your app depends on it, you're not breaking your own application.

Re:packages (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 8 months ago | (#45363387)

No, that's actually not generally a problem. Package managers remember which packages you asked to be installed and which packages it installed automatically to satisfy dependencies. When an automatically installed package has no more packages dependent on it, it gets uninstalled.

The real problem is, as another poster pointed out, is the same as any automated procedure--if something goes wrong enough, it can put you in a very deep hole very quickly and if you don't understand what it was doing for you, you'll have a great deal of difficulty digging yourself out again.

Re:packages (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 8 months ago | (#45363519)

Well, that was my experience using a distro with auto-dependency checking... I gave up on it after a year and went back to slack.

Re:packages (2)

reub2000 (705806) | about 8 months ago | (#45364255)

How often do users get into that type of hole? It might happen if you enable too many addon repos or are running a development branch.

Re:packages (2)

jones_supa (887896) | about 8 months ago | (#45364181)

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently... which means that if you want to uninstall a package, and you don't want to keep around any other packages whose only purpose for being installed was to support the package that you no longer want, if you had to manually install those dependencies in the first place, you are in a good position to be able to know which packages you should be removing as well.

Under Ubuntu/Debian those supporting packages are marked "automatically installed" and can be removed with "apt-get autoremove".

Frankly, I thought Slackware already had a package dependency system in place. If not, I have better things to do than manually track dependencies. It's not productive work for me.

Re:packages (1)

ApplePy (2703131) | about 8 months ago | (#45364367)

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently...

That much is true, I reckon. And it's all fine and dandy to know every package on your machine... if you only have one machine. When you start administering a few hundred different servers that serve different purposes and have different software and belong to multiple clients... good luck with that. Old systems get crufty, sure. But I'd rather backup & reinstall once in 5 years than to fuck with trying to manually remove orphaned packages all the time. Just seems like an enormous waste of time. As far as I'm concerned, APT and YUM are godsends. So... I'll just bow to your enormously impractical 1337-ness and go on my merry way.

Re:packages (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 8 months ago | (#45367939)

Pretty much this. I love Slackware, I cut my linux teeth on Slackware, Slackware held my hand as I plunged into the world of FreeBSD. Unfortunately, manual dependency tracking (and, gods forbid, updating) dozens of machines...

Sadly, I don't have time for that (who does?). That's the only reason I haven't dumped ubuntu-server in the bin.

Re:packages (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363315)

I jump shipped from Slackware to Gentoo myself. Gentoo is basically everything that's great about Slackware plus a fantastic package manager. The first install process is a bit painful though. Always a trade off somewhere.

Re:packages (1, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | about 8 months ago | (#45363781)

You were a slackware user and you used packages? Either you are/were a filty casual, or you were of the very few who depended on such.

Installing things on slackware was/is almost always 'tar xvjpf source.tar.gz && cd source && ./configure && make && make install', aside from the initial system install, of course

Re:packages (1)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 8 months ago | (#45364057)

You misunderstood me. I used slackware until 2000, when a friend suggested to me to try Debian, which he had installed in a computer of our lab. The first thing I tried was to edit a configuration file using midnight commander (mc -e), which was not installed by default. I pointed to the screen and made a face implying "is this what you call a decent OS?", but he said "wait", and typed the magic words "apt-get install mc".

From that moment on, I would never use an OS without package manager again... at least not by my own volition.

Re:packages (2)

CronoCloud (590650) | about 8 months ago | (#45364981)

Wait, you wanted to use Midnight commander to edit a conf file instead of vim or emacs? Freak!

Probably easier to use for simpler edits though.

Re:packages (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45365081)

Mc is great for moving around a file system. Beware the delete, tho! It's a hard one.

On the package management, I found with stock Ubuntu the bigger packages were not compiled with the proper options, like mplayer not having all of faad or other things in place. With a situation like that, one must throw away the package manager and install the slackware way anyway.

Been there done that. Slackware, all the way for 12 years now.

Re:packages (1)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 8 months ago | (#45366537)

Back at that time I was still dual-booting, and used to code in the IDE of Turbo C and DOS edit... mc's editor was the closest match.

In 2006 I forced myself to use vim during one month. There were some things that I fell in love with, but overall I didn't like the experience. So I just made a plugin for gedit with everything I liked in vim, and that's what I've been using since (now with Pluma, because gedit3 broke compatibility).

Re:packages (1)

SigmundFloyd (994648) | about 8 months ago | (#45366403)

but he said "wait", and typed the magic words "apt-get install mc".

Just FYI, on Slackware that would have been "slackpkg install mc".

Re:packages (1)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 8 months ago | (#45366471)

mc was installed by default, and in 2000 there was nothing resembling "slackpkg". But nice to know it exists now!

Which means Slackware was easier (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45368219)

Yes it was installed by default. That is kinda the point. Slackware has a decent selection of packages preinstalled so no need to have to type such a command. Surely that makes it even easier. Before you reply you might wan to read this:

http://my.opera.com/ruario/blog/2011/09/26/slackware-package-and-dependency-management

slackpkg install mc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45368169)

I see you have not used Slackware for a while: "slackpkg install mc"

Re:packages (1)

Clsid (564627) | about 8 months ago | (#45364867)

Wait I must be on drugs or something, but during the brief period I used Slackware, I thought you were supposed to create Slackware packages yourself from every source install, which is extremely easy to do and one of the major reasons I liked Slackware in the first place. Hell, there was even a website called Linux Packages or something like that, where you could just share whatever packages you created if anybody didn't want to go through the process.

In my case I ended up using Gentoo for personal use even if the install is burdensome, Debian or OpenBSD on servers and Ubuntu for desktop installs.

Re:packages (1)

Skiron (735617) | about 8 months ago | (#45366073)

Linux packages is now gone, but there is http://slackbuilds.org/ [slackbuilds.org] today!

Re:packages (1)

seyyah (986027) | about 8 months ago | (#45364933)

Installing things on slackware was/is almost always 'tar xvjpf source.tar.gz && cd source && ./configure && make && make install', aside from the initial system install, of course

Slackware is never that. Slackware is all about packages. Always.

Re:packages (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45368139)

You clearly have not used Slackware for a while or if you have you have not kept up with the current trends. Most users do not do this. For packages not included in the official repository they make use third party repos or use SlackBuild scripts to produce packages and then install them

Re:packages (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366893)

It's something that can't be appreciated until you have actual experience with the system. Of course, for somebody coming from debian, it automatically seems archaic, but consider that I started with debian (in 1997) and after 10 years moved to slackware -- not the other way around. There are many reasons why slackware is the longest standing linux distribution, dead-simple package management being just one.

Never used (0)

map200uk (1053842) | about 8 months ago | (#45363143)

Slackware..always heard it#s pretty hard to configure..maybe I'll try it someday Used to Debian/Ubuntu/CentOS

Re:Never used (1, Funny)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 8 months ago | (#45363993)

It's all I've ever used. It was version 10.5 when I first got heavy into it though. I use it as my only desktop now. I'm able to do anything that I need to do, it just takes me about 5 hours longer than it should. ;)

They have come a long way as far as updates however (slackpkg). Rolling things from source is really cool and makes you look old-school, or so I'm told. I work for myself doing IT work locally, and even other "Linux guys" tell me that I'm hard-core, simply because I run slackware, do to it's very mechanical nature. I just go with it.

Re:Never used (1)

goarilla (908067) | about 8 months ago | (#45366607)

There never was a 10.5, you might mean 10.2.

No its not (3, Interesting)

ArchieBunker (132337) | about 8 months ago | (#45364691)

The config files in Slackware are pretty straightforward. These days its near impossible to set up a Ubuntu or Debian install via the command line. Nothing but a pile of scripts that call for more scripts. When something doesn't work you can't even look in the logs because its not reported.

Re:Never used (1)

jmccue (834797) | about 8 months ago | (#45364695)

I think the hardest part of the install is disk partitioning, if you opt for a full install you will have a fully functional working system. All you need to do is run useradd after the install and your are ready. Anyway I understand what you mean by 'useto', for me I am very much use to Slack and haven't tried a different distro in a very long time :)

Re:Never used (1)

FuegoFuerte (247200) | about 8 months ago | (#45364877)

Anyone who told you it's hard to configure was either running it on a VERY oddball hardware setup, or was lying to you. I originally switched to Slackware (in 2001) because it was so much easier to make everything "just work" than it was with the other distros. I still use it for that reason. I can go from bare metal to fully working system in a half hour or less.

Also, I got tired of the circular dependency hell from the other distros of the time. Maybe they're better now, but Slack's package management works just fine for me, thankyouverymuch.

Re:Never used (1)

Clsid (564627) | about 8 months ago | (#45364883)

You should try Gentoo when you get the chance. The install process alone will make you understand a lot more about your computer than you ever wanted to know.

Damn. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363175)

I was hoping I could run the 13.37 version forever.

Thank you Patrick. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363183)

Thank you Patrick.

Like the Eveready Rabbit (4, Insightful)

stox (131684) | about 8 months ago | (#45363199)

It keeps going and going.

True to its users.

Congratulations, on another fine release, to the Slackware Team!

Re:Like the Eveready Rabbit (1)

Hillgiant (916436) | about 8 months ago | (#45367337)

I am embarrassed to say that I stared at the screen for some minutes before realizing that "Eveready Rabbit" was not some cutsie release name for the latest Slackware release.

Thank You, Patrick V! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45363329)

Thank you, thank you, thank you! Slackware has been, is, and continues to remain the finest distribution of Linux ever.

Yes, it's a struggle to configure and use. It's Unix at its best. It's not meant to be easy to use, you have Windows for that. If you want the true power of a Unix system, then that is what Slackware is for.

Long life and good luck to you always, Pat!

Yawn!!!!!! (1, Redundant)

AntEater (16627) | about 8 months ago | (#45363731)

I've been anticipating this release for several weeks now. What's funny, is that there's not much to say about it here. Predictable. Reliable. Maybe even boring. Still, Slackware is an awesome system that is a joy to administer. I'll be updating several machines as soon as my DVD arrives in the mail.

Still tarballs? (1)

oldhack (1037484) | about 8 months ago | (#45363851)

Slackware still uses tarball packaging?

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45364107)

And they install in seconds.

(If you are surprised by this, then you probably aren't familiar with the slackware philsophy. It's founded on simplicity and vanilla-ism, which is a lot different than, say, debian.)

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45364155)

Yes, now go back to your noob distro.

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

mishehu (712452) | about 8 months ago | (#45364475)

OMG they're not using $flavor_of_the_month!!!

Re:Still tarballs? (2)

Nimey (114278) | about 8 months ago | (#45364585)

More importantly, it still doesn't use a dependency-resolving package manager. If that works for you, great, but it doesn't for me.

Re:Still tarballs? (0)

oldhack (1037484) | about 8 months ago | (#45364673)

Well, that really is the main point of the question, isn't it. I would have thought fewer idiots use slackware, but the replies above suggest otherwise.

Re:Still tarballs? (2)

Nimey (114278) | about 8 months ago | (#45364753)

Well, you know. Some people need to do things the hard way to prove how manly they are; also nerds aren't stereotyped as being ill-socialized for nothing.

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

bencollver2 (3424983) | about 8 months ago | (#45367045)

A tarball is hard, but 2 tarballs wrapped in an ar achive is easy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deb_(file_format)#Design [wikipedia.org]

From the 14.1 release announcement: "Have fun! :^) I hope you find Slackware to be useful."

I see a happy smiley face and friendly tone, but we shouldn't let empirical evidence get in the way of a good stereotype.

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

Nimey (114278) | about 8 months ago | (#45367477)

Obviously I wasn't talking about Patrick, but the subset of Slack users who are aspies.

You're perpetuating the stereotype (ill socialization) a little bit.

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

bencollver2 (3424983) | about 8 months ago | (#45368265)

Aww shucks, tried to have reasonable discourse and all I got was an armchair diagnosis of a mental disorder. Makes me feel all warm and social.

Re:Still tarballs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366913)

You use the word "still" as if slackware is planning on implementing such a thing, and just hasn't gotten around to it. That's wrong. Slackware is deliberately designed to avoid that kind of complexity, and hence, there will never be a dependency-resolving package manager in slackware. Believe it or not, to most slackware users this is a plus, not a minus. It's something you can't easily understand until you have experience with the system.

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

Nimey (114278) | about 8 months ago | (#45367539)

No, I'm using "still" in the sense of "Patrick hasn't made this change and he may never, but until he does I'm not interested". I used Slack for a year or so before giving up and switching back to Debian because the lack of package management drove me crazy.

See the other reply I made in this thread where I mentioned the stereotype about nerds? You're reinforcing that a little too.

I can't see how a dependency-resolving package manager would be /that/ complex. I mean, Debian's had a very good one in apt since '99, and that's an eternity in computing terms... but I know that Slack is basically Patrick, he's one person, and he's got his priorities (and there are tons of distros with that feature anyway), so I don't really expect it to change, it would just be a nice feature.

Re:Still tarballs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45367881)

As you point out, it's not necessarily that it's not complex to build a package manager, it's just not a priority. In fact, it doesn't even seem to be necessary given that plenty of people seem to get along fine without one.

Re:Still tarballs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45368333)

It is more that it is not needed http://my.opera.com/ruario/blog/2011/09/26/slackware-package-and-dependency-management

Re:Still tarballs? (1)

higuita (129722) | about 8 months ago | (#45368237)

Yes, tgz (or txz) is just a tar.gz (or tar.xz) ... just like a .deb is just a .ar achive (try ar x name .deb) ... but this is a good thing, you can open then with standard tools if the pkgtool or dpkg or apt-* don't work.

rpm can only be open by rpm (or converted to standard archive by tools that usually require again the rpm), making very hard to open if the rpm really dont work.

Bundled with proprietary software... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45365693)

Re:Bundled with proprietary software... (3, Informative)

Wild Wizard (309461) | about 8 months ago | (#45367007)

To get on that list you only have to include the full unmodified kernel.

Since Slackware always uses the full unmodified kernel then it will always be there unless the kernel devs fix it up.

I also believe there is a special agreement regarding the non-free program xv.

Re:Bundled with proprietary software... (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about 8 months ago | (#45368059)

No mainstream distro passes the FSF tests if you look there - only some fringe distros like gNewSense (Stallman's favorite), Trisquel and a few other Latin America specific distros available only in Spanish (English is a separate localization download for them).

And there was much rejoicing in Slacker Land... (2)

Noryungi (70322) | about 8 months ago | (#45366231)

Here is to another great release!

Thanks to Patrick Volkerding and the entire crew - I am going to buy my CDs and DVDs right now to support Slackware.

Slack is back! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45366679)

Hail to the king baby!

Nice (1)

Slackhead (953613) | about 8 months ago | (#45366949)

Another fine release. Not that I'm biased or anything...

Slack is the God of linux distros (2)

satan666 (398241) | about 8 months ago | (#45367829)

If you are a real SA, then you use slack.
This is my quick, 1 line, summary of most
distributions today:

1. Fedora -- Fuck no. I want my video to work.
2. Centos -- Not too bad actually. The only thing I would run other than Slack.
3 RH - No! I dont have $10,000.00 a month for support.
4. Debian -- De-what ? Die motherfucker!
5. Ubuntu -- Ubu-suck-my-dick -- another African word that means suck-my-dick
6. BSD -- Hey, listen to me: Fuck off. Go play with OSX... bitch!
7... Whatever...

Yeah, I run Slack, I compile my own kernel, I build my packages from source.
I kill and eat my food. I live in the woods. Grrrrr....
Now leave me alone people. I have a Word document I need to finish,
for management :P

XFCE isn't lightweight. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45368221)

OpenBox. Now that's lightweight.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...