×

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.com

CmdrTaco posted more than 15 years ago | from the distributions-of-old dept.

Linux 72

Charles Bronson wrote in to tell us that Slackware now has its own domain name. Shockingly enough, its Slackware.com. The distribution that so many of us learned to love Linux on now has a happy home on the web. If there's one thing for certain, its that Slackware users are definitely attached to their distribution. Dave says its because of Slack's advanced packaging system *grin*.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

72 comments

It's a commercial distribution.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039253)

Many of you might not know this, but Slackware is a *COMMERCIAL DISTRIBUTION*.
I recall reading an artical a few weeks ago.. in it, I recall Linus saying that he was "scared" when Slackware became available.. he didn't like the idea of a commercial Linux distribution. He eventually grew to like the idea, as the artical later said..
It doesn't at all shock me that a commercial distribution should choose a .com domain. You might argue that it's non-commercial, since they offer free downloads of Slackware. If you believe this, then you surely must believe that RedHat is also a non-commercial distribution.
Andrew Dvorak
andrew_dvorak@geocities.com
"Experience is the worst teacher; you fail the test first and learn the instructions afterwards." --Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary."

Slackware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039254)

Slackware is one of those things that will never die. I used it for years and will always use it (basically because no other distro is half as good). On an other note, slackware.org has been online for months. The page says it isn't the official page tho. Wonder why no one noticed that one.

Actually, slackware has 3 domains... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039255)

slackware.net was announced not long ago... slackware.org has been around for quite a long time.

--
"Argue for your limitations and, sure enough, they're yours"
-- Richard Bach

Slackware RULEZ!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039256)

Go Slackware!!!!

ok (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039257)

Nice to see slackware updating their website. Too bad they can't update their libraries to '98-'99 status.

How about .hm, .tj? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039258)

Both of these are available, although .tj has temporarily suspended.

Happy hunting

Poor souls... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039259)

Whenever I see someone rave about slackware, I can't help but think, "poor soul, he couldn't figure out how to use dselect." Debian is IMO MUCH more functional and advanced. With the exception of a few die-hard sysadmins and those that insist on compiling everything for themselves (I have better things to do with my time), I think they would be better served by Debian. So, all ye who tried Debian once and moved back to Slackware, I urge you to try it again -- you don't know what you are missing.

When will they just let it die? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039260)

Seems like for some reason every newbie I talk to got slakware because it's "Easier to deal with." What a load of crap. Redhat and Debian both have much better installers and a much clearer upgrade path.I wish slakware would just die so I could stop telling those newbies they wasted their time and/or money with Slakware and now they should go get a Redhat CD. (I personally use Debian but I think Redhat's a hair more user friendly for the beginner.)

Poor souls... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039261)

(enry [mailto] at home)

I'm not sure about that. I tried to install Debian because it was lightweight - I'm building up some 386 machines with LCD screens for use in a home automation project I'm working on. With 170MB, RH filled the drive way too quickly.

After installing the latest Debian, I couldn't boot the machine. Something flaked out with fsck on the first boot and I couldn't get it to work after that. It got to the point where it would ask me to set a root passwd, but since the partition was mounted "RO" it wouldn't set a password, then ask me again for a passwd. Even booting with the RH rescue diskettes didn't solve this, since somehow the same scripts appeared again to set the passwd. On top of that, Debian randomly hung on bootup and after about 5 minutes of operation. I wasn't sure if it was the hardware until...

Bleah. I gave up and installed RedHat (got it to mount NFS from the home server and got things working that way). Installation was perfect, hardware is rock solid. Have had it running all weekend without trouble.

That GlibC thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039262)

How hard would it be to do a Slackbuild linking against libc6 instead of libc5? That is, how difficult would it be to setup up the minimum necessary for a slackbuild, and then convert that to glibc and proceed to slackbuild?

Poor souls... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039263)

errr.. what so special about debian and redhat that a slacker can't do. I tried both it's just another linux, then I tried FreeBsd Mmm... I know what I'm really missing ;) I urge any slacker who want to try another dist should give it a try, it's Packages Collection,init script.. really felt at home

its vs. it's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039264)

Don't mean to nitpick, but its is the possessive for it. You used its three times when you should have used it's (contraction for it is).

FHS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039265)

Quote from slackware.com:

"Slackware complies with the published Linux standards, such as the Linux File System Standard."

Err, hardly. If you want a nice, new, unread copy of the file hierachy standard, ask Patrick for his - I don't think he's ever read it.

If you're one to do things manually, use one of the BSD systems - at least they've been put together properly, and have an idea what security is - Slackware feels like Patrick just tarred up his drive and slapped it on a CD.

Yes, Slack was better than SLS at the time, but that time was '94. Times have changed, things have gotten better.

cwd in root's path, for gods sakes.....

eh, off topic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039266)

sorry this is a bit off topic but anyone know how, if possible, i can tell what irq settings are being used in linux? my modem works fine in windows (USRobotics 56k faxmodem), and linux doesn't see it, i'm most positive i just need to change the irq or the com settings on the modem...it would be cool if i knew what to change it to, and didn't have to try random ones...thanks =)

When will they just let it die? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039267)

i tell everyone that wants to get into linux that if they want a distro that a monkey can install, check out redhat. If they want to learn about linux, go with slackware.

/proc/interrupts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039268)

...

Why does it have to die? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039269)

Why does it have to die? Does it offend you that not everyone uses your favorite distribution? Where is written, into which stone is it engraved that people must use packagers? Where is it written, into which stone is it engraved that on must upgrade their entire system regularly to keep "up to date."? More importantly, what is so wrong with a system that expects you to learn how to use it before you use it?

(Moreover, some of prefer to do things manually, for us Slackware is good.)


(Just so I don't send the wrong impression, I use RH4.1, and plan to back up, and convert over to Slack3.6 as soon as I can get myself a functional CDROM drive and a Slack3.6 CD set)

Are you all going soft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039270)

What the hell is going on? Has redhat made a bunch of stupid linux users? I havn't encountered a program yet that i can't run on my slackware 3.6 machine.

"Well golly gee, it's not using glibc2, i guess i'm screwed." Took me 2 hrs to upgrade to glibc2 on my slackware machine, and i'm up and running again.

For those that are curious I got an email from Patrick about a month ago and he said that slackware 3.7 will still be libc5, but he will put out a 4.0beta that will be glibc2.

Man, it seems like every linux user is becomming like a windoze user. "If it doesn't come in a fancy package that's precompiled for me i can't install it", or "Man, this was installed this way, i don't think i can change it". I thought having control over your machine would be one of the first reasons people install slackware

-Brian
bdial@rkkengineers.com

more scary then redhat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039271)

i know, i know... i'm nearly a complete newbie to linux cept that i've run and installed redhat before and just looking at the directions on how to install it makes me just think its 700 times more complicated... maybe its just an over-explanation of how to install it but it still looks a lot harder then redhat...

it's actually too bad because i know of so many people that love slackware and swear by it since it is a lot cleaner distrib then redhat (yeah, i've had problems with the redhat distrib too - my sendmail server still takes 2+ minutes to startup... reminds me of win95)

can someone say, is it basically just make a boot floppy and then start off it with the cd in like with redhat or what? and since i'd be installing on a scsi drive with an ide cdrom how do i know what to start with? oh, and are the cds any good from cheapbytes?

Advanced packaging - yup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039272)

I agree with his point and it is nothing to grin
about. .tgz at least *respects* the user/admin
to have certain knowledge of his/her system unlike
RPM, where --nodep is the genesis of massive destruction of consistancy.

Didn't we all suffer from "Cannot uninstall program-some files are missing" from M$?

HOW-TOs, for you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039273)

thanks alot! it worked! i'm finally on the net in linux, =).

Slackware. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039274)

Bottom line: Slackware, Stick to libc5 until libc6 is STABLE, and remain the most reliable mainstream linux distribution. Thank you.

Are you all going soft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039275)

I havn't encountered a program yet that i can't run on my slackware 3.6 machine
I have - anything that uses modern glibc2 features - tmpreaper comes to mind, as I tried to compile that on my Slack box this morning, and found it used cool features only available in libc6 (the GLOB_BRACE feature of glob(), if you must know) - sure, I could have hacked it to work, but with severe loss of functionality.

Also, there's something most slack users don't seem to get - having glibc2 installed on your system is not the same as having a glibc2 system.

Also, I have complete control over my system. I know exactly what's in each .deb, and if I don't like the way it's done, I build my own. My system stays nice and tidy, and I can install and uninstall things without breaking everything because I forgot that X needed Y and without it would break Z in a very subtle way that wouldn't be noticed until customers complained.

Nice website (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039276)

I am a a Debian addict running Slink right now, but I must admit that the slackware.com website is very nicely done and is easy to navigate. The most basic instalation and configuration information can be easily found. It should particularly be helpful to someone new to linux. This site is definitely much better than redhat.com and suse.com where it takes a while to find something useful.

a.nother idiot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039277)


Glibc2 is stable, that's why they're working on glibc2.1 already. But then, I guess you still use a.out, because ELF isn't stable yet.

Glibc2 is NOT stable. Everything that is supposed to be in Glibc 2.0.x is NOT fully implemented and the features that are certainly aren't time tested.

Why would I still use a.out over ELF? you're comparing apples to oranges in what is an apparent attempt to cover up your own lack of knowledge. Unfortunately, there seems to be a vast surplus on wise-ass fools like yourself.

Libc5 isn't even maintained anymore, except for serious security problems.

And do you know why libc5 isn't maintained anymore? ... Because all of the features that it's aimed to implement are finished! What a concept.

Slackware the most stable? Tell that to someone who's / has overflowed due to there not even being any fscking log rotation. Don't tell them it's their fault - all decent dists install it by default, because that's the smart way to do it.

It IS their fault. You've fallen into that oh-so-popular frame of mind which dictates that linux installations should be ready to go right out the box. ... If that's the way you think, NT would be a much better choice.

WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE THINKING? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039278)

Remember when you first heard about linux?....

You didnt care weather, it used RPM, libc5 or glib2. You didnt care weather it was .com or .org

You just wanted it on your computer as fast as you could put it on thier... We've lost that

We are all on the same team here.. We're all linux users... Period

Everytime I see flame wars like this it makes me sick that such smart people reduce themselves to such low levels over petty differences..

You like slack use slack You like debian use that

Use whatever you want , thats was the idea of the whole linux thing in the first place *remember*


negahban@home.com

Redhat still lamers distro? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039279)

Last time I saw RH was the 4.2 disto. It lacked shadowed passwords which IMHO is a severe lack of security. I really couldn't care less about which package manager you use, and as far as I know a slackware-glibc2 is in the making, so that's not an issue too in my book, but I would *never* install a distro that came with unshadowed passwords. That's just lame.

Does debian come with something like shadowed passwords? I never got to check it...

more scary then redhat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039280)

Heh, that's funny, you called slackware clean. So tell me, how do you remove something after doing a make install? Call me crazy but I got better things to do than spend hours searching for files to remove. Go Debian!

Used to be a slack user ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039281)

I used to use slack because it wasnt "watered down" like caldera/redhat are w/ all theyre gui tools etc. Then I tried debian because I wanted package management w/o having to rely on X to do anything. Now I only use debian because its a good mix of ease of use w/o hand holding, and customizability that slackware offers.

Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2039282)

If debian had UMSDOS support newbies could use it instead.

When will they just let it die? (1)

Ec|ipse (52) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039283)

I've been using Slack for a few years now, and recently installed RH, debian, caldera, etc.. and found that I can't stand the file structures of any of them, the only one I've found thats close is SuSE, and thats because it was originally based on Slack when it first started out. So now I'm running one Slack box (this one) and another SuSE box for playing.

Slackware won't die as long as distros like the above are still treating the users like MS has been for years. RPM's are better left for the MS migraters rather then the user who wants to actually learn Linux.

My Slackware setup (1)

mfh (56) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039284)

My slackware setup consists of Slack 3.2 with rpm installed. I have found that this is the ideal setup for me. I upgraded to glibc2 via rpm also. It was quick, painless, and now my slackware system is up to date. I would advise this to anyone using slackware that wants newer libs!

Re: eh, off topic... (1)

Gleef (86) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039285)

Anonymous coward wrote:

sorry this is a bit off topic but anyone know how, if possible, i can tell what irq settings are being used in linux?

If your kernel is new enough, you can just "cat /proc/interrupt". That will give you the IRQ settings.


my modem works fine in windows (USRobotics 56k faxmodem)

US Robotics (3Com) makes three kinds of modems: crap, decent and excellent. Their Courier line is excellent, the best modems I've seen for under $500. Their Sportster line is decent, but you might have to wade through some plug and play settings to get the modem working in Linux. Their WinModem line is crap, it's a glorified sound card, coupled with a Closed Source windows program for pretending the sound card is a modem. These won't work in Linux until someone rewrites such software from scratch (it's easier to just spend the extra $30 to get a real modem).


and linux doesn't see it, i'm most positive i just need to change the irq or the com settings on the modem...it would be cool if i knew what to change it to, and didn't have to try random ones...thanks =)

Many modem programs in Linux assume /dev/modem as the device. /dev/modem is usually just a symbolic link to the appropriate com port device. Boot up your machine in Windows, check which com port it is hooked up to, remove "COM", subract 1 and preceed it with "/dev/ttyS". For example, "COM1" would translate to "/dev/ttyS0".

Once you know which COM port Windows uses, just:
$ cd /dev
$ rm modem
$ ln -s ttyS0 modem
Of course replacing ttyS0 with whichever the approprate tag for the com port you want is.

Uhm, Slackware.com is old (1)

Jordy (440) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039286)

Slackware.com was registered in 1995. It always went to cdrom.com's web page, so I guess slackware.com got a new web page, not a new domain name :)

Glibc comes with Slackware 3.6 (1)

Jordy (440) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039287)

It's there, in one of the packages. Binaries are not compiled against it and your compiler will not use it by default, but you can run glibc bins just fine.

I Run Slack, But.. (1)

Aaron M. Renn (539) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039289)

I'm running slackware and think it is a good distro. But next time I install a clean system, it will probably be Debian because slackware installs non-free software by default and I don't want any of that on my system. Plus I'm interested in trying out new distros.

Good luck Slack! (1)

CrusadeR (555) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039290)

Like so many others, I started out with a Slackware distribution. I'd happily go back when they move to glibc, as Slackware was consistently a higher quality package than Redhat, Caldera, and many others...

Actually, slackware has 3 domains... (1)

farrellj (563) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039291)

Yuppers.

Slackware not only is a decent distribution it is the easiest to customize, IMOHO. But then again, I have been using Linux since kernel v0.12...

ttyl
Farrell

Slackware + glibc2 (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039292)

Posted by oNZeNeMo:

I've seen a lot of complains that slackware doesn't use the newest libc libraries. It's as simple as downloading egcs and reading the glibc2 howto. Sure, it may take a few hours to compile, but you have to consider all the time you're saving with slackware by not having to clean up all the extra garbage that you find in other distros (*cough*redhat*cough*).

Poor souls... (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039293)

Posted by posterkid:

poor soul, he couldn't figure out how to use dselect

Sorry, we're not all lusers who need a packaging system to install a program.

No log rotation? luser. (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039294)

Posted by posterkid:

[pk@odin /usr/local/sbin]$ sudo wc -l logrotate

29 logrotate

And one line in cron. If you can't handle doing that yourself, GTF off of Un*x.

Are you all going soft? (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039295)

Posted by Buckaroo Banzai:

I started with Slackware about 3 years ago as a TOTAL newbie (to UNIX too!). Eventually it pushed windows off my machine (good riddance). And I always felt proud to say that, "I use Slackware, not Redhat" because it meant that I am TRULY a Linux user.

But then -- I went to install glibc (actually, about two days ago). A nightmare. I insisted on compiling from the source, but eventually went with the binary distribution. Looking more closely at my filesystem, the library structure is a MESS! Granted, this is the accumulated junk of a few years. My system is working fine now, but I think its time for a fresh install - and it might be time for Debian. I feel kinda guilty, but want a clean install, maybe learn a new distribution...

I had my mind set on it until I saw this thread...

Slack's advanced packaging system (1)

Wisdom Seeker (841) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039296)

"Dave says its because of Slack's advanced packaging system *grin*."

In my oppinion, the .tgz format is not to be laughed at. It may not be very sofisticated, but it does the job.
I personally find adding, removing, creating and managing Slackware .tgz packages, much easier than the .rpm format. It's a lot more flexible.

The above is my personal oppinion, I'm aware that people who favor other distributions will probably have a different oppinion, and recomend other package formats (such as .deb or .rpm).

Regards
Jesper Juhl

Poor souls... (1)

James Kachel (1176) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039297)

Can't we base criticisms or praises of a distribution on something *other* than the package management system?

more scary then redhat (1)

James Kachel (1176) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039298)

You make 2 disks, a boot disk and a root disk. Since your CD-ROM drive is SCSI, you'd download the appropriate SCSI bootdisk.
Oh, and the CDs from CheapBytes are fine. Get a book too.

Libc5 + kernel 2.0? (1)

heroine (1220) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039299)

I can't imagine still using Slakware. I started on it years ago and converted to Debian when libc6 came out. After using Debian as a crutch to become familiar with the proper file heirarchy, I now use it to initialize the base system and install most things by hand. Now the libc5 system looks like pre-Win95 technology. There are actually people in this world who think Slakware is completely compatible with modern programs and runs exactly as fast as kernel 2.2.

Slackware still rules (1)

tzanger (1575) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039301)

Started out with it waaaaaay back in the 1.0.x days, did the a.out --> elf conversion manually and one day I will do the libc5 --> libc6 conversion as well. It builds character and teaches you a little bit about what is actually going on under the hood, which is what I *love* about Linux.

I've never used or even seen Debian but after dealing with RedHate I am turned off of these "turnkey" packages. RPM bows big hairy sheep with diseased feet and gingivitis. Mind you their rc.d structure is godlike.

Slackware lets you tune your system how you want. None of this "don't worry, just sit back and I'll install what I think you want". none of this RPM bullshit. If someone could school me on debian and its advantages (remove the spambusters from the email) I'd appreciate it but if it's just another RedHate clone, I'll pass.

I actually *prefer* to use .tar.gz as I know what I am getting. This is one of the reasons I loathe WinBlows. You have no control. Same with RPMs. .tar.gz is the One True Way. :-)
None of this "ooh, your dependencies aren't right" crap. Half the time the dependency database is screwed. The only thing I don't really like with .tar.gz is the nonability to uninstall everything without going through the Makefile.

Other than that... Slackware will rule my box for years to come. Keep up the good work!!

slackware (1)

diakka (2281) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039302)

I used slackware for about a year. It was my first Linux distribution. It was nice and simple, and a good distribution to learn how stuff works. Later on I decided to install Applix. Since it came with rpm's you had to install rpm as I recall. Playing around with rpm, i tried installing other software packages as well but many rpm's kept failing dependancy checks. Of course i could override this, but I thought it would be nice to see how a whole system in which every package's info was stored in a package database would be (yes i know slackware does, but it didn't have all the cool features that the other package tools did). I was reluctant to install redhat because of the "commercial aspect". I was under the impression that their system depended on alot of propriotary software, so I tried debian, and couldn't get the damn thing to install. I finally said "screw it" and decided to install redhat. Eventually all my misconceptions about redhat were washed away and I've been running that ever since. I don't mean to plug my distribution or start a flame war, but I'm just telling my experience. I have some very fond memories of running slackware. Makes me feel kind of nostalgic.
--

Why I still use Slackware (1)

linuxrulez (2414) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039303)

1)It ships with loadlin (and LILO too!!!)
2)Its got the shadow password suite
3)Its got Openlook
4)tgzs can be uninstalled using pkgtool
5)rpm2tgz and glibc allow Redhat binaries to work under Slackware
6)tgzs are smaller than rpms and a lot of software on the net is still available only as tgz. One doesnt have to wait for the rmps to come out.


Well... (1)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039304)

"Advanced packaging system?" Bhahahaha...

Anyway, good luck to the Slackwarez, too. After all, it was the dist I began with (but horrors if I ever have to use it again =)

Yours, ex-slackware, current debilizer,

Slackware Rocks! (1)

glomph (2644) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039306)

Clean Lean and Mean!
And despite what a lot of klueless types say,
glibc6 stuff RUNS FINE on it.

For instance, Oracle, WINE, and many other glibc6
binaries. All crusing on my several dozen Slackware boxes... Yay Patrick Volkerding...

Avoid proprietary, avoid fifty gazillion rc.d files, avoid MS-style GUI-GAK! Go Slackware!

good old Slackware (1)

morbid (4258) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039307)

*blush* I'm running Slackware at the moment. It's what I started on back in '95 and I like it because the packages are nice and simple .tgz files :)

I've got Debian, Redhat and Caldera CDs (amongst others) but only for the extra apps.

I don't like that RPM thing having too much control. Being hard of thinking, I never could figure out what it was doing. pkgtool seems to do the biz.

Let me get this straight, you pompous moron. (1)

FiNaLe (4289) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039308)

I can hardly believe they even let someone as dumb and irrehensible as you around modern technology.

When you see someone installing slackware, you point them to Red Hat?? If you must use a distrobution, slackware is definitely the best. You probably couldn't even fix a Makefile if it was broken, so go hide behind your "easy" little dselect, and rpm. And you, sir, have no right at all, to call someone else a newbie.

If you can deal with the learning curve, stay with windows. I bet you have poor hygene too.

Slackware: _Was_, _Is_, _Will be_ (always) (1)

vrkid (5002) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039309)

My first distribution I downloaded was MCC interim 1+ (does anyone remember that one?), back in the summer of 1994 (now why do I feel old all of a sudden?). Then came out Slackware and I was stupid enough to download it in ascii mode (on a 2400 modem for a whole day) :) Been using ever since, my current machines use Slackware 3.4, highly patched to include just about all the latest packages available. I even migrated the sysem to glibc2 and recompiled the whole system to support it. Yes it took me a weekend to do it, but what a ride! What an experience! Learned so much I didn't even think possible. As my day to day job i administrate RedHat machines (someone elses decision). So you can look at it as my profession is RedHat and Slackware is my hobby :)

no coward here (1)

datazone (5048) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039310)

im not a coward, just entered the wrong password... i hate when that happens, too many damn password to remember...

Truth of the matter.. (1)

doomy (7461) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039311)

Slackware is dead...

It was good a couple of years ago..actually i started with slackware way back in 94 :) i guess they just couldnt keep up with debian and redhat..

still.. it's fun to do tar xvfz something.tar.gz

in other news.. stampede uses bzip2 to compress their archive formats..
--

Maybe you need to read between the lines (1)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039312)

Of course it's commercial. Who said it wasn't? The comment about Shockingly enough, its Slackware.com is humor. Needs an apostrophe, but it' humor.

--

Are you all going soft? (1)

Acronym (7913) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039313)

Well, some of us are ex-windoze users.

I, and many friends here at university, have installed Linux. What distro have we chosen? Redhat 5.2. Why?

a) Easy installation.
b) RPM.

Yes, I know that experienced users may see these as crutches; but get this.

We newbies don't care.

It's a big leap from Windows (which, I hasten to add, is perfectly usable on the desktop for most single-user applications) to Linux; most of the fundamental assumptions are very different. So we've all got quite enough (re)learning to do, and anything which makes our lives easier is a definite bonus.

Less configurable? Quite possibly. But we just want to use the damn thing.

It's people like us - new adopters, technically competent, learning, but not exactly gurus - who will help evangelise Linux on the desktop. Also, these people are frequently competent programmers, if not hackers in the true sense if the word, which increases the developer base for OSS yet further. Linux doesn't just need virtuoso programmers, although they have a very prominent role to play; it also needs competent, level-headed coders who may not change the world, but can at least incrementally improve it... these are the kind of people who are installing RH 5.2 today.

So, RH5.2 suits our needs. Slackware may suit yours better; in that case, use it. No-one is going to stop you doing so, and distros like Slackware are ideal for some. Just because RPM isn't for you doesn't mean you have to bemoan its' existence; let's all live and let live.

After all, it's all still the same OS, just by different routes.
--
Acronym

Yay (1)

CWiz (9100) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039314)

I started out with Slackware many, many years ago so it's actually rather fun to see they've got their own place now.
I've still got one computer (which my mom uses, how about that?) that runs Slack, but the main server has moved to Debian GNU/Linux and my gateway/jukebox runs my own homebrew GNU/Linux system.
In any way, good luck Slack. I know atleast a couple of nerds who will be very glad about this news:)

Slack may not be for everone... (1)

magister (9423) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039315)

But its my fav distro, i run it on 3 of my computers, and i run debian on my alpha. I like it now being BSD strict on the file hericy, and not Sysv 5 strict on the runlevels. i mainly run it becous i find it much easer to hack and make it just the way i like it. With RedHat, when i had it installed on my alpha, i coulnt get it actualy uninstall packages, and i had a hell of a time converting the runlavels the way i like them. i switched to debian mainly for the package managemnt and im still having troble with runlevels. Slackware's configuration is strate forward and nothing extra that you need to worie about. i like a compleetly coustomized system, i like to change the way everthing is. with debian i still cant get it to make files with the .gz .tgz .deb .rpm ect to be colored at the console.

It's a commercial distribution.. (1)

BusterB (10791) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039316)

Redhat remains commercial, but is equally easy to download for free

I'm sorry but Slackware does not cut it. (1)

simm_s (11519) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039317)

Slackware was my very first distribution, and it taught me to love linux. Last year I decided to change to a different distribution and learned that Slack has a bit of catching up to do. I currently use S.u.S.E and i'm in heaven. I can update on the internet and easily use rpms. When the guys at Slack.com decide to add redhat-like and S.u.S.E-like features its distribution I will come back and not a second before.

I am enjoying this (1)

Agathos (11554) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039318)

I, for one, am finding this half entertaining, half educational. I've got a Red Hat partition that's been sitting on my computer since I first put it together a few months ago. I still don't use it regularly and haven't finished tweaking it to my satisfaction (mostly window manager things - Red Hat's default is repulsive!).

Sometimes I wonder if I should tear it all down and replace it with slackware or something to really learn it thoroughly, starting from the bottom. Then I wouldn't get frustrated by simple command-line syntax issues that wouldn't slow me down if I had actually needed to use a command line at first (this is actually what stopped me the last time I booted the Linux partition). I already know I don't care for RPMs. I never used them with any constistency (which screws RPM up, right?), and now I've stopped using them altogether.

So reading a debate over the pros and cons of slackware is pretty relevant to me. The fact that it's so heated just increases the entertainment value.

Package system debate (1)

SineWave (11802) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039319)

With all of the talk about RPM vs. .tar.gz, I'm suprised no one has mentioned the rpm2targz utility thats included in (at least) Slack 3.5

Its the only distro I've ever used, and I'm quite happy with it. Especailly after having a look at the rc.d dir on a friend's RedHat box... ecchh. ;oP

Truth of the matter.. (1)

StimpyBoy (11864) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039320)

Ahh, Slackerware. At least that's what us guys with nothing better to do than spend days installing an OS called it :)

I actually like Slackware's install from 3.2 way better than Redhat's. I remember being able to mount anything I needed during the install, really handy for installing off FAT drives that you downloaded the distro to (yes, downloading Linux is the only way :) I haven't seen what the later versions are like, I hope they haven't dumbed it down.

It was pretty high quality too. Redhat 5.1 has given me more headaches in a week than slackware gave me in a year.

Redhat RPMs are making people lazy. I just feel like a simpleton when I install an RPM. I find myself querying packages all the time. Perhaps it's paranoia, but give me .tar.gz any day :)

Uninstalling tar.gz's (1)

Tim Sutherland (11914) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039321)

Actually, I just saw a neat proggie on freshmeat,
called Pack http://www.linuxos.org/Pack.html
It's a replacement of /bin/install that will
record what files are installed, allowing you to
uninstall them later. I also understand that tgz
can be easily uninstalled, although I have never
used slackware.

Slackware! (1)

tarcus (206701) | more than 15 years ago | (#2039324)

My system's a mess, but it's *my* mess, *I* made it into this mess, not some far-away schemer on another continent, it was me! I ballsed it up myself!

Just install what you need to get a bootable system with network access and a compiler, then everything else you download and install. What other way is there?

--

Check for New 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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...