wow.. been reading for three years and this is my first post, which also happens to be first post...
Ah.. such a shame... three years of training.. three long years of awaiting that special moment.. that one shining point in your life where it all comes together. Ah to score that elusive and coveted first post that we all scoff at but secretly dream about...
So you hit the Read More link and you see NO POSTS...and your heart starts to race.. palms begin sweating... you quickly type your gibberish in then grope madly for the mouse... with high hopes you click the submit button then pray to the geek Gods..."Oh dear God.. just let me have it once.. please God.. just this one time"
Then the page loads and you are left looking at this:
There would be an iso, but right now, slack-current is a quickly moving target. If you really want an iso, you have two options. One, get the iso for 7.0 and use 'upgradepkg' to upgrade to -current. Two, wait until 7.1 is released and get its iso.
Naturally, this comment brought to you by Slackware-current.
--
steve
C-x i ~/.sig
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
nemoc
·
· Score: 2
linux wasn't meant to be an 'enterprise' operating system. It was written as an experiment on the memory management capabilities of the 386. The reason linux is getting so much recognition in the b2b world and in ecommerce is because linux stands on it's own merits. That's why we all use it, not because of some marketing hype. Okay...linux distributions start changing there name's to appease the suits. what next? 'value' added features, fragmentation of the distro's, focusing on marketing insead of programming...where does it end? no...slackware should keep it's name, and be judged on it's merit as an operating system (well...distribution). If the suits don't think 'slackware' if professional enough let them use NT. But we'll all laugh at them when their server goes down.
Actually I started with Slack 4. I got a little frustrated setting up X so I switched to Redhat.. woowoo got X working right away, but was really confused with most of the rest of it.
So I went back to Slack. Give me a newbie, I'll give him a Slack distro with a book. They will be much better off in the long run;-)
Re:Real geeks use Debian!
by
Pinball+Wizard
·
· Score: 2
Debian, more than any of the other distros, follows the GNU philosophy. It is committed to supporting free software released under the GNU, BSD, or similar free licences. Unlike the others, they respect Richard Stallman's wish to call Linux GNU/Linux. See more about this on their social contract page.
Its not that its technically more advanced, it just follows the GNU philosophy more than the other distros.
--
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
Phroggy
·
· Score: 2
Personally, I don't care what the CTOs think. I'm a geek, and Slackware appears to be the best geek distro of Linux. For those of you who aren't geeks, there's Debian, Corel, SuSE, and, um, a couple of others.
If the CTO really wants the business to succeed, he'll find geeks to run the servers - not business-oriented people who happen to know computers and will try to keep them working because they're geting paid, but geeks who are passionate about what they do and would probably keep doing it for free if they didn't have bills to worry about. These are the people that will pour their soul into making things run smoothly - and these are the people who run Slackware.
(Note that I'm not advocating letting them do it for free, nor am I claiming that all geeks only run Slackware.)
--
-- $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$]; $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
You can still run the base install from floppy disks, downloadable over the Internet, as for ordering it from floppies, I think that it is only available on CDROM at this point. The A directories are sized for distribution onto floppy disks.:-)
Or the *BSDs which due to an, uhh, interesting licensing conundrum with AT&T will continue releasing 2.x updates for an eternity (or until the copyright expires, which under the DMCA is the same thing as infinity).
Your statement that all BSD-based operating systems must remain within the 2.x versioning regime is mistaken. You probably meant to say that they must stay within the 4.x regime, but that is also untrue. For a time, the actual Berkley distribution (not the *BSD's, which didn't exist at the time) was confined to the 4.x range. But that hasn't been the case for many years now.
These days, the code used in all currently produced and maintained BSD-based operating systems is entirely unencumbered by legal restraints arising from AT&T copyright claims. Thus, for example, OpenBSD is at version 2.7, while FreeBSD is at version 4.0.
The code has moved forward quite a bit since the 4.4BSD days, and the versioning for each BSD project reflects that. Each follows its own versioning rules.
You might want to check into the history of the BSD side of the UNIX story. It's actually quite interesting.
And I'm only on RedHat 6.2 - I'd better upgrade to Slackware, as it's obviously a newer and better release!
Seriously though, why are the Linux distro's playing the (MS approved) numbers game? Do we really need this sort of numbering system (i.e. people jumping numbers to "keep up"). Is there a better way that actually provides a useful comparison (other than the kernel number, which in itself isn't that useful).
Does any site have a list of Distro releases, kernel versions, and major software versions (sendmail, gcc, etc)?
Remember that was Patrick's whole argument? The only reason he went to 7 in the first place was that RedHat had a higher version number and people were asking him questions like "When will you catch up to RedHat?" Since there are enough people out there that don't get that different products with different version numbers don't compare, mainly because they're *DIFFERENT PRODUCTS*...
Actually Slack artificially inflated their last version by a couple because they were sick of being asked if they were compatible with "Linux 6". It's a pretty funny article, if you poke around on the slackware site I'm sure you'll find it.
It's a marketing thing - like "Oracle 8i" which sounds cool.. until you realize they haven't gone through 8 revisions. Then you have Microsoft's calling everything by years - which works rather well if you overlook the fact that they've never released it in the year that the product was named after.:)
Totally marketing. That's why I like the linux kernel - "We're at 2.2.16!" which obscures the fact that they have, infact, gone through dozens of development cycles by now. Or the *BSDs which due to an, uhh, interesting licensing conundrum with AT&T will continue releasing 2.x updates for an eternity (or until the copyright expires, which under the DMCA is the same thing as infinity).
Since linux seems to emulate first, innovate second with code, it seems logical that developers would follow in the naming schemes of major (proprietary) vendors as well. By emulating first I mean no disrespect - there have been legit free software projects that did come up with something original (ex, emacs).
and anyone who suggests using the year of release will be shot:-)
Oh darn...i was really looking forward to Linux 2002. Kernel 2.6.0 sounds so boring. And hey, if M$ havn't released a version of Windows with the same year, we're in the clear! ("Oh, you're using Windows 2000? That's two years old now! I have Linux 2002"):)
Just a selection, more are in the MIRRORS.TXT file on any of these sites, FTP isn't slow if you use a server near you...
UK/European Users: The Slackware distribution is mirrored nightly at: src.doc.ic.ac.uk in directory/packages/linux/slackware-mirror ----------------------------------
USA: ftp.freesoftware.com:/pub/slackware/ is the home site. Also: uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu:/pub/systems/linux/distributions/slackware. ftp.cps.cmich.edu:/pub/linux/packages/slackware sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/Linux/distributions/slackware. mirrored nightly. ftp2.netis.com:/pub/linux/slackware ftp.nlife.com:/pub/linux/slackware/ full mirror of ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/linux/slackware/ ftp.cs.umn.edu (160.94.277.144) mirrors nightly in/pub/Linux/slackware. ftp.linux.locus.halcyon.com/pub/linux/slackware: Updated daily at 08:30 Pacific. ftp.halcyon.com mirrors the distribution at 400 PST daily. ftp.thedalles.net:/pub/linux/slackware ftp.thepayne.com:/pub/unix/slackware-3.6 daily mirror @ 01:00 Pacific. ftp://ftp.cs.unm.edu/dist/mirrors/slackware-3.6 updated daily around 1:00am MDT. ftp.cs.columbia.edu:/archives/linux/Slackware mirrors the distribution daily (in the early morning). (they also have slackware_source) ftp.ccs.neu.edu:/pub/os/linux/slackware. Updated: Nightly
--
~ppppppppö
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
streetlawyer
·
· Score: 2
no, "thank you" was the trademark of the dumb marketing guy, not the dumb consultant. osm occasionally uses "thank you", but if you need a trademark to recognise his style, you're mad. gnarphlager says "thankyougoodnight", and I say "fucken" a lot.
There is an explaination on the site as to the jump Here.
All of the information on what the current release includes is here, on slackware.com
You can always get all of the newest stuff by looking in the "current" directory on any slackware mirror.
Pretty much, Slackware went to 7 because Patrick was getting bugged by people who didn't realize that the numbers are just numbers, and thought that RedHat was eons ahead of Slack. Also, several major changes were made in that release, including shifting to glibc.
Slackware is very friendly to local compilation of software, if you don't like how far up to date a piece of software, just compile it yourself, also, you should always compile a customized kernel to get optimal performance from your machine with any distibution.
It is suprising that the next distro is not 8. I held off on submitting the beta as a story. The beta is actually an excellent product. It includes X4 and the newest verions of just about everything that there is to have the newest version of.
BTW, Slack is the best distro;-)
-- Eh...
Newbie question:
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2
Is Slackware better than Red Hat? Or KDE?
Re:Newbie question:
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3
When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi *and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like, 'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.
Ed, man! !man ed
ED(1) UNIX Programmer's Manual ED(1)
NAME ed - text editor
SYNOPSIS ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ] DESCRIPTION Ed is the standard text editor. - ---
Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed because it's ED!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:
- -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929/bin/ed - -rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970/usr/ucb/vi - -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990/usr/bin/emacs
Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed. Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K; and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:
- --- Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm the novice with verbosity.
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.
ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!
When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!! Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!
TEXT EDITOR.
When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their "edlin" on a UNIX standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.
Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!
Once again, my fav distro beats the others to the punch! I really like the way they are doing things, with a live, ongoing beta (aka slackware-current). Programs are kept current, and you can be on the b/leading edge if you want.
ttyl Farrell
-- CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada
h
Maybe they need a change of name
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4
As a professional consultant for a major Fortune 500 software company, I've recently gotten involved in the whole open source phenomenon as started by Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman with the release of the GNU/Linux operating system (or is it Linux? I'm not too sure on this point).
Anyway, after having compiled a report on the commercial viability of open source as an alternative to closed source in the e-commerce/b2b world, I've become quite interested in Linux myself, and thanks to a handy Corel Linux distribution, consider myself to be someway to becoming a "guru" as people here like to call themselves.
Anyway, my point is that Slackware, as a distribution, doesn't give out the professional image that Linux is trying to gain at the moment. On one hand, you've got respectable players like Red Hat, Corel and SCO pushing Linux's corporate image to new levels of respectibility, but on the other hand you've got a distribution named "Slackware", hardly the name your tech-savvy CTO wants to represent a core part of their enterprise solution.
The whole name seems to give the distribution a half-finished, "slack" even, image, surely not one that's in anybody's best interest, whether they be the average long-haired Linux sysadmin or a suited CTO looking for the next big thing. And this image taints all of Linux.
No, whilst Slackware may produce a decent distribution, they definitely need to think about a name change to ensure continued acceptance in the increasingly corporate-driven Linux market.
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
grammar+nazi
·
· Score: 2
I decided to do as I usually do, and enlighten and entertain the/. masses:
slack (as an adj.) 1 : not using due diligence, care, or dispatch : NEGLIGENT 2 a : characterized by slowness, sluggishness, or lack of energy (a slack pace) b : moderate in some quality; especially : moderately warm (a slack oven) c : blowing or flowing at low speed (the tide was slack) 3 a : not tight or taut (a slack rope) b : lacking in usual or normal firmness and steadiness : WEAK (slack muscles) (slack supervision) 4 : wanting in activity : DULL (a slack market) 5 : lacking in completeness, finish, or perfection (a very slack piece of work) Interesting rootwords include the greek lagnos meaning lustful.
Mandrake(we all know it's the magician, though) 1 a : a Mediterranean herb (Mandragora officinarum) of the nightshade family with ovate leaves, yellowish or purple flowers, and a large forked root traditionally credited with human attributes b : the root of a mandrake formerly used especially to promote conception, as a cathartic, or as a narcotic and soporific 2 : MAYAPPLE
yellow-dog 1 : MEAN, CONTEMPTIBLE 2 : of or relating to opposition to trade unionism or a labor union
grammar nazi's conclusions: None of the other Linux distros had worthwhile names to list here. Slack is probably not a hotword for a productivity application/OS. However, it is a catchy word and it represents the exact opposite of how I perceive the linux kernel. I can think of one particular OS that is fitting to be called slackware. Any guesses?
--
Keeping/. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
be-fan
·
· Score: 3
Are you kidding about the marketing hype part? Linux is not popular because it stands on its own merits. In all fairness, BSD did it a long time before Linux became a plausible solution. Linux's increasing popularity in the business world is simply a byproduct of people reeling from Microsoft looking for another solution. Linux happened to be one of the only free OSs that were viable at the time, and also the only one that had a community vocal enough to hype it (Unlike BSD.) As such, there is nothing technical about Linux that makes it stand out. Its popularity with business is ENTIERLY hype related. In this end, the hype that OSS and the FSF create help a great deal. PS: I'm not saying that Linux has no merit for people who like the OS. I'm also not saying that OSS and the FSF is just hype. I'm saying that these things are true in the business world. (Are you going to tell me that these companies give a damn about the GPL and the philosophy behind it?) Linux and the FSF are very meaningful the members of the community, just not the business world.
-- A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
medicthree
·
· Score: 3
You use Corel linux and think you're on your way to becoming a guru? Bwhahahahhaha...
I'm sorry, I'll take the karma hit on this one. I'll even start it at 2.
[Ignoring for the moment that your post is marginally off-topic] Could you innumerate exactly what gives Debian "real power" over all the other distros?
--
-- "I have a good idea why it's hard to verify programs. They're usually wrong." --Manuel Blum, FOCS 94
Slashdot Mirror
wow.. been reading for three years and this is my first post, which also happens to be first post...
Ah.. such a shame... three years of training.. three long years of awaiting that special moment.. that one shining point in your life where it all comes together. Ah to score that elusive and coveted first post that we all scoff at but secretly dream about...
So you hit the Read More link and you see NO POSTS...and your heart starts to race.. palms begin sweating... you quickly type your gibberish in then grope madly for the mouse... with high hopes you click the submit button then pray to the geek Gods..."Oh dear God.. just let me have it once.. please God.. just this one time"
Then the page loads and you are left looking at this:
(#8)
Ah well...always a bridesmaid and never a bride.
Anywhere you can download a bootable iso image?
linux wasn't meant to be an 'enterprise' operating system. It was written as an experiment on the memory management capabilities of the 386.
The reason linux is getting so much recognition in the b2b world and in ecommerce is because linux stands on it's own merits. That's why we all use it, not because of some marketing hype.
Okay...linux distributions start changing there name's to appease the suits. what next? 'value' added features, fragmentation of the distro's, focusing on marketing insead of programming...where does it end?
no...slackware should keep it's name, and be judged on it's merit as an operating system (well...distribution). If the suits don't think 'slackware' if professional enough let them use NT. But we'll all laugh at them when their server goes down.
Actually I started with Slack 4. I got a little frustrated setting up X so I switched to Redhat.. woowoo got X working right away, but was really confused with most of the rest of it.
;-)
So I went back to Slack. Give me a newbie, I'll give him a Slack distro with a book. They will be much better off in the long run
Its not that its technically more advanced, it just follows the GNU philosophy more than the other distros.
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
If the CTO really wants the business to succeed, he'll find geeks to run the servers - not business-oriented people who happen to know computers and will try to keep them working because they're geting paid, but geeks who are passionate about what they do and would probably keep doing it for free if they didn't have bills to worry about. These are the people that will pour their soul into making things run smoothly - and these are the people who run Slackware.
(Note that I'm not advocating letting them do it for free, nor am I claiming that all geeks only run Slackware.)
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
You can still run the base install from floppy disks, downloadable over the Internet, as for ordering it from floppies, I think that it is only available on CDROM at this point. The A directories are sized for distribution onto floppy disks. :-)
Eh...
Or the *BSDs which due to an, uhh, interesting licensing conundrum with AT&T will continue releasing 2.x updates for an eternity (or until the copyright expires, which under the DMCA is the same thing as infinity).
Your statement that all BSD-based operating systems must remain within the 2.x versioning regime is mistaken. You probably meant to say that they must stay within the 4.x regime, but that is also untrue. For a time, the actual Berkley distribution (not the *BSD's, which didn't exist at the time) was confined to the 4.x range. But that hasn't been the case for many years now.
These days, the code used in all currently produced and maintained BSD-based operating systems is entirely unencumbered by legal restraints arising from AT&T copyright claims. Thus, for example, OpenBSD is at version 2.7, while FreeBSD is at version 4.0.
The code has moved forward quite a bit since the 4.4BSD days, and the versioning for each BSD project reflects that. Each follows its own versioning rules.
You might want to check into the history of the BSD side of the UNIX story. It's actually quite interesting.
anyone know if you can still get Slack on 8" floppies? (wink)
And I'm only on RedHat 6.2 - I'd better upgrade to Slackware, as it's obviously a newer and better release!
Seriously though, why are the Linux distro's playing the (MS approved) numbers game? Do we really need this sort of numbering system (i.e. people jumping numbers to "keep up"). Is there a better way that actually provides a useful comparison (other than the kernel number, which in itself isn't that useful).
Does any site have a list of Distro releases, kernel versions, and major software versions (sendmail, gcc, etc)?
CP/M was way too consumer to be worthy of a geek. MP/M was for the real geeks!
--
"I have a good idea why it's hard to verify programs. They're usually wrong." --Manuel Blum, FOCS 94
UK/European Users: /packages/linux/slackware-mirror
The Slackware distribution is mirrored nightly at:
src.doc.ic.ac.uk in directory
----------------------------------
USA: /pub/slackware/ is the home site. Also: /pub/systems/linux/distributions/slackware. /pub/linux/packages/slackware /pub/Linux/distributions/slackware. mirrored nightly. /pub/linux/slackware /pub/linux/slackware/ /pub/Linux/slackware. : Updated daily at 08:30 Pacific. /pub/linux/slackware /pub/unix/slackware-3.6 daily mirror @ 01:00 Pacific. /archives/linux/Slackware mirrors the distribution daily (in the early morning). (they also have slackware_source) /pub/os/linux/slackware. Updated: Nightly
ftp.freesoftware.com:
uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu:
ftp.cps.cmich.edu:
sunsite.unc.edu:
ftp2.netis.com:
ftp.nlife.com:
full mirror of
ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/linux/slackware/
ftp.cs.umn.edu (160.94.277.144) mirrors nightly in
ftp.linux.locus.halcyon.com/pub/linux/slackware
ftp.halcyon.com mirrors the distribution at 400 PST daily.
ftp.thedalles.net:
ftp.thepayne.com:
ftp://ftp.cs.unm.edu/dist/mirrors/slackware-3.6 updated daily around 1:00am MDT.
ftp.cs.columbia.edu:
ftp.ccs.neu.edu:
~ppppppppö
no, "thank you" was the trademark of the dumb marketing guy, not the dumb consultant. osm occasionally uses "thank you", but if you need a trademark to recognise his style, you're mad. gnarphlager says "thankyougoodnight", and I say "fucken" a lot.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
C'mon people, this is guy is funny. Don't get bent out of shape... just let sleeping trolls lie.
"Free your mind and your ass will follow"
There is an explaination on the site as to the jump Here.
;-)
All of the information on what the current release includes is here, on slackware.com
You can always get all of the newest stuff by looking in the "current" directory on any slackware mirror.
Pretty much, Slackware went to 7 because Patrick was getting bugged by people who didn't realize that the numbers are just numbers, and thought that RedHat was eons ahead of Slack. Also, several major changes were made in that release, including shifting to glibc.
Slackware is very friendly to local compilation of software, if you don't like how far up to date a piece of software, just compile it yourself, also, you should always compile a customized kernel to get optimal performance from your machine with any distibution.
It is suprising that the next distro is not 8. I held off on submitting the beta as a story. The beta is actually an excellent product. It includes X4 and the newest verions of just about everything that there is to have the newest version of.
BTW, Slack is the best distro
Eh...
Is Slackware better than Red Hat? Or KDE?
Once again, my fav distro beats the others to the punch! I really like the way they are doing things, with a live, ongoing beta (aka slackware-current). Programs are kept current, and you can be on the b/leading edge if you want.
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
As a professional consultant for a major Fortune 500 software company, I've recently gotten involved in the whole open source phenomenon as started by Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman with the release of the GNU/Linux operating system (or is it Linux? I'm not too sure on this point).
Anyway, after having compiled a report on the commercial viability of open source as an alternative to closed source in the e-commerce/b2b world, I've become quite interested in Linux myself, and thanks to a handy Corel Linux distribution, consider myself to be someway to becoming a "guru" as people here like to call themselves.
Anyway, my point is that Slackware, as a distribution, doesn't give out the professional image that Linux is trying to gain at the moment. On one hand, you've got respectable players like Red Hat, Corel and SCO pushing Linux's corporate image to new levels of respectibility, but on the other hand you've got a distribution named "Slackware", hardly the name your tech-savvy CTO wants to represent a core part of their enterprise solution.
The whole name seems to give the distribution a half-finished, "slack" even, image, surely not one that's in anybody's best interest, whether they be the average long-haired Linux sysadmin or a suited CTO looking for the next big thing. And this image taints all of Linux.
No, whilst Slackware may produce a decent distribution, they definitely need to think about a name change to ensure continued acceptance in the increasingly corporate-driven Linux market.
[Ignoring for the moment that your post is marginally off-topic] Could you innumerate exactly what gives Debian "real power" over all the other distros?
--
"I have a good idea why it's hard to verify programs. They're usually wrong." --Manuel Blum, FOCS 94