Slashdot Mirror


Slackware 10-RC1 Released

Chaxid writes "According to the latest Slackware ChangeLog, release candidate one of the next iteration of Slack is upon us. I asked Patrick Volkerding via e-mail if the 2.6 series of the Linux kernel would be included in this version, and this was his response: 'To have support for using the 2.6 kernel in the installer might not be a good idea quite yet, and it would delay the release a lot. I'm planning to wait on that for the next one'. It's worth noting the Slackware 10 RC1 is fully 2.6 compliant however." As TouchOfRed writes, though, "A test kernel 2.6.6 option is offered via the 'testing' tree. Slackware does not offer ISOs for the RCs (however there are some third party users that compile the RCs or the -Current tree regularly as ISOs), so if you are already running Slackware 9.1, you can use the excellent Swaret to upgrade to the latest packages (make sure you edit your /etc/swaret.conf prior of using swaret to allow for kernel upgrades and other options)." This release includes kernel 2.4.26 , Gnome 2.6.1+, KDE 3.2.3, GCC 3.4, XOrg 6.7 and more.

38 of 346 comments (clear)

  1. Can anyone say why they don't release... by Dagny+Taggert · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ISO's of RCs? Is it to help the guys selling ISO CDs? Seems to me they would want to make it easier to get and test.

    --
    Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
    1. Re:Can anyone say why they don't release... by pestilence4hr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Probably because bandwidth isn't free...just a guess.

    2. Re:Can anyone say why they don't release... by boojit · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because their current form of distribution is superior to ISO download. By using an rsync mirror, you can not only easily download an entire distro, but update that distro with any changes as they occur...without downloading the entire ISO again. For instance, when RC2 comes out, by using rsync you'll be able to easily download just the changes from RC1 to RC2. (I don't use swaret as i've got some custom scripts built to use some rsync mirrors I know of, but I'm sure it works on this concept and uses rsync).

      Also: this distro method allows you to pick only those packages you want to download. Don't like GNOME? don't download it. Don't want any gui at all? skip gnome, kde, and X.

      Once you've downloaded your distro, just do an NFS export on the distro dir on the host machine. Then build yourself a boot CD or boot floppy (as you prefer). Once you've booted on the target machine, you can install straight off the NFS share to the target. Works great, I do it all the time...I did my first ever Slackware install this way, even though the host machine was a Windows box.

      Honestly, ISO downloads of distros kinda sucks, once you start doing things this way.

      DaC

    3. Re:Can anyone say why they don't release... by boojit · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sure it does. Just download the distro at work (using straight rsync or swaret or even FTP if you want but that doesn't work very well) and then build your own ISOs from the distro. It's a piece of cake, there is even a text file there to tell you exactly how to build the ISO. You can even build your own CD with just the packages you want on it, so you can have the whole thing on 1 CD if you want.

      If all else fails, unofficial sites do release ISOs of the current releases. Some have been mentioned in this forum.

      DaC

  2. Fully 2.6 compliant by mpitcavage · · Score: 5, Informative

    Slackware 9.1 was fully 2.6 compliant, too.

    1. Re:Fully 2.6 compliant by ananke · · Score: 5, Informative

      this new release has a couple of things that will help with 2.6.x kernel more than 9.1 release did. first udev packages have been added, second, updated hotplug packages seem to work better with 2.6.x

      --
      --- d'oh
    2. Re:Fully 2.6 compliant by 13Echo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm currently using 2.6.6 with Slackware 9.1, but I noticed this too... While it works fine, the hotplug system seems to not work as well as it did with 2.4.22. Most specifically, ALSA seems to act a little goofy, but it's nothing that can't be fixed by adding a specific init command to load the proper modules. As for the rest of the important stuff (power management, networking, etc.) - I just built all of that into the kernel instead of making it into modules.

    3. Re:Fully 2.6 compliant by 13Echo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes I was. I had to disable the extra specialized framebuffers though, like nVidia/ATI specific. I kept it simple and left only "Vesa/VGA graphics support". On my first attempt, it started with a blank screen, when I enabled some of the other modules as well. Simplifying it seemed to fix the problem.

      If you'd like, I can post a copy of my ".config" file so that you may see the options that I used.

  3. Happiness :) by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It fills my heart with glee that a fellow dutchy is making (among other people of course) one of the more popular linux distros.

    Congrats to him (and the team)

    --
    This is the sig that says NI (again)
    1. Re:Happiness :) by BrokenHalo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the things that makes Slackware so well put together is that it's a one-man show.

  4. Swaret by Tribbin · · Score: 4, Informative

    I swaret my way to the newest versions. (swaret.org)

    It's nice to have an up-to-date installation-CD though.

    --
    If you mod this up, your slashdot background will turn into a beautiful sunset!
  5. Obligatory complaint by Shadowlion · · Score: 3, Funny

    And I just installed 9.1... *grumble*

  6. Re:Slack by ananke · · Score: 4, Funny

    more like grandfather. slackware predates gentoo by ages :)

    --
    --- d'oh
  7. Terminology nit-pick by johnw · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Surely you can't release an RC? You can issue an RC, but once it's released it's a release, not a release candidate.

    1. Re:Terminology nit-pick by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It seems like everyone is going "release candidate" crazy lately. It seems to me that "release candidate" used to mean "we think this may end up being the 'final' version, but we're going to do some testing, just to make sure. If we don't encounter any HUGE bugs, this will be final." Developers didn't even hit RC2 unless there was some big and unexpected bug in RC1.

      Now, people are releasing release candidates as "a full release that we don't yet guarentee is free of bugs", but they don't exactly guarentee the final release is bug-free either, so I'm never sure what the difference is. Plus, they plan on going through 3 release candidates before the final release, which means that "Release Candidate 1" is never really a candidate for release as "final", and yet it is released. It seems like either the terminology or numbering schemes could use some revision to reflect what the developers actually mean.

  8. Wow, 10 already? by Nick+of+NSTime · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Slackware was the first distro I ever used, way back in 1995. I had read about Linux in a small InfoWorld article, back when InfoWorld was tabloid size instead of regular magazine size. The article said you could run an entire operating system on a single floppy disk. Of course, I had to try this on my 386SX with 4M RAM. I downloaded Slack over a 14.4 modem and then copying it all to a set of floppy disks. I wish I could remember the name of that tool. Anyway, I ended up installing Slackware using UMSDOS so I could keep my DOS/Windows data.

    I remember I had to completely reinstall Slackware any time I wanted to add a new piece of software because I didn't know how it all worked. The very first question I asked on a Linux newsgroup was, "What's darkstar?" It, of course, was the default hostname for a new Slackware install. Heh. Starting X would dump you into fvwm with only an xterm and a pager; not much has changed there. :)

    Ultimately I used that Slackware machine to learn about Unix and make the move from client-focused to enterprise-focused. Those were fun times.

    1. Re:Wow, 10 already? by Roofus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, we're at 10 because Patrick likes to count 2, 3 4, 7 , 8, 9, 10 =)

    2. Re:Wow, 10 already? by Unique2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, not really, Slackware did a version jump from 4 to 7 because people did not realise the difference between the Slackware version and the component packages version. See: Why the jump from 4 to 7? from the Slackware FAQ.

      --
      No trees were harmed in the posting of this message. However, a great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
    3. Re:Wow, 10 already? by zarr · · Score: 3, Funny
      1,2,3,2.4,2.5,2.6,7,8 ...

      Ha! That's nothing!

      1, 2, 3, 95, 98, 2000, 2003, ...

  9. Memories... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can still remember my grandpa telling me stories about this distro.

  10. I started with Slackware... by Noryungi · · Score: 5, Informative
    I think it was way back in 1994-95 that I downloaded my first version of Slackware. It was love at first install, or something like that.

    And I am still using it today. Why?

    • The KISS (Keept It Simple, Stupid) principle of Slackware makes it a breeze to use.
    • Slackware tries to be as UNIX-ish as possible.
    • Slackware -- with its BSD-style init -- is easy to configure.
    • Slackware is a complete system, and yet one that is still reasonbaly lean, since it includes only the most important software.
    • Slackware does not include any of the cutesy-yet-useless GUI thingie that are supposed to 'help' you configure your system while treating you like a jerk.


    All in all, thanks Patrick ! Another great version of a great distribution !
    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
    1. Re:I started with Slackware... by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Slackware -- with its BSD-style init -- is easy to configure.

      I would take issue with this. IMO SysV init is much simpler to use and administer one you understand what it is doing. Since each daemon has its own startup and shutdown script, and since the order they are being executed in can be determined by a glance. It is also very easy to re-order daemon startups, and to start / stop /restart individual processes while the system is running through /etc/init.d. BSD style init does not have this benefit, and since everying is all mismached together it is also often quite cumbersome to manage dependancies.

      From my experience the people who prefer BSD init because it is "simpler" are just people who do not want to take the 5 mins to understand SysV and set it up properly. Investing a few mins setting up your SysV will save you hours of headaches you'd have later on with BSD style.

    2. Re:I started with Slackware... by jcostom · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Don't want mysql to startup on boot? In SysV init you mave to rename six symbolic links to begin with the leter "K", and possibly reorder them. In BSD init, you just remove the executable permission from rc.mysql.

      Why on earth would you do that? Use the tools your distro provides: RedHat/Fedora/Mandrake: chkconfig mysqld off Gentoo: rc-update del mysql default Debian: update-rc.d -f mysql remove Those things are much simpler IMHO than tracking down some filesystem permissions issue later. Suppose they change the behavior to not directly exec rc.whatever, but rather do something like /bin/sh /etc/rc.d/rc.whatever, now you're sunk. Your rc.whatever will be run even if +x isn't set..

      --

      The unsig!
    3. Re:I started with Slackware... by sysopd · · Score: 3, Insightful
      It was a hypothetical situation. Scripts change, too easily in fact.

      Slackware's init scripts haven't changed the way they call /etc/init.d/rc.* scripts since I've been using it (Slackware 3.x), and probably have always worked that way. That is how BSD style init scripts work. Just as the SXX, KXX, etc prefixes in the rc.X directories under SysV work a certain way since thats how they were designed.

      Those of us who don't like hackish solutions like removing an +x bit prefer something manageable, like sysv.

      I'd hardly call BSD inits hackish, rather I'd call it logical, and elegant in its simplicity. Take all the tools away and which one is easier? I believe one of the primary ideas behind slack is that anything should be fast and easy using only a text editor and the standard unix tools (chmod is one of those). In that vein it succeeds. If you look at SysV in this light, you are forced doing what others have pointed out (manual renaming/linking/removing/etc of scripts in several subdirectories).

      Many of us Slack users have been around the block and had to fix things in a pinch. Doing things manually prepares you for these times and also teaches you a little more about how the underlying system works. If slack forced you to do it manually but used SysV no one would like slack. But slack makes it easy to do 'the hard way'. And this extends way beyond the BSD/SysV debate. Everything follows this notion, which is the reason why so many have brought up slackware's ease of administration. Everything is up front and there for the tweaking.

      If you haven't given slackware more than a simple glance, I suggest running it for awhile to get the feel of it. I am not a blind-eyed zealot either, I have used redhat, mandrake, gentoo and sourcemage and run several distros regularly. I believe there is wisdom to be gained from most distros and that 'everything according to its purpose' is a good mantra here.

  11. Re:Vim by hattmoward · · Score: 3, Informative
    Slackware-current Changelog
    Mon Jun 14 00:39:32 PDT 2004
    ap/vim-6.3.004-i486-1.tgz: Upgraded to vim-6.3.004.
  12. Re:PAM? 2.6? by hattmoward · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you want PAM, you can roll your own and make packages of it, or you can use the PAM packages from Dropline GNOME. I still don't recommend it! =)

  13. Re:PAM? 2.6? by Jane_Dozey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "And 2.6 is quite stable, not to mention a hell of a lot faster than 2.4... so why are we still stuck in the stone age? If you want to be really elitist about it, stick with 2.2..."

    This is one of the benefits of slackware. It's picky about new versions. Mature software is bound to be more stable. Like the article states, the new RC is 2.6 compliant but it's a Good Thing that it's not forced on users. It's not about elitism at all.

    "Until Slackware has a solid PAM implementation, it will be delegated to my smaller, simpler tasks. And yes, I've read Patrick's rants about his dislike of PAM."

    Why put in the work when there are some major problems with PAM? If you want it, you can either look for packages other people have made, or you can impliment it yourself. Yes, it's annoying not to have that option in the official distro, but then again, it's a whole lot of effort just for the sake of making a handful of people happy.

    --
    Silly rabbit
  14. Slackware 10RC1 ISOs by Chaxid · · Score: 5, Informative

    ftp://inferno.bioinformatics.vt.edu/linux-distros/ slackware/slackware-current-iso/

  15. Re:A question... by hattmoward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't even know what you're talking about-- slackware has had easy removal of packages nearly forever! Incredibly, it's called 'removepkg', but like any tool, you can shoot yourself in the foot if you're not careful. =) With the addition of Swaret to the mix, managing packages on slackware is too easy.

  16. Mod this one a troll Re:Slack by murderlegendre · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slackware is not so much a cousin to Gentoo, as it is Gentoo's *mentor*. That said, any further comparison strains credulity.

    Such silly, half-thought, cookie-cutter comparisons of the two distros only serve to further obscure the true nature and intent of Slackware.

    Trolly, trolly, troll-troll

    --
    There's a Starman, waiting in the sky / He'd like to come and meet us, but he hasn't got the time.
  17. Re:A question... by Marc+Desrochers · · Score: 3, Informative

    the others have answered your question, and I'll even add this, it even comes with RPM, should you feel the need to scream out loud.

  18. Re:If not ISOs, .jigdo would be nice by wetshoe · · Score: 4, Informative

    IIRC, no official FTP sites ever had the ISOs. Patrick did this for a reason, which he explained in great depth when 9.1 came out. I can't remember why, but I'm sure you can find it on the mailing list archives. He chose to release the ISOs using bitTorrent to save all the mirrors' bandwidth. Download yourself a bitTorrent client and point your browser to Slackware's official bitTorrent page. You can get the ISOs that way, like everyone else.

  19. Re:Need some help... by Xpilot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    i'm told it doesn't get more stable than Debian Stable, but i normally hear people say Slack is hard to install or hard to work with.

    They are probably getting nostalgic from "back in the day" when Slack came on 2,545,645 floppies and you had to use a soldering iron, chewing gum, duct tape and copper wire to get the hardware to work with it.

    That's no longer the case, but a lot of people started out with the "hard" Slackware, moved on to the "easy" distro's like Redhat, and still assume Slackware is still the same as it was in days of yore. The truth is, even though the appearance of the installer hasn't changed much (still ncurses), it is extremely easy to use, straightforward, and as flexible as can be.

    --
    "Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
  20. This is not news! by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 4, Funny


    This is not the release of Slackware 10! This is merely the release of the "release candidate version 1"!

    Worst of all, I was looking forward to rsync the update today, and now you've shot that idea to hell, Timothy!

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  21. Re:Slack by RLiegh · · Score: 3, Informative

    For allegedly having a "disdain" for GUIs, it's ironic that it was because of fitting both Gnome and KDE (and sources) that they had to jump to two cds, instead of one. Not to mention the fact it's one of the first to distribute (in the RC, at least) X.org as part of its' distribution (afaik, mandrake doesn't do that yes, and neither does redhat).

  22. Re:KDE by Schrambo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I do. I'm only a newcommer to the loving arms of slackware(9.1) for about 4 months now. The non-bloatness. With slackware I am in total control of my system. so what slack is manaul configuring and it doesn't have the greatest auto hardware detection. In my eyes thats a good thing. it makes you learn, and with slackware you learn fast.

  23. update with swaret in two steps by Chuck+Bucket · · Score: 5, Informative

    (1) edit /etc/swaret.conf so that VERSION=current
    (2) issue the command: swaret --update; swaret --upgrade -a

    and you'll basically have installed Slackware 10 RC1. Damn, I love Slack, and swaret just makes it easier to keep 'current'.

    CB

  24. Re:Need some help... by reallocate · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Slackware does not do automatic package dependency resolution. Many people seem to consider that a sine qua non of using Linux. If you do, too, Slackware isn't for you. In the other hand, you'll never need to deal with botched automatic dependency resolution or trying to understand how installing from source will impact your dependency gizmo.

    Slackware does not do automatic hardware detection and configuration. You need to know how to partition your disk(s) with fdisk or cfdisk before you even run the setup program. You need to know if you want to use CUPS or lprng or something else with your printer and how to set it up. You need to know the specs about your video card and monitor, and you need to configure X yourself.

    I know all those things and can run thorugh Slackware's curses-based setup program as fast as I can use the keyboard.

    Slackware has a little configuration tool called "pkgtool" that allows you to do some basic configuration (set up your mouse, decide what services will run, etc.). Beyond that, well...the beauty of Unix is that everything is configured with a text file.

    I like Slackware because it doesn't get in my way with a big layer of poorly documented packaging and configured gizmos. Everything is visible. When I change something, I know exactly what has been changed. When I need to install software, I don't need to wait until someone releases it in the package format used by my distribution. I can download the source and install it myself. Case in point: When KDE 3.2.3 was released a few days ago, I might have downloaded the source and installed it myself as soon as KDE madeit available. As it was, the files were available on the Slack site within 48 hours.

    Finally, Slackware does minimal tweaking of the packages it offers. What you install is pretyt much exactly as it was released by the developers. That's a great boon when something breaks. You don't need to worry about what SLackware has done to the code and not told you about.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"