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.
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".
Slackware 9.1 was fully 2.6 compliant, too.
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)
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!
more like grandfather. slackware predates gentoo by ages :)
--- d'oh
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.
I can still remember my grandpa telling me stories about this distro.
And I am still using it today. Why?
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)
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! =)
"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
ftp://inferno.bioinformatics.vt.edu/linux-distros/ slackware/slackware-current-iso/
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.
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.
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.
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
(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
free ipod and free gmail!
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"
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.