Slackware 10.0 Officially Released

BRTB writes "Slackware 10.0 is out! X.org 6.7.0, kernel 2.4.26 (2.6.7 optional), KDE 3.2.3, GNOME 2.6.1, GCC 3.3.4... it's all new, and just as stable as you'd expect from Slackware, if RC2 was any indication. There's an official announcement, as well as some ISO BitTorrent links, and a mirror list. Of course, the non-cheapskates among us should go buy the CD-set to support the project. Have fun, everybody..."

Comments

Re:Yet Another Distro

[Yi Ding]

Just what Linux needs... Yet Another Distro

Please, keep these garage basement projects out of the news... we already have enough distros. Thanks.

Yep, that's right, the distrobution that was out before kernel 1.0 is now considered Yet Another Distro. Oh how the times have changed.

grass is always greener

[bcrowell]

I guess the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. I keep getting disgusted with FreeBSD and wanting to switch to a different unix...until I actually try a different unix and get just as annoyed with it :-)

What do slackware users perceive as its strengths? My perception is that slackware is the distro where you install everything from tarballs, with no automatic system for satisfying dependencies (as you'd have in Debian, Gentoo, or FreeBSD, for instance).

Actually I'm starting to feel that automatic systems for installing software and satisfying dependencies are more trouble than they're worth. In FreeBSD, I often feel like a prisoner of the ports system. If I want to run application A, it forces me to upgrade library B. But then the new version of B breaks application C. Oops! Try recompiling C. No, that doesn't work. Oh, it's because C depends on library D, which then depends on B, so you really need to recompile D. Note how the whole story started because this automated system felt it was so important for me to upgrade library B, when in fact I would have probably been fine not upgrading it.

The real issues are (a) software needs careful testing, and (b) open-source hackers are sloppy about making changes that break stuff. If slackware is really thoroughly tested, that could be great...

Re:grass is always greener

[ag0ny]

Back when I wass still using Linux (Slackware had been always my distro of choice), I used to download, compile and install everything myself instead of using the precompiled packages.

Perhaps that's because I'm a do-it-yourself guy.

Around 3-4 years ago I started using FreeBSD. In the beginning I was using the ports system for everything, and often got into the same dependency hell that you're talking about.

Now I'm using a "hybrid" approach:

- Things that don't change often, I install from ports and forget about them.
- Programs that I think will need to update from time to time, I download, compile and install under /usr/local/software/packagename-version/

I feel quite comfortable doing this because each package is sitting on its own directory. It's also easier to handle dependencies:

Say FooProgram-1.0 requires libFooBar-1.0 and BarProgram-1.0 requires libFooBar-2.0. I would have this:

/usr/local/software/FooProgram-1.0/
/usr/local/software/BarProgram-1.0/
/usr/local/software/libFooBar-1.0/
/usr/local/software/libFooBar-2.0/

Of course, the compilation phase sometimes gets a bit messy and requires some tweaking, but IMHO it is worth the extra effort. There should be no dependency problems. Also, removing an old version of a program is as easy as removing the directory where it has been installed.

I know this approach will not be suitable for everyone, but it works for me. I hope this helps you.

Donations

[Via_Patrino]

"non-cheapskates among us should go buy the CD-set to support the project"

If you want to support the project you dont need to buy anything, donate directly and all the money you wanted to donate (not just part of it) you reach the end you wanted.

Re:Yay!

[zoloto]

Now if the slashdot effect would take effect on the following torrets, we'd be in business much quicker:

Slackware 10.0 Installation ISO disc 1
Slackware 10.0 Installation ISO disc 2 (GNOME/KDE/KDEI, /testing, live rescue disc)
Slackware 10.0 ISO disc 3 (Sources part 1, /extra , Slackware book)
Slackware 10.0 ISO disc 4 (Sources part 2, ZipSlack, /pasture)

Please download and keep your torrents open to at least a 1:1 ratio! I do it, so can you! LEave it on ALL NIGHT BABY!

Offtopic: I for one welcome our slashdotting overlords.

Re:Yet Another Distro

[bigberk]

Yep, that's right, the distrobution that was out before kernel 1.0 is now considered Yet Another Distro.

Another interesting angle about Slackware is that it has been profitable for some time. Pat does a lot of the work himself, and his small team helps him with CD orders etc. Much of the testing is community volunteer work, of course. RedHat might have 1,000 employees doing what Pat+friends can accomplish. Hey, here's an article on ten years of Slackware

After trying many different distributions I have settled on Slackware. The BSD-style configuration is, I find, straightforward and powerful (even though I wasn't a BSD user before Linux). Slackware does not impose specific configuration styles, layouts, interfaces or layers on you and I enjoy the resulting flexibility and freedom. I like the "EZ" .tgz packages. You either use the slackware packages, or compile from source (I use a hybrid approach). I have NOT found RPM or FreeBSD ports to be particularly more convenient. Sorry, but it's true.

Security notices are rapid, accurate, and to the point thanks to Pat himself. Things in the Slackware installation work properly, without embarassing-looking glitches. It is intelligently put together, and tested to perfection.

Overall the distro is the lean and the easiest to tweak in the least amount of time. I personally found it the easiest to install of all Linux distros. Slackware is a winner.

Re:Yay!

[finkployd]

If I had a geekgirl..too bad I'm stuck with the average woman.

I suspect that if she ever stumbles upon this comment you will not have her much longer :)

Finkployd