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

xorg + radeon

[Coneasfast]

anyone tested x.org 6.7.0 . i want to know if it supports proper 2D drivers for later radeons (9600 and later) out-of-box? i know xfree86 4.4.0 does.

Re:xorg + radeon

[sp0rk173]

I'm running it right now with a 9700 pro. No problems. Runs beautifully.

Yay!

[thenextpresident]

Damn, and I am going home now too. Wait, I know...

Me: Hey, can you go grab slackware 10 for me?
My GF: Sure.
Me: They have bittorrents...
My GF: I know. Already downloading...

Oh yeah. Tech girlfriends...the only way to download distro's. =)

Re:Yay!

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, no one actually believes you have a geek girlfriend.

Re:Yay!

[Anonymous Coward]

for those who become depresesd as they know that they shall never have the joys of carnal knowldege of a woman... i suggest: the the Fleshlight :)

Re:Yay!

[jazman_777]

Unless you're really willing to get your hands dirty up front, and if you really are a n00b with Linux I wouldn't recomment Slackware as your first distro....

Yeah, Fedora Core 2 for the dual-booter n00bs, eh? Joke's on them.

Re:Yay!

[Anonymous Coward]

More like:

Me: Hey, can you go grab slackware 10 for me?

My GF: Are you kidding? I used slack in HIGH SCHOOL. Stick with gentoo, big guy.

Me: Well, I wanted to try it out. Maybe it's gotten better!

My GF: Tell you what, I'll start giving you a blow job and I won't stop until the distro finishes installing. Now which distro do you want to try?

Me: HOLY SHIT! Gentoo, please!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And remember I use both KDE and Gnome!!

Oh yeah. Made-up fantasy girlfriends are the BEST. =)

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:Yay!

[MuParadigm]

So glad I don't live in your world.

Re:Yay!

[pherthyl]

Hey cool, same here. First installed slackware 3.6 on my 386. Downloaded all the floppy sets over a 14.4 dial-up connection and installed it. It was great, I remember emailing a KDE guy asking if I could run KDE 1.0 with 4MB of ram. Turns out they recommended about 8MB...

Oh the nostalgia.. I miss the excitement of the discovery in those days.

Now I run Debian, which kicks ass, but it lacks the same kind of excitement and hobby feel as I had back then.

Re:Yay!

[TiMac]

My last techie girlfriend owned a Wallstreet model Powerbook *shudder*

Which should be perfectly fine, since one can assume that probably WAS around 1998...I know that some /.ers can go a decade without 2 girlfriends.

Unless you've got something against the PowerBook...

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

Re:Yay!

[Pieroxy]

It depends if you want an OS for getting things done or to play around.

Re:Yay!

[Bandman]

actually, it was around december :-/ and the Wallstreet had more wrong with it than our relationship (Ba-ZING)

Slack and X.org

[dancingmad]

Perhaps its not completely germane, since it was announced a while ago, but again, kudos to Slack for moving to X.org so quickly. The faster everyone gets away from X the better we all are.

Re:Slack and X.org

[pairo]

kudos to Slack for moving to X.org so quickly. The faster everyone gets away from X the better we all are. Aren't you contradicting yourself a bit there?

Re:Slack and X.org

[rmohr02]

The faster everyone gets away from X the better we all are.

Away from XFree86 anyway. Personally, I prefer distros that still support X in some manner ;).

Re:Slack and X.org

[kfg]

Personally, I prefer distros that still support X in some manner ;).

E actly. It would seem a rather pointless and e treme measure to fail to support in some manner, at least lower case.

The Window System is also nice to have around, but if you at least have support you can always still work at the console, although that might suck on an Window System oriented distro like andros.

KFG

I was wondering why my connection was slow...

[Nyder]

Well, I guess that explains why my connection is so slow today.

Re:Yet Another Distro

[GoofyBoy]

You do realize that Linux itself is a "garage basement project"?

I'm definately going to have to get this

[ChairmanMeow]

Slackware 9.1 gave me a great few days setting it up. I'm definately going to have to try Slack 10.

ok... so I'm a total nerd... so what?

Not Slackware X?

[PornMaster]

Bah. Not Slackware X, not Slackware XP.

C'mon! Where's the marketing, folks? ;)

-PM

Re:Not Slackware X?

[kfg]

Bah. Not Slackware X, not Slackware XP.

I'm waiting for Slackware XPalidocious myself.

Out here on the east coast we won't get the special edition slated for distribution in California, but I hear that one's not so stable anyway.

KFG

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.

So, honest question.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does Slackware have an apt/"windows update"-style auto-update tool yet?

Re:So, honest question.

[Silvertre]

You mean something like Swaret? http://www.swaret.org/

Re:So, honest question.

[germanbird]

Does Slackware have an apt/"windows update"-style auto-update tool yet?

Check out slapt-get. It can be found on freshmeat at http://freshmeat.net/projects/slaptget/. I used it to keep my Slack 9.1 install up to date and was pleased with its performance.

Re:So, honest question.

[light101]

yes they do, you can check out slapt-get and also swarret. Im a fan of slapt-get, you chan check it out here. Easily put into cron if you want it to be updated daily/weekly/montly whichever you prefer with something like

slapt-get --update
slapt-get --upgrade --no-prompt

Check also the possibility of somechangedscript.new for upgraded ways of doing things.

Re:So, honest question.

[mattyrobinson69]

and slapt-get (which i prefer) (also slapt-gui to go with it)

you can find that yourself on freshmeat

distribution based on slackware still using xfre86

[cyfer2000]

available from this link Buffalo Linux.
JoLinux
Plamo Linux
Slax Live Linux

Twin kernels

[Neo-Rio-101]

This looks exciting. I can't wait to try this one out. Especially as it has 2.6.7 in it.

Why are some linux releases still hanging onto the 2.4.26 kernel, or relasing two kernels (Knoppix comes to mind) ?
Th2 2.4 kernel tree still has that floating point kernel bug in it, doesn't it?

Re:Twin kernels

[Googo]

"If you actually cared to read the release note"(that's slashdot for you), you would realize that it is a released with two kernels compiled with different configurations. This was the same during the previous kernel change and was probably the same before that. Slackware 10 comes with 2.4.26 default with 2.6.7 selectable during install I believe.

Re:Twin kernels

[dangerz]

Why are some linux releases still hanging onto the 2.4.26 kernel

The 2.4 kernel has had 26 revisions in it fixing bugs.

The 2.6 kernel has had 7.

That's why :)

Re:Twin kernels

[bender647]

For what its worth, I've been dual-booting Slackware-current (now known as 10.0) with the latest 2.4 and 2.6 kernels and it's been rock solid. He's done his homework and the distribution seems well set-up for either kernel. Of late, most everything I want is now supported in 2.6, so its probably time to cut 2.4 free (although the CAD tools I use are not yet certified for a 2.6 kernel).

Re:Twin kernels

[MicroBerto]

I disagree, this is very un-exciting. The 2.6 series is VERY stable for only being the 7th release. I definitely think that it should be the default install by now.

If you take two identical PCs, load Mandrake 10 on one, and Slackware 10 on the other, have the same window manager and everything else, you'll definitely see a difference in that Mandrake 10 has a MUCH faster feel.

Granted, Mandrake shipped it perhaps a bit early with 2.6.3, but the 2.6.x is that much better, as testified by basically everyone out there.

I think making 2.4 default is a mistake now. 2.6 has proven its weight in gold. I've avoided upgrading my computer even longer because this kernel solved so many of my speed issues.

for ppc?

[wooby]

I ran Slackware on my PC for years, but have recently switched to a Powerbook. I'd like to run Linux, and I've investigated dual-booting with either Debian or Gentoo.

I'm having trouble finding good resources, though these people seem to have made some progress... last November.

I've had a difficult time finding a current PPC port of Slackware. Has anyone experimented with building a Slackware base system on a G4 from some other distro, or had any luck with some other approach?

Re:Migrating from SUSE 9.1

[jefe7777]

fdisk

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

[A.T. Hun]

The biggest strength of Slackware, for me, is its rock solid stability. It just doesn't crash or do anything weird. It definitely isn't "bleeding edge" (although it does contain the most recent KDE, for example), but that's just fine by me.

I've also grown to appreciate Slack's lack of dependency checking. Basically, Slack just gets out of your way. The KISS principle applies everywhere. I've used Red Hat and Mandrake, but now that I know what I'm doing, I think I'm a Slackware lifer.

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.

Re:grass is always greener

[pavon]

This means that foobar.dll v1.0 and foobar.dll v1.1 can exist on disk at the same location (to the requesting program).

This is already possible in Linux and has been for years (it probably inherited the practice from other unices before it was created). The way that linux handles different versions of the same libraries is actually really nice. You can read about it here . Where the problem comes in is that that either the package manger doesn't like to install multiple versions of the libraries, or the user isn't aware that it is possible. I think that the latter is the more common case. The user sees that they need library version Y, and they have X so they naturally upgrade the package rather than installing it beside the existing one.

This is where .NET comes in. There is no more DLL hell.
Kind of live WinForms/Avalon :P

Re:grass is always greener

[Kevin_Peters]

This is something I've been trying to address to the OSS community. We need to use hard links if the version isn't the same. Install it in the application's directory. That's where it belongs. This would solve all of Linux's dependency problems, IMO.

Re:grass is always greener

[bcrowell]

One way is to not use dynamic libaries, and use inline. The binaries will be big, but that is not a problem anymore since hard drives are big and cheap.
Actually the LSB says that binaries should be statically linked, except for a very short list of very stable shared libraries. Too bad nobody actually pays any attention to the LSB.

The second way to fix this is to do what .NET did, make assemblies (exe, dlls) strong named.
One problem with this type of scheme is that sometimes you upgrade a library because it had a security hole, or perhaps because it had a bug that caused crashes or sent data to /dev/null. When you actually want the new version of the library, it's really nice to upgrade it and know that the new behavior will apply to all programs. The real problem is that programmers are sloppy about changing their APIs (and also that some dependencies aren't even libraries). C++, unfortunately, really encourages programmers to break binary compatibility, because any change to an exposed class breaks compatibility.

Re:grass is always greener

[captaineo]

That sounds eerily familiar... I think most admins that need a stable production system probably end up doing about the same thing!

I was spoiled starting out as a Windows programmer. I hate to say it, but Windows has the best attitude towards backwards compatibility of any mainstream platform I've seen. System APIs are preseved, bug-for-bug, *forever*. If I ship or buy a Windows package today, I'm virtually guaranteed it will run on any Windows platform years into the future. Whereas Linux binaries age like meat in the summer sun.

Perhaps one day a Linux or BSD vendor will get their act together and offer a truly stable system (in the sense of minor upgrades not routinely breaking everything). This will probably require a lot of effort to modularize the various component packages and strictly enforce versioning of interfaces. (Debian seems furthest ahead - e.g. they understand that unstable libraries need a unqie API version for each and every release, regardless of whether the original authors care to provide one)

The LSB seemed like it was intended to move forward in this direction, but instead it just seems to have codified the existing (poor) situation. RedHat provided a pretty good solution (100% compatibility within major releases) but with the discontinuation of support for their low-end distros, Linux software vendors are left with no clear standard target system.

Re:Yet Another Distro

[tiny69]

Please, keep these garage basement projects out of the news...

Apple and a few other large computer companies started out in a garage. Google started in a dorm room. So what's your point?

Somebody help me out...

[rindeee]

...what is the draw to Slackware? I have used (and loved) both SUSE and Debian for years and use them as my primary systems (along with OS X and Solaris). SUSE has YAST. Debian (and based distros) has the best (in my opinion) package management system. RedHat has....ummmm...well, I'm sure it has something. Anyway, since I've never used Slackware, what are its best qualities? I'm very curious as it seems to garner a lot of respect.

Re:Somebody help me out...

[johnnyb]

Slack appeals to the "traditional UNIX" group of people. I actually started on Slack 3.(5|6) that came bundled with a book. The book said it came with a complete UNIX system. I didn't really believe it - I was assuming it was some sort of trialware - and learning about people who actually shared code with each other freely really changed my perception of the field of computer science while I was in college.

Slackware today still has a lot going for it:
* it doesn't assume much about you, except that you know what you're doing
* it is built for speed - it attempts to be cruft-less (and from what I've seen it succeeds quite well)
* it's packages are backwards-compatible w/ .tar.gz formats
* BSD-style init for those who like it (I'm a SysV guy, myself)
* a competent community

It's kind of a do-it-yourself kind of environment, which, for some reason, Linux people often enjoy :)

Re:Somebody help me out...

[EvanED]

A binary will be in /usr/bin, not /opt/bin/usr/somewhere/in/egypt

Just what do you have aganst Egypt? Are you racist? I have a dream that one day binaries will be judged not by the path in which they reside, but by the nature of their execution.

(With sincerest apologies to Dr. King)

Re:Somebody help me out...

[James4765]

Because I can strip it to the bones and make it into a custom router, or print server, or whatnot very, very easily. Red Hat, Mandrake, SuSE and the rest try to put their "brand" on just about anything - Slackware hasn't been tinkered with overmuch, hasn't had 2.5 kernel stuff backported to 2.4 (breaking gawd-knows how many libraries, libdnet for one - sorry, no Nessus on your Fedora box!) and generally just behaves itself better.

OTOH, it is definitely not a beginner's OS. Sort of like how no novice rider could ride a Ducati even close to it's peak, but with experience, a rider can do amazing things with the same bike.

Plus, Slackware (and Debian) are the only distros left that can install on really old PC's - 486's and 386DX's. 'Bout the only thing they're good for is a poor man's remote terminal server, tho...

Re:Somebody help me out...

[evilviper]

I think it's simple. Slackware is the most simple of all distros. It doesn't have SysV scripts, just the basic /etc/rc scripts, which are incredibly simple, easy to configure, etc.

It has the simpliest package manager of any. It doesn't get in your way, and it's trivial to make a package. In fact, it's trivial to install a slackware package without the package manager.

All packages come with the dev files (headers, libs) so you don't need to mess around with all the roadblocks other distros put in your way that make it harder to install the dev files for your programs.

There's plenty more reasons, but I find that to be a good run-down of the biggest reasons to use it.

Re:Migrating from SUSE 9.1

[jefe7777]

>>In the end, I might save some time if I archive the config files and just reinstall everything.

you'll save a lot of time doing that.

don't forget to visit

http://www.linuxpackages.net/

for your precompiled slack addons.

good luck...i'm off to download.

WMP54G

[jeffkjo1]

If slackware will work, out of the box, with my Linksys WMP54G wireless card, I'll start using it yesterday.

Anybody know?

Re:WMP54G

[osmin626]

There's an old saying that been floating around in the hallowed halls of Slack for a long time:

'Ask ten Slackers a question; get eleven answers.'

I.e. Slackers tend to know exactly what they are doing.

They don't have to hide behind any fancy-pants tools to get the job done. With Slack, you get down to the bare metal, and most Slackers like it that way.

I agree....

[strabo]

Anything that came after SLS is just Yet Another Distro...

Slackware through the years

[ziggyboy]

I have been a Slackware user since 1996. I've seen it grow all through these years, and even though it didn't get as popular as Redhat, Mandrake, SuSE or Debian, I stuck with them. It's been Slackware from the first Internet server I've installed in 1996 to my new personal server this year. I've never been so proud of my distribution of choice! My thanks goes to Patrick Volkerding for all his effort. He actually replied to my emails years back...however minor my concerns were. Thank you for taking care of your Slackware users.

Slackware has always been releasing the latest software, although this time they sounded 'too Debian' by releasing a 2.4 kernel claiming it was more 'stable' than 2.6. This is a first. They still don't have a packaging tool to match apt. Well, maybe someday... Nonetheless, viva la Slackware!

About mysql_pconnect

[nihilogos]

Slightly off-topic, but hey. The site is slashdotted with a "too many connections error"

<rant>
This is why just about no-one should use php's mysql_pconnect function. It sounds great, "Oh cool it will keep the connection open so apache doesn't have to reconnect to the server." The connection overhead when mysql is running on the same machine is minimal, and you don't run into this problem where apache spawns 50 child processes, each of with its own persistent connection, and eventually you get the "too many connections error".
</rant>

Re: Torrents directory layout a bit weird

[tomhudson]

The torrents save the first set of files to slackware-10.0-iso/, the rest to subdirectories under it, kind of weird, so you end up with this:

• slackware-10.0-iso/
  • slackware-10.0-install-d1.iso
  • slackware-10.0-install-d1.iso.asc
  • slackware-10.0-install-d1.iso.md5
  • slackware-10.0-iso/ (subdir with same name as parent dir!)
  • slackware-10.0-install-d2.iso
  • slackware-10.0-install-d2.iso.asc
  • slackware-10.0-install-d2.iso.md5
  • slackware-10.0-source-d3.iso
  • slackware-10.0-source-d3.iso.asc
  • slackware-10.0-source-d3.iso.md5
  • slackware-10.0-source-d4.iso
  • slackware-10.0-source-d4.iso.asc
  • slackware-10.0-source-d4.iso.md5

Not the prettiest layout for the disks, IMO.

Nevertheless, I'll leave it running for the next few days (got to use my 1mb upload for something, right :-)

This may be an artifact of linux, as I've noticed it before with a few pieces of code I wrote where a directory already existed, and it created another with the same name under it ...

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:X.org 6.7?

[Michael Hunt]

If memory serves (may be a bit rusty on the dates)

X11R6.2 - XFree86 3.2 (c 1996)
X11R6.3 - XFree86 3.3 (late 96-early 97)

The xc changed the license for R6.4 so XFree86 stayed based on 6.3 for a while, until they backpedal sometime in 1998-1999.

X11R6.4 - XFree86 4.0
dunno about 6.5
6.6 was merged into XFree86 4.2 or 4.3 if memory serves.
X11R6.7 IS X.Org 6.7 as X.O is the xc's reference X distribution now.

My Love

[dangerz]

RedHat was the very first distro I ever used, which was several years ago. Eventually, I tried out several other distros once I was comfortable with RedHat and once I came to Slackware, I hated it more than life. It was so hard to configure and was much different than RedHat.

Eventually, I did get it working and I am so happy that I did. Slackware has been my favorite distribution of Linux ever since, and I continue to use it today on all my linux pc's. Gentoo was ok, but something about Slackware keeps me coming back. I'm currently on my P4 3.2ghz Laptop running Slackware 9.1, while my server upstairs which hosts all my projects and work is running Slackware 9. At my parents' house (I live with my gf in an apartment at college), my mp3 server still runs to this day running some oooold version of Slackware from 1998. It still is just as stable and just as good. It's a 486, so it has no reason to upgrade anything. The system runs stable and fine for all the hardware and all the tasks it needs.

Eventually, I'd like to have my desktop upstairs running linux. It's hard to part with MS Flight Simulator though and I need Macromedia Flash for development.

Either way, this is my thank you to Patrick for giving me a beautiful and stable distro.

Re:My Love

[ahaning]

don't tell anyone here that I said that, I'll get beat

Don't worry. You've just praised a Microsoft product after praising Slackware. All those that would beat you are currently passed out due to a short circuit in their beliefs code.

Re:X.org 6.7?

[erikharrison]

It's 1988 and the X Consortium is the maintainer of the X protocol and it's reference implementation. The reference implementation goes through 6 major releases. Release 6 goes through (i think) 3 minor revisions with the X Consortium. X11R6.3.0

X consortium dissolves, and maintainance passes to the Open Group.

The Open Group establishes X.org an independent group to maintain the standard, after TOG make a serious licencing blunder with X11R6.4.0 which pisses off XFree86. XF86 basically threatens to perform a complete fork rather than a parrallel implementation if the licence changes, TOG backs out and X.org gets formed.

X.org makes a few releases - keep in mind that they maintain a reference implementation, whereas XFree86 seems to be focused on drivers and features, based on the X.org code. This starts with (again, I think) R6.5.1.

Fast forward, David Dawes of XF86 pisses off everybody whose an important developer in his project (notably Keith Packard), and then threatens to change the licence. X.org has been thinking of making their position in their relationship with XF86 more dominant anyway and the whole thing culminates in a full fledged fork of XF86 prior to the licence change. This code is worked on, some random bug fixes are included, and many of the GPL incompatible licence cahnges are released by the original developers under the X.org licence, bada boom bada bing, X11R6.7.0.

I Disagree.

[sp0rk173]

When I started out, I cut my teeth on Mandrake. It was easy, but I did nothing for two weeks but say, "Man! Look at all these fractal programs!" A week later I installed slack...that's when I began to love *nix. The curve went from a slope of zero to exponential. The slackware installer even has a good intro for a newbie. It's nothing to be afraid of.

Re:The question is...

[WhiteDeath]

why are you talking to your right hand?

because the other one left?

"Awesome!" say 95% of computer users.

[copponex]

This is meant to be sarcastic. I know it's not always this bad, but I love playing the Devil's (Microsoft's) Advocate.

"I bet with Slack 10, I can add my friend's windows printer! Oh... It's okay. I bet my wireless card will work now! Well, shit... my laptop isn't even supported. And I can't even get the sound to work. Oh, alright. Read the manual, huh?"

The next step is to configure /etc/conf.modules. Make sure that none of the following aliases is commented:

# alias char-major-14 off
# alias sound on
# alias midi off

Then insert (if not already there) the following lines:

alias char-major-14 ad1848
options ad1848 io=0x530 irq=10 dma=1 dma2=0
post-install ad1848 modprobe "-k" opl3; modprobe "-k" v_midi; modprobe "-k" softoss2
options opl3 io=0x388

Furthermore, it might be necessary to configure your pcmcia (/etc/pcmcia/config.opts), because there might be an IRQ conflict. Exclude at least the IRQs 7 and 10. Now you should be ready to boot your new kernel. Good luck!

"Umm, fuck Linux."

Re:"Awesome!" say 95% of computer users.

[copponex]

"I bet with Windows, I can add my friend's music collection to my playlist! Oh... DRM."
If you can't afford the songs, then you don't really want them, do you? Borrow an album, sure, but do you think fair use should really include "permanently borrowing" thousands of songs?

"I bet I can create a wireless network without an access point! Oh... Need Linux for that."
Linux and roughly twenty pages of howtos. Which wireless cards work with which distros? Oops, I meant which revisions of which wireless cards works with which distros?

I really wish I could use some sort of "wizard" in XP to "share" my connection. Oh wait, I can.

"I can't even change the MAC address on my ethernet cards."
Gosh, I wish there was an item for around $100 or so that allowed me to "route" all of this "internet" traffic. Guess I'll just have to read the howtos and learn how to use all the unix commands.

"And my sound card skips and crackles, because it's older and not well supported. Same with my old video card, damn. No solution except to downgrade to Windows 98, huh?"
I would have tried downloading drivers, but you sound like you've got better ideas.

"To install a sound card: plug it in, hope it works, swear if it doesn't."
It sure is easier to look for modules, compile them, and then add them to the kernel, isn't it?

"Then buy a new card, but be sure to buy a brand name card, or the drivers will suck."
Gosh, you're right. I've never heard of anyone trying to make sure pieces of hardware worked with linux.

"I think I'll write some software!"
I do it every day, honest. Oh wait, I'm 95% of computer users. I don't think I write software, do I?

Re:"Awesome!" say 95% of computer users.

[Kphrak]

Your points are all perfectly valid. That's why I don't recommend Slackware to the casual user. If you want to see what this whole "compooter" thing is about, run SuSE, Fedora, or (zealots, please have mercy) Windows. :) If you want to have a fairly user-friendly system with minimal viruses and spyware, at low cost, run any of the first two. If you want to get your feet wet, try Knoppix; it doesn't require any drastic alterations to your current system since it's a LiveCD, and it's pretty usable.

If you're knowledgable about Linux, like a hands-on install where you get to manage your system without those pesky wizards and auto-generators getting in the way, don't mind BSD-style FS layouts, and don't expect everything to be handed to you...for God's sake do yourself a favor and run Slackware. You will thank me later.

I should mention that I define "later" as "after you manually install your drivers by looking up the names and opts in the kernel docs and uncommenting the requisite rc.modules entries in vi, exclude your PCMCIA IRQs 7 and 10 (your machine will lock up), call the Korean manufacturer of your monitor (your system is down, right? So you have no network) to figure out what to put in the XFree86Config, and add your SMB connector (missing by default) to your CUPS connector list...etc."

Re:Slackware's time has passed

[Anonymous Coward]

So why does it have the most posts at LinuxQuestions? Why was it voted best distro in last years LinuxQuestions awards? Why, after 10 years, has Slack survived when countless other distros have failed? Why is Slackware looked to for being secure, stable, and a great way to learn Linux? Sounds like a lot for a distro that is "no longer wanted". I don't know what Linux community you're part of, but most of us respect and enjoy Slackware.

Re:Why ???

[dangerz]

Stability. It has always been extremely stable for me.

I also never liked things like 'apt-get' and slackware is mainly gzipped tar. Although there is 'pkgtool', I don't really use it that much. I like configuring, compiling, and installing on my own.

I guess Slackware just gives admins more 'admin' power, rather than putting it all into a bunch of programs. Use RedHat or Gentoo for a while and you'll forget how many different options you have when configuring or compiling something.

Consider my opinion biased though, as I have only used Gentoo for a month, the last time I used RedHat I was in junior high, and any other distro I don't even remember.

Bad binaries support

[Via_Patrino]

Slackware is a nice distribution, its easy to understand its package system for example. But it has bad binaries/package support.

You can live happily with it if all packages you need are in the distro, which include all packages needed for servers and small offices machines, but it can be a nightmare if youre a home user.

Slackware is a "one man" distribution, the reason for that is its low number of official packages.

And if you need some other software outside of that its better you compile all yourself or youll be in a jungle of amateur made packages.

People with different software and hardware configurations generating packages and spreading it around.

That lead to missing libraries messages (even when you have them), missing new versions of libraries that are on the official distro (but not yet updated), complaints about not finding your remote control (even when you dont have one), binaries compiled with strange options (some missing other unuseful) and so on.

A slackware zealot may say "compile your own", but sometimes you cant, because of time restrictions, or just dont want to waste a lot of time compiling a "one task application" and its dependencies.

And in that situations youre SOL in the jungle, and is not a good experience at all.

Re:Bad binaries support

[erikharrison]

That's what linuxpackages.net is for. It's an independent location for slack packages.

Re:Bad binaries support

[evilviper]

And if you need some other software outside of that its better you compile all yourself or youll be in a jungle of amateur made packages.

That's what I love most about Slackware... It's about the only Linux distro left where you can mix source and packages. All slackware packages have the devel stuff, not just the binaries, so you don't have to jump through extra hoops to get the -dev packages like with all other distros.

The Slackware package manager doesn't screw with you on dependencies either. If you want to install a package of XMMS, and you installed libmp3 from source, it won't stop you from installing XMMS just because it didn't detect the libmp3 package as installed.

It may sound trivial when you are just reading it, but it can be a massive pain in the ass. With RedHat or something else, a certain package doesn't work on your system, so you have to install from source. Then it won't let you install anything depending on that library you compiled. Even if you force it to do so with --nodeps, it might install the first package that depends on the lib, but when you install another package that depends on that package, which in-turn depends on that lib, you're usually just screwed, and no combination of switches to RPM will work.

complaints about not finding your remote control (even when you dont have one)

You can't blame slackware (or unprofessional packagers) for this problem. It is an inherent limitation of binary packages. Functionality like LIRC must either be compiled in (in which case you must have the LIRC libs), or it must not be compiled in (in which case you can't get your remote working if you have one).

The solutions to that problem are all unpleasant.

Have hundreds of different packages for each program, all with different options compiled-in, and different dependencies.

Have programs statically linked, so you have all the libs built-in, and the binary is huge and wastes lots of memory.

Compile with the lowest-common-denominator options, which gives you absolutely bare-minimum functionality, and many people will have to compile their own.

Compile with the most popular options, in which case some people need to install more libs than they have or want, and others need to compile their own to get more features added in.

Frankly, with applications that have various dependencies, you're just best off compiling from source. No package manager can fix these problems.

a few days... ah yes, the good ol' days

[ChipMonk]

Time was, this was real. I had The Linux Bible, which had an old Slackware based on kernel 1.2.13. I took notes for 3 hours before I ever did a thing with the CD. One week later, I was online. No GUI yet, so Lynx was my friend. Another week to get XFree86 up and running (I learned more about video timing than I ever wanted). Two more days, and I had Netscape loaded and running. That's when I knew I had taken the first steps of that fateful journey...

Re:a few days... ah yes, the good ol' days

[Bandman]

I'm with you. Ya just haven't lived till you've entered modelines by hand, I tell ya.

Kids today, what with their XVGA setup programs, and their live CDs.

GET OUT OF MY YARD

It works alright

[tarballedtux]

I've using a 9600XT with X.Org 6.7.0 and the ATI binary driver 3.7.6 (3.9.0 was making mplayer crash or at least refuse to do usual operations). I'd say it works well. If only ATI could beef up there Alternative OS drivers it could be alot better.

--tarballedtux

Re:Cool

[tarballedtux]

The transition to X.Org from XFree coulnd't have been easier. 1)I backed up my XF86Config file. 2) Removed ALL the XF86 packages. 3) Used swaret to DL and install X.Org 4) Renamed xf86config to xorg.conf and bam it worked right away. --tarballedtux

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.

As a recent slack user:

[JoeShmoe950]

I'd tried Debian, Mandrake, and a few minor distro's. I don't know why everyone says that slack is hard to configure. Atleast in the newer versions , it isn't. I installed slack 9.1 I think it was. It went without a hitch, not at all confusing compared to debian, although a graphical install would have been nice for anyone new. It finished the install and then restarted. I typed startx. On most computers, it would have been fine. I looked in the file and it was configured, except for my integrated graphics, which I no longer used (put in a GeForce but never disabled integrated). I changed that one line in the file to NV, and X worked. Network worked, CDRoms worked, etc. I don't get why people say its hard to install. Although nongraphical, the install is still menu driven and straight forwards. The configuration is minimal, and its fast and rock solid. I never looked back after that. Swaret works great, and for things not in a slack package, they will usually compile perfectly. GO SLACK!

Buy the CD folks...

[linuxhansl]

support Patrick's effort...

I was using Slackware from its inception in 1993 (ahhh... I remember downloading a large set of floppy images over night at work from my Ultrix machine, storing the "large" files on my DEC/VMS diskspace).
After a long digression over FreeBSD, RedHat, I came back to Slackware last year...
I already ordered the CD, not that I couldn't download the iso's but this a great distribution and if I can help to keep it going I'll do so.

In other news...

[generationxyu]

Slackintosh is dead as of today. Slackintosh was a port of Slackware to the PPC, specifically Macs, by simply recompiling Slack packages from source.

If anyone is interested in taking this project, I would love to help. I don't have the webspace, but I'm willing to do the porting, and get Slack 10 into PPC form. If you're interested email me: jlongs2@SLACKuic.edu minus distro.

Re:old skool

[evilviper]

my first linux distro back in around '98 was Slack, downloaded and copied to a whole box of floppy diskettes over a 28.8 modem!

Okay, but why? In '98, I had an inexpensive 4X CD Burner ($200, IIRC), and 56K modems were old news already.

Sorry, but this is a poor excuse for a euphoric story... I hear almost the same story from people who were doing the same back when floppies weren't what they are now, and 28.8 modems were a distant fantasy, yet slackware was already around...

And in the end, have our systems really improved that much over the years?

Oooooo, a whole 6 years. Surely we should have 3-D computer interfaces, and flying cars by now...

Come now, I could tell you the stories of installing Slackware, XF86, and GNOME on my 486/33 with 4MB of RAM, etc.

In reality, our computers haven't changed more than a little from way back in the 486 days. In the 386 days, PCI was just comming in to use, and in the 486 days ISA was practically gone. The only thing that's really changed is that an AGP port was added, while PCI ports are still there.

AT cases were the thing, although current ATX cases have practically no changes vs. AT. Power supplies still have an 80mm fan in them, and mount in the top back of the tower. The motherboard mounts to the inside of the case, the CPU has a heatsink and fan on it. All the cards mount in the bottom back of the case, plug into PCI slots. 5.25 and 3.5 inch drives still mount in the front of the case, and plug-in via good old IDE ribbon cables.

Almost nothing has changed since the 486, which is a lot longer than 6 years ago.

Re:old skool

[Enucite]

Okay, but why? In '98, I had an inexpensive 4X CD Burner ($200, IIRC)

Well, that 'inexpensive' CD Burner probably cost you at least $400 if you got it even near the end of '98. CDW Dec. 1998 It wasn't until close to 2000 that they got under $200
I remember I spent over $250 on my first burner, (4x Plextor) in late '99.

and 56K modems were old news already.
Believe it or not--for those of us who weren't living in a large city--in '98, 56K was still the fastest we could connect.

I remember staying after school my senior year (98) in high school to use the "fast" connection to download Linux isos at ~50KBps and burn them on the "fast" 2x burner they just got in the computer lab.

in the 486 days ISA was practically gone
As long as by "practically gone" you mean "the standard". Hell, even my Pentium systems had more ISA ports than PCI, most didn't even have a PCI device installed. It wasn't until the P2 that PCI cards started becoming the standard.

Stop wasting resources!!

[SpaghettiPattern]

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

By that I'd pay for:

• The packaging (materials and handling)
• The delivery
• Possibly the store which almost certainly will NOT give any support.

I don't want to cut out the middle man for the sake of it but in small distros (currently all linux distros can be considered small compared to windows) the delivery overhead is out of proportion. Most people involved in the deal will make much more money out of the deal than Slackware themselves.

I also think the resources in this process are almost completely wasted.

I recall wanting to buy a copy of Tux Racer. The retail price here in Europe was way above what I wanted to pay for it. The retail price in USA was better but shipping amounted to US$20. So emailed the Tux Racer guys telling them I don't need the box and the manual. I also told them that I'd be happy to pay them full price if I could download the game. That was useless because it didn't change anything at all. They probably thought I was crazy.

When possible I try paying the people/bodies that make/package/service my software directly. And I do!!

WTF?

[Arker]

if you really are a n00b with Linux I wouldn't recomment Slackware as your first distro.... Try some more user-friendly distros such as RH, SuSE, Mandrake or other...

What a bunch of nonsense. Tell me why Slack isn't as good as RH, SuSE, or Mandrake for a beginner? Any serious reason or are you just repeating some prejudice you heard somewhere else? Have you even tried Slack?

It's not user-friendly? How so? Because the installer runs in text mode? Please.

Kernel question

[Viol8]

Does anyone know how hard it is to upgrade to the 2.6 kernel if you go for the standard 2.4 install with this dist? Do the seperate installs literally just install different kernels or does it install different versions of libraries too which would need to updated on a manual upgrade?

My Xorg experience

[SillyCON]

Slackware-current. Using NVidia GForce4 MX440 (NV17) with Nvidias last linux driver (build five thousand and something) Xorg works exactly as XF86.
Only quiks came from applications that dont find /etc/X11/XF84config-4. Soft-link to /etc/X11/xorg.conf and youre done.

The slackware differential

[davi_slashdot]

From the announcement:

"Each Slackware package follows the setup and installation instructions from its author(s) as closely as possible, offering you the most stable and easily expandable setup."