Slackware 12.0 Released

Matt writes "Straight from our good friend and colleague in the fight for quality distributions, Mr. Patrick Volkerding, comes a brand-new and eagerly-awaited release of Slackware, version 12. HAL automount, KDE 3.5.7 and XFCE 4.4.1, Xorg 7.2, 2.6 kernels as far as the eye can see, oodles of updated applications and utilities, and hardware support for just about anything under the sun. Get it here. Enjoy! I know I will."

Comments

The only release I consider anymore

[Anonymous Coward]

Many thanks Pat. I now have something to keep me busy on July 4th holiday!

Why?

[Creepy Crawler]

Slack is great for reasons other than this..

Slack's great for setting up tight servers in which you know every program running and where it's at.
Its also go for when you know how to set up a speed-server in which you need it up in 20 minutes.

If you want to change anything past what's on the CD, go get the source for each program it requires. There's soo much time wasted on that... if you can find the sources for that specific module..

Go Debian/Ubuntu. I like my package archives.

Re:Why?

[SyniK]

Slackware Package websites:
www.linuxpackages.net
www.slackware-current.net
(There are more, but these are easy to remember.)

They're very nice for any omissions and/or upgrades between release versions.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

www.slackware-current.net

is not a slackware package site it's a easyes one and that should be taken down already sicne it's a trademark violation

Re:Why?

[Creepy Crawler]

apt-cache search ****
apt-get install ****

is much easier.

And I have access to many more archives, many more CPU/arch platforms, and 2 kernel structures to choose from.

Dont get me wrong. Slack for a barebones webserver in 20 minutes kicks ass. It just isnt great for most anything desktop oriented.

Re:Why?

[SyniK]

That's for Pat to decide / enforce...

Re:Why?

[smittyoneeach]

gentoo, baby, with the paludis package manager. when no lesser addiction will suffice.

Re:Why?

[Creepy Crawler]

I'm sorry, but I'm not a masochist.

Re:Why?

[smittyoneeach]

Pain is good. Extreme pain is extremely good.

Re:Why?

[PenGun]

Slapt-get install ... too hard for you?

  Oh well.

  Archives, you know we all can get at em'. You do understand there are tools to use your debby stuff elsewhere deb2targz being just one. What's a kernel structure and why just 2? We tend to roll our own kernels mostly.

Re:Why?

[SyniK]

Slackware, being a one man deal, is nice to see Linux as one man's vision. No committees involved or any compromise in the design, but it doesn't have the resources for something like apt... Apt is nice.

On a desktop system how often after initial setup and configuration (a week just to be sure?) do you need apt-get? When installing something you just learned about? Maybe once a month tops? So maybe you use it for system upgrades/updates? rsync'ing slackware-current and "find . -name *.tgz -exec upgradepkg *.tgz" does a fair approximation of it.

A quote about being easy from an obscure 80's movie...
"Quicker and easier. Yes, quick and easy is how you bake a cake or clean a toilet bowl or shop, by mail. But quick and easy is not how you run a multi-million dollar business such as ours (Perret)."

Re:Why?

[ericrost]

Actually, I use it at least four or five times weekly. Some new package I want to mess with, some new task I want to tackle, some new server service I'm setting up.. If I had to hunt for stuff on the interwebs (the actual packages, not just info) and build it, it would slow me down. That's a big reason I use Ubuntu.. however, I'm installing slack on an old Pentium lappy with 40 MB of ram just to fart with it, all things in their place.

Re:Why?

[Drache Kubisuro]

Don't forget http://www.slackbuilds.org/ !

They provide tested scripts to roll your own packages. So you know what you're getting into and that it will work with your individual Slackware installation. They've worked very hard to prepare for Slackware 12. I think they were the first, in fact, to be ready for Slack 12.

Re:Why?

[poofyhairguy82]

Slapt-get install ... too hard for you?

Yes, when it does not have what I want. Which is far too often.

Where Debian (and Ubuntu) "win" on the desktop is not because they have the best package manager tools, its because they have the most packages. I originally switched to Ubuntu back in 2004 because it was the only Linux distro (besides Debian unstable of course) that had a program I really wanted (bit tornado) in its package repository. Thanks to this huge repository and Ubuntu, I have gotten EVERY linux program I have wanted over the past three years without touching a complier. Heck, I haven't even had a compiler installed in the last year.

I know that ruins the effect of Linux for some, but compiling programs and chasing dependencies is the worst part of the OS for me (and other like minded desktop users). Each to their own...

Re:Why?

[poofyhairguy82]

On a desktop system how often after initial setup and configuration (a week just to be sure?) do you need apt-get?

How about FOR the initial setup? I hate compiling new programs, whether its the first week of use for a Linux install or the 36th month. On an Ubuntu box, thanks to apt-get and scripts like Automatix I can setup a new Ubuntu box (meaning blank hard drive to a full install ready to play AVI files, Flash and do everything an average user does) in less than an hour and a half. And most of that time is waiting for packages to download and install themselves- I never have to touch a command line once to get it done anymore.

When you are big on picking up Linux converts, cutting down a two day (at least for me back in the days of compiling what I needed) process to an hour and a half is a big deal...

Re:Why?

[tsa]

I also switched to Ubuntu from Slackware, and I'm sort-of happy with it. No compiling kernels and other stuff anymore, but a few handy things also didn't work anymore. It took me a long time to get used to Ubuntu, but I won't switch back. The only real problem I have with it is that it's so agonizingly SLOW! I heard that might be a GNOME thing, so I will switch to KDE to try that out, but the booting also takes forever. O, and does anyone know how to start the automounter before anyone is logged in? I use the machine as a fileserver for my laptop a lot.

Re:Why?

[kkazakov]

Well, definitely not up to you to decide. The site is mine. I already told Patrick about this. I do respect the man, and therefore if he asks me to remove it - I will. So far his reply was something like that he doesn't have time for such things right now, and later he will contact me. Besides this, what bothers YOU personally? You're holding the trademark, or what?

Re:Why?

[wolf369T]

Guys, I simply don't get this package managers wars... It's not like you apt-get something everyday. You install a system, being Slackware, Ubuntu or Vista and then live with it. From time to time, you can (sl)apt-get for some updates. What's the big deal with it?! (I'm speaking from a desktoop user point of view). So what if Ubuntu/Debian have the largest repository? For every piece of software from that repository, there is a source, just in case LinuxPackages is not enough. Unfortunatelly, checkinstall as left out of Slackware 12.0. Hope this will be fixed soon. With that, using the power given by the source, you can make your own tgz packages and store them into your own repository.

Re:Why?

[inflex]

I did the same ... switched from Slackware -> Ubuntu. I still use SW for servers that I don't want to revisit in a long time (or FreeBSD).

Anyhow, also had the same problem, GNOME/Metacity was just painful. I switched back to Fluxbox and all was good. If you don't want to go as far as Fluxbox, try XFCE.

Re:Why?

[fuzzix]

apt-get install yawn

I actually switched to Slackware after apt broke one too many times under Ubuntu (some sort of Hedgebadger as I recall it). This wasn't an ESR style "I did all the wrong things and your distro broke so it's your fault". I added repositories as described in the FM and ended up with fun things like mutually exclusive dependencies (ie; two required libs which couldn't coexist).

I may have done something wrong but meh - managing my own dependencies always works and I'm not limited by what is (or more importantly, what is not) in apt.

That said, many of the servers I manage run Debian Stable. If the box isn't in my home it isn't going to get as much love ;)

Re:Why?

[empaler]

Calm down. He is entitled to opine about things he has no control over, in the same way as you probably have opinions about the Iraq war.
He's not even being offensive, he 's just saying that the site uses a trademarked name in violation with the trademark holder.

That he was simply uninformed is something else. You could have used this opprtunity to tell him in a nice way that he was wrong, instead you attacked him, personally.

So, getting back on track here:
* Slackware is a trademark.
* slackware-current.net does not have an explicit permit to use the trademark
* kkazakov, the site owner/operator has contacted the trademark holder to obtain rights. The trademark holder has neither granted nor protested.

Implicitly; it is unlikely to be a problem. At a glance, I can't see any ads nor even a tip jar.
All in all the site looks as if it holds content that is highly relevant to slackware, without trying to make a buck on it, nor even cover server costs (as far as I can tell).

In other words: the Trademark owner is unlikely to have a problem with the site. Further down the line, he might even endorse it.

Re:Why?

[Richy_T]

I use Slack at home, Debian at work. Just last week, I needed to install lubcurl-perl. As is typical with apt, it wanted to install and uninstall a bunch of packages due to dependency issues. So I go ahead. Well, the new version of "libc6" won't install because of something with readline which won't install a new version as it's part of coreutils which has a dependency on libc6. Then I start getting segfaults, I guess the lib is busted up somehow. Long story short, I find myself attempting to boot with a 2.4 kernel installed but only 2.6 modules on the machine.

There are apparently no good Debian repair tools or at least not obvious at short notice. I ended up using Knoppix to get things back into shape. Somewhere along the line, aptitude itself gets uninstalled (I didn't do it). Aptitude will not install as it depends on an old lib which got uninstalled somewhere along the line and only the new version of the lib is available (the author says that aptitude does not play well with the new lib). I could downgrade but at this stage, it's working again and I don't want to mess with stuff.

Along the way, the latest KDE got installed. It doesn't play well with the Cygwin X-Server and the mouse locks up periodically. Unless I run xeyes. Go figure.

In short, sure package managers are handy and convenient but they're not a panacea. I would go so far as to say that package managers (and Windows installer/dll issues) are the wrong answer that should be solved by a fundamental rethink of the way an OS is put together.

Rich

Re:Why?

[Richy_T]

Just to add a couple of points.

Slackware causes its own issues. My home install is borked as I have somehow have two different versions of libc in two different places (this is my fault). Stuff will run but some stuff won't compile. I am throwing a new install on a new system to fix this (I just installed 11.0 on Sunday, just before 12.0 comes out. Typical).

Also, before someone points out I should have used CPAN, I have had mixed success with installing perl packages using CPAN on Debian.

Rich

Re:Why?

[fuzzix]

Also, before someone points out I should have used CPAN, I have had mixed success with installing perl packages using CPAN on Debian.

I wouldn't bother with CPAN on Debian - If it's not in apt I'm not bothered (since it's not my machine).

Issues I've had with CPAN on Slack amount to difficulties compiling Perl-GTK (not sure if it's 1 or 2 - possibly to do with lack of GNOME... GtkHTML springs to mind for some reason...) I had to do a bit of manual tweaking before I got it to build.

Re:Why?

[apoc.famine]

If you want to try kde, just do it: $sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop
When it's done, log out, and choose KDE from the menu. You don't really have to *think* about trying it out, unless you are severely limited on space. As for speeding up the boot process, damned if I know how. I just have faith that at some point someone will mainstream a way to do it without more custom hacks. I'm too lazy at this stage in my life to work on fixing it myself, so I just boot *before* going to get my coffee. I don't think I've watched/timed a boot in ages.

Re:Why?

[MightyMartian]

The thing I love the very best about Slack is that I can compile a stock kernel from kernel.org with a minimum of fuss. It was the first distro I used way back in 1993, and though I've played around with Redhat, Mandrake/Mandriva, Ubuntu and Debian, I still keep coming back. All the custom routers and proxy servers I've ever built save one are on Slack (the one being an experiment with FreeBSD that worked fairly well, so I think FreeBSD would be my second choice).

Re:Why?

[MightyMartian]

Slackware isn't really meant for people who need it *that* easy. I'll admit that the package system is a little archaic, but to be honest, I mainly compile from source, so it doesn't bother me that much.

Re:Why?

[poofyhairguy82]

Guys, I simply don't get this package managers wars... It's not like you apt-get something everyday.

Yes, I do use apt-get almost everyday. Every time I get on my Ubuntu box its asking me to upgrade something- either security updates or to keep up to date with the newest developmental Compiz. If it wasn't for apt-get, I could not have the newest Compiz toys without living in front of a compiler seeing as how the code is updated very often.

You install a system, being Slackware, Ubuntu or Vista and then live with it. From time to time, you can (sl)apt-get for some updates. What's the big deal with it?

Because many of us Linux desktop users like updating A LOT. The "set it and forget it" model of Linux works best for servers. I personally upgrade to every Ubuntu release every six months. The longest I "live with" a Linux install is that period of time. The big deal is that for me, upgrading EVERY piece of software on my computer when a new release comes out is as easy as a few mouse clicks...I haven't touched a command line in my last two upgrade cycles.

For every piece of software from that repository, there is a source, just in case LinuxPackages is not enough.

But when you compile a program from source (sans Gentoo), its up to YOU to also get all the dependencies and its up to YOU to decide where everything goes and to make sure it works. With Ubuntu, a (much smarter than me) developer does all this hard work (better than I could do it) and puts all that work into a single package for me to use with a mouse click. Just because I like using my Linux desktop does not mean I am good at putting it together. Because of package managers, I can leave that to the paid professionals...

Re:Why?

[wolf369T]

I tend to think the opposite: I see no need for a dekstop to have daily updates. Even so, Slackware does have updates for stable branch, but not daily. On the other hand, servers must be updated daily, due to security issues. I think. I'm just speculating, as I don not own a server, for that matter.
So what if Ubuntu pops up a question every morning asking you to update? It's frustrating and there is no explicit benefit for upgrading to the very-last-cutting-edge version of compiz, for instance. It's nice to get new versions that includes new features (I remember that once KDE camed in Slackware with a bug for kopete dealing with webcams. Upgrading KDE for that matter was mandatory. Upgrading beryl for some extra themes is not of my interested).
I am not a Slackware-Jehova-Witness type propagandist. It's just that I'm not feeling I'm using Linux as long as I run Fedora or Ubuntu. I really feel the power of Linux under Slackware. Fedora and Ubuntu are just nice and almost good imitation of Windows. Every eyecandy here came with a bug there.
Slackware is not perfect. It's just the best I could find.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, servers must be updated daily, due to security issues. I think. I'm just speculating, as I don not own a server, for that matter. I think that it's just as important to have daily security updates for the desktop as well. I used to not care about security until one day I decided to use firestarter to monitor port attacks and was staggered by the amount of activity! Now I'm becoming more and more of a nut about security, I keep Windows (XP) offline as much as possible and do everything but gaming on linux. But even linux can be vulnerable if you're not using a hardened system, good passwords, limited root access and daily updates.

Re:Why?

[notamisfit]

You know, you don't have to compile everything. There's sites like linuxpackages.net that offer binary packages. You check dependencies (they show them for you) download, install, and they like, work and stuff. Running backwards through dependencies can be a bit of a pain if they're deeply nested (although I've never seen them get more than 1 or 2 levels deep, probably thanks to the good library selection present in Slack). When I was running 10.2 on my main box, I had multimedia, codecs, and such ready to go in half an hour.

Re:Why?

[MrNerd]

chasing dependencies is the worst part of the OS for me

I wish Ubuntu resolved my problems. It won't even go online for me. It's not that it doesn't see my network card - it does. It just won't talk to my router over it. I run a derivative of Smoothwall as my firewall/router (with a hub) and it works with Ubuntu on all my other computers. This seems to be a known problem, but I have yet to find a fix. It has something to do with the IPV6 networking, I gather, but I just don't have the time to delve deep enough to find out how to fix it for this computer.

Ergo, I run other distros, live cds, and *gasp* sometimes Windows.

I like ubuntu - I just wish it worked for me on this machine the way it works on other machines. (No, I don't have the time or need to replace the network card either...)

Am I the only one?

[wawannem]

It is a bit hard to jump back into Slackware... The long hiatus a while back left me seeking other distros which I have stayed loyal to.

Re:Am I the only one?

[SyniK]

Yes and no.
Yes, every extended hiatus has me trying other distros to fill in the gaps (new gcc, new kde, new X, new distro-specific widget, etc)...
But I always go back to slackware-current once the gap is filled.

Re:Am I the only one?

[T-Bone_142]

Your not the only one i to switched away from Slackware on my desktop, but i didn't stray far. I now run (Slackware based)Zenwalk Linux (formerly Minislack) with Zeqadious's lightweight gnome packages.

Even with Slackware no longer on hiatus i have stuck with Zenwalk because of its package management (dependency resolution), active development team and lightweight no boat design philosophy.

However i do still run Slackware 10.1 and 11 on my two test servers, and will most likely keep using it as my server distro for years to come.

Keep up the good work Patrick, you make one of the best Linux distributions around (IMO).

Re:Am I the only one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope

The nice package management system in distributions like Ubuntu makes installing software even easier than in windows. I enjoy fooling around with Linux but there comes a point when time can be better spent elsewhere. I've used every version of Slackware since 3.3 until trying Ubuntu last year.

Re:Am I the only one?

[DynaSoar]

> It is a bit hard to jump back into Slackware... The long hiatus a while back left me seeking other distros which I have stayed loyal to.

No, you're probably not the only one. However, that opinion is the opposite as that of Jason1729 below, who states he gave it up due to too many updates and fixes, and he's probably not the only one to feel that way either. Between the two, Patrick is probably running at pretty much the right speed:

From: Patrick J. Volkerding (bf703@cleveland.Freenet.Edu)
      Subject: ANNOUNCE: Slackware Linux 1.00
      Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
      Date: 1993-07-16 17:21:20 PST

  The Slackware Linux distribution (v. 1.00) is now available for
  anonymous FTP.....

12 versions in 14 years, plus revisions between. All under his guidance. Most would have abandoned the effort sooner and with fewer releases, and probably due to doing so many in that time. Hell, most would have given up rather than rewrite it all in order to switch libraries.

Re:Am I the only one?

[d12v10]

Oh my lord, did you just end a sentence with a preposition?

Re:Am I the only one?

[fbjon]

No, he ended it with a phrasal verb, nothing wrong with that.

Re:Am I the only one?

[Anonymous Coward]

12 versions in 14 years

4 + 1 = 7. It's true! Pat says so. ;)

Re:Am I the only one?

[Anonymous Coward]

12 versions in 14 years

Nope. See: http://slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php?faq=general#0

The version was bumped from 4 to 7 at one point, skipping 5 and 6. So that's only 10 major versions.

Still, number of versions is one of the most meaningless things ever.

Re:Am I the only one?

[belligerent0001]

WOW! Cleveland Freenet!! That's a blast from the past. I see that Patrick was in the bf series...what a noob...I was an ah series. :P

I know...it's off topic...AND I have abused ellipsis'...mod away

Re:Am I the only one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh my lord, did you just end a sentence with a preposition?

Up with this we will not put!

Re:Am I the only one?

[Azar]

Well, Slackware jumped from 4 to 7 because Pat got sick and tired of people asking him why Slackware wasn't using "Linux 6.0".

I think it's clear that some other distributions inflated their version numbers for marketing purposes, and I've had to field (way too many times) the question "why isn't yours 6.x" or worse "when will you upgrade to Linux 6.0" which really drives home the effectiveness of this simple trick. With the move to glibc and nearly everyone else using 6.x now, it made sense to go to at least 6.0, just to make it clear to people who don't know anything about Linux that Slackware's libraries, compilers, and other stuff are not 3 major versions behind...I promise I won't inflate the version number again (unless everyone else does again ;)

(Taken from http://slackware.com/faq/do_faq.php?faq=general#0)

But even with that, Slackware has had far more than 12 versions. Try 30.

12.0, 11.0, 10.2, 10.1, 10.0, 9.1, 9.0, 8.1, 8.0, 7.1, 7.0, 4.0, 3.9, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1, 3.0, 2.3, 2.2.0, 2.0.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.0, 1.0.4, 1.0.3, 1.0.2, 1.0.1, 1.0

If you count the first number as "primary" releases, Slack has had 10. But there can be significant changes even in point releases.

I do love Slack, even though I'm no longer using it as my primary desktop.

Re:Am I the only one?

[Phroggy]

Yeah, but:
3.5
3.6
4.0
7.0
7.1
8.0
8.1
9.0
9.1
10.0
10.1
10.2
11.0
12.0

(I don't know how many releases there were before 3.5.)

Re:Am I the only one?

[Anonymous Coward]

A: What did you do that for? B: Around here, we do not end sentences with prepositions, my good man. A: OK, then. What did you do that for, asshole?

Yes, but... does it support

[EmbeddedJanitor]

iphone?

Re:Yes, but... does it support

[Anonymous Coward]

Woops, looks like someone forgot to check the anonymous coward checkbox....

Re:Yes, but... does it support

[newr00tic]

=P

Once you go Slack ...

[drpimp]

Once you go Slack, you never go back!

Well that used to be my motto, at least for my servers. But I really just got tired of having to compile things that I could not get with slackpkg or slapt. I have switched to Debian for my servers I alleviated my headaches with compiling apps (those not included or available). Mind you if you needed something that WAS available with slackpkg or slapt then it was a great system. And even still a better system to have a locked down tight server. I would rank it up there with Gentoo in certain aspects (of course not installation).

Since I will probably quest to install Slack again someday, does anyone know if it comes with a GUI installer yet? I have not installed since Slack 10 so maybe my question is obviously dated, but it is a valid one at that!

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[PenGun]

Yeah ... but it's a curses GUI. Same as always.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[person132]

Still text based, AFAIK. No reason to go graphical.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[ralph1]

GUI is for girls or sissys Not even dos shell.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Megane]

Since 3.6 or so, it's really the only Linux I've used. But it helped that I was already a Mac user and had no interest in X Windows. In fact, Xfree86 setup was so much crap back then because it wanted to create custom modelines (instead of using VESA standard modes) which would never work right if you didn't have a big name brand monitor and video card, so I avoided using anything but text mode for Linux.

One of the reasons I used Slackware in the first place was that it was basically the last distribution which could still be installed from floppy disks. Of course the problem was that floppy disks in those days were made cheaply enough to be unreliable. A bad boot or root floppy was a real pain in the butt. But it worked until I could upgrade my cheap old PCs to ones with El Torito CD boot support.

OS X and cheap G3 Macs finally ended my daily use of Slackware, but I do still use it when I need a quick, lean install of Linux. I particularly like how it doesn't have dependency crap that installs a jillion library packages because of one app that you didn't want to install in the first place. Even Cygwin does that crap. With Slackware, it's just go into menu mode, and deselect everything but the few packages that I want.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for knowing the difference. Too many fucking faggots these days think that GUI means something in an X-server window, and anything in the framebuffer console is just "text-based", regardless of whether or not it actually is.

Look at links. Look at mutt. Both are console applications. Both have GUIs. If any of you out there can't get your heads around this, please shut the fuck up. Stop pretending that you 'get' Slackware. Stop pretending that you 'get' anything at all since you left Windows-land.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Anonymous Coward]

who cum me moose ara'nt verking than huh

gui my arse

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[richlv]

compiling your own packages also got a little bit harder with removal of checkinstall for slack 12.
it didn't work quite well with recent coreutils.

hopefully, checkinstall will get updated and included back, but in case somebody just wants it to get working fast, replacing 'chmod' from slack 11 made it so much happier.

changelog recommended monitoring http://asic-linux.com.mx/~izto/checkinstall/, so that's probably something i'll do for some time :)

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[fistynuts]

No reason to go graphical. Except that it immediately alienates the standard user, reinforcing what they've heard over the years that Linux is horrendously complicated and difficult to understand in comparison to that nice Windows operating system with the big buttons.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never understood the complaint with compiling server software and dependencies; how many network daemons are you people running? I run slackware and a typical current setup runs Apache (or nginx), PHP, Postfix and Dovecot; all of which are built from source on a staging box. It takes me at most a single morning to rebuild all these, it takes much longer to configure.

In 6-7 years, the only serious problems I've encountered with compiling software are bugs in autotools.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Mr. Underbridge]

But I really just got tired of having to compile things that I could not get with slackpkg or slapt

Often as not, converting .RPMs works fine.

Since I will probably quest to install Slack again someday, does anyone know if it comes with a GUI installer yet?

I don't think that's high on Pat's probability list (wasn't as of 11, doubt it's in this one). On the up side, it's probably the same as you remember, so it shouldn't cause you any problems.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Selivanow]

People who use slack are not standard users. People who use slack KNOW what they are DOING...or at least don't mind learning.
There does seem to be a larger gap these days. When I started to use slack in early '95 it was my first taste of Linux and I loved it. Of course back then if you used MS stuff it was DOS and Win3. Even OS/2 wasn't easy to install. I remember having to edit the config files on my boot disks to get my Sony CDU-33A 2X cdrom drive working for the install.
Slackware recognized it "Out of the Box"!
Anyways, Slackware is and has always been the best distro to wrap your brain around Linux. If you want to know how everything fits together, go Slack. if you don't like SYSV style init, go Slack. All else....go elsewhere, it's your choice!

Hurray for Slack 12.0! Great job, Pat!

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[doti]

Any "standard" user that feels like that should be running Ubuntu (or an equivalent) anyway.

Slackware is not for them, and it's not Slackware's fault.

Anyone that says Slackware is the best is right, and others that say Slackware are inadequate, they are right too.
To each it's own.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[m3gatr0nX]

Once you go Slack, you never go back!

I'd have to agree with that statement. I've gotten too used to the Slack way of doing things and really appreciate its simplicity and the fact that I can keep it nice and lightweight. Ubuntu / Fedora / Suse are all nice, but I find them way too bloated for my needs on the desktop and as a server. Slack as a server works best. Sure you'll have to compile a lot of packages from source, but that's the only way you can be sure the software is configured correctly for your needs.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[catmistake]

don't YOU tell me to stfu!

I've never seen any graphics in links or mutt or in the framebuffer console...
I'll admit there are levels of user interface... but if it isn't GRAPHICAL, how can it be a GRAPHICAL user interface?

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[ArTourter]

Try "links -g" one day from your console. (hints it use svgalib)

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[notamisfit]

What exactly is Slackware's init system? It's not System V, and it's really not close to BSD except for the rc. prefix in front of all the scripts.

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Archwyrm]

It is based on the original BSD boot system, or so I have heard.

This page hints at it: http://openskills.info/infobox.php?IDbox=1042

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[catmistake]

Try "links -g" one day from your console. (hints it use svgalib)

:~$ links -g
Unknown option -g
:~$

Was that hiding in there all along?? I never knew! Wow... amazing the shit you can learn from the gurus... I AM NOT WORTHY of your h4xor wizdum!

Re:Once you go Slack ...

[Anonymous Coward]

from links' man page:

-g Run Links in graphics mode. If not given, Links will run in text mode. Running
in graphics mode means that Links will probe all compiled-in graphics devices
and run on the first found. If none found, links will not run in text mode.
This option works only if --enable-graphics was given to ./configure.

Noooooooooo!!! Not tonight!

[bersl2]

I have work to do tonight! Don't make me choose between that and upgrading to 12.0!

Re:Noooooooooo!!! Not tonight!

[pilbender]

AAAAAHHHH Damn it! I was thinking the *exact* same thing. I have to just put it out of my mind because I've got code to release tomorrow and we're down on devs by 60% :-(

I'm going to take a stand. I'm going to take charge. I'm *not* going to let the Slackware upgrade dominate my thoughts! I will fight the urge! I will write my code so I can keep my job and my house and my wife. I will make the right choice.

There! I don't feel any better and it doesn't make it okay. I still want to upgrade my Slack boxes. It's fun even after 13 years ;-)

Re:Noooooooooo!!! Not tonight!

[Skapare]

Call in sick. You know it will make you sick if you can't get your Slack.

Re:Noooooooooo!!! Not tonight!

[pilbender]

You know.... that's the best thing I've heard or read all day. Mod parent brilliant please.

Re:Noooooooooo!!! Not tonight!

[Provocateur]

And when you return to work the next day, with a gleam in your eye, just tell them you've had sex. Just so you don't have to answer any more follow-up questions.

In case they do ask, just tell them, freshmeat.net. There, no more questions.

Re:Noooooooooo!!! Not tonight!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to just put it out of my mind because I've got code to release tomorrow and we're down on devs by 60%

Are you perhaps working for NSN? (Nokia Siemens Networks) People are jumping ship like crazy, here.

Slak Rules

[PenGun]

Always.

  Just tried to install the Fiesty Fawn thingy. It goes in alright but I need to be root to set the puppy up. I refuse to be crippled by some piece of .... that wants to protect me from myself. I refuse to put in my user password every damn time I want to do anything.

  It's easy to fix. Just crank in slak once again, over top of the toy.

  We'll have 12 in Slamd64 (64 bit slak) soon.

Re:Slak Rules

[QuantumG]

sudo -s

Re:Slak Rules

[notamisfit]

$ sudo passwd root

Other than that, yeah Slackware is pretty fucking awesome. I gave Slack 12 (actually -current) a shot in the pre-RC stages and was pleasantly surprised. I might give this one a shot later on.

Re:Slak Rules

[ClaraBow]

Just tried to install the Fiesty Fawn thingy. It goes in alright but I need to be root to set the puppy up. I refuse to be crippled by some piece of .... that wants to protect me from myself. I refuse to put in my user password every damn time I want to do anything. You can always use these handy commands:

• SU

• SUDO

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah. My initial impression of Feisty was that it was an amazingly superior version of Windows Vista ;)

Re:Slak Rules

[Kjella]

You do know that it's 30 seconds on google and one command to enable the root account right? How you survive on slak without basic geek problem solving skills is beyond me.

Re:Slak Rules

[SyniK]

Those that are stuck on a sudo box have adapted (as all these child posts will show)...
My particular brand of crazy is:

$ sudo bash

Re:Slak Rules

[PenGun]

Yeah I'm so lame I've been root for ... woo 12 years now. No I'll just crank in slak rather than surf a menu system to allow me to be what the fuck I am.

  I keep a user account for ssh etc but at home I'm root. Here's a hint turn it off if you aint using it. Turn it on when you need it.

  The only fools who have come close to rooting me lost 3 class C networks, heh on advertising.com yet, and became friends. Don't try to root me ... just ask for an account eh'.

Re:Slak Rules

[PenGun]

Support EMI. Wow! No way in hell!

Re:Slak Rules

[g0dsp33d]

I'm on vista now, downloading Slackware. Trying to find a *nix package that will run on my laptop without sacrificing chicken blood to get the wifi drivers working. I refuse to use dialup to fix problems with wireless.

Does anyone know the basic differences I'd notice between this and say Fedora 7 or Ubuntu?

Re:Slak Rules

[X0563511]

Wow, that commend there made you appear to be a lot younger than I'm sure you are.

The very idea of rooting someone is that they don't know about it. So, you only know how many times they have failed to root you.

A healthy dose of paranoia is a good thing, as long as you don't get carried away.

---- ----

Myself, I have yet to try slackware. It seems I always end up moving back to Debian. I've tried lots: redhat, fedora, suse, and gentoo. I've even played with (and had running decently) FreeBSD.

Re:Slak Rules

[Hex4def6]

Would I be right in saying that you're about 13?

Re:Slak Rules

[markwalling]

fred's at Akademy, but i'll get on his case for you :P

Re:Slak Rules

[PenGun]

"The very idea of rooting someone is that they don't know about it. So, you only know how many times they have failed to root you."

Very true. I ran servers for years and you can tell by your traffic whether you are being used to do something you had not planned. I've caught a few people trying really hard but those advertising.com boys actually used my server. That's why I went back up the chain and took several networks from them.

  If you are so quiet I can't detect you ... then you know I don't care much. You are not impacting my machine. As I said, just ask for an account.

  Oh yeah I'm 60 this year.

Re:Slak Rules

[notamisfit]

Umm, yeah, Slackware is a lot, lot harder. That's the basic difference.

While it's got it's uses, if you're new enough to have to ask what the difference is (and there's no judgment in that; we were all new once), you probably shouldn't be using it. It won't help with the wifi drivers; they're all in the kernel and Slack uses a vanilla kernel.org kernel. Honestly, if Ubuntu doesn't support the hardware in question (it includes a few non-kosher drivers for stuff like Atheros), it probably won't run on Linux period.

Re:Slak Rules

[ushering05401]

Here is a link to a site where your intellect will be tested by other far advanced minds like your own... http://www.digg.com/

Use it carefully... Remember, with great power comes great responsibility.

Re:Slak Rules

[PenGun]

Nasty ... that one almost hurt.

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

$ cp /bin/sh sh
$ sudo chown root sh
$ sudo chmod 4755 sh

(assuming . is mode 700)

Re:Slak Rules

[kollywabbles]

Ubuntu is for n00bs looking to get away from Windows. Go full Debian or go home.

Re:Slak Rules

[vtcodger]

***Just tried to install the Fiesty Fawn thingy. It goes in alright but I need to be root to set the puppy up. I refuse to be crippled by some piece of .... that wants to protect me from myself. I refuse to put in my user password every damn time I want to do anything.***

You can set up a root user and log into it on a real console -- or at least you can in kubuntu. It'll be just like Slackware -- sort of. I think there is a way to do a semipermanent sudo, but I don't remember what it is. In any case, I don't really see how this nonsense makes ME any more secure. All it does is impede my use of the PC. Whose computer is this, anyway?

Pretty much, I agree with you. Kubuntu lasted about two weeks before I muttered 'screw this' and installed Slackware. Particularly aggravating is that if you forget to sudo things, the programs don't necessarily tell you that they didn't do what you asked them to do. Many of them simply ignore part or all of your command.

I'm sure that there are all sorts of things wrong with Slack, but the only one that has caused me any aggravation so far is that Kcron is included in the distribution. It appears to run, but the tasks it schedules never get executed. That's because of the way Slackware schedules periodic tasks.

Re:Slak Rules

[cdw38]

+1.

To the question: You should really read up (check distrowatch.com for links to various reviews of different distros) before installing (or trying to install) Slackware. My first experience with it wasn't until after 4 months of Mandrake 9, and I couldn't even get X working without IRC help. Trying to jump straight into it (without basic familiarity with the Linux kernel and environment) will be unnecessarily hard.

I suppose the best way to ultimately become familiar with Linux is to ween yourself from distros like Ubuntu and Fedora for a few months to see how things really work behind the UI curtain distros like that provide. I'm still a total *nix noob myself, and will stay that way as long as I'm too lazy to find time to play around with anything other than Ubuntu [after spending about 4 years without Linux installed (after about a year worth of Mandrake)]

So, yeah. CN: Stay away until you are at least somewhat familiar with Linux. At least that's my own view (although admittedly inexperienced as I am).

Re:Slak Rules

[deftcoder]

'sudo -i' to become root (until you Control + D or 'exit'/'logout')

Re:Slak Rules

[swillden]

Dude. You know it's trivial to set a password on the root account so that you can login as root if you want, right? If you prefer slack, that's fine (I use Debian myself), but there's absolutely nothing stopping you from making Ubuntu work the way you're used to. However, your comments make me wonder: What do you use on slack if not sudo? su? Or do you just log in and run everything as root all the time? If so, that's a bad habit and you should break it.

Re:Slak Rules

[big_groo]

What this guy is trying to say is that with Slack, you're going to have to use a terminal. Start with slack, get used to the terminal. You'll learn. You'll thank that random guy on /. that said 'Get used to the terminal'. Ubuntu is all GUI tools. When those fail (and they do), you have to go to the terminal anyway.

Yes, I meant to say 'terminal' several times in this post. Do you see a theme here? Welcome to Linux. (If this is your first Linux distro, try Slack, *then* try the others. You'll be back.)

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

My, you have a large penis. It is ever so wonderous!

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Trying to jump straight into it (without basic familiarity with the Linux kernel and environment) will be unnecessarily hard.

Or very educational, depending on just how stubborn you are. *wink*

Re:Slak Rules

[endemoniada]

I'd say the "n00b" here is the one who chooses his OS on pure ideology. I use Ubuntu because it suits me better than Debian. Simple as that.

You're free to use Debian all you want, just don't EVER go around telling everyone else what they should use.

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, let me guess: you've never released a single piece of software in your life, have you?

Re:Slak Rules

[GotenXiao]

Oh I wish I had mod points right now :P

Dead on the money - if you want to learn Linux, dive in with Slackware. Aside from Linux From Scratch, it's the ultimate crash course in learning how to use everything :P

Re:Slak Rules

[wolf369T]

You could also try Bluewhite64: http://www.bluewhite64.com/news.php, which claims to be a pure 64-bit OS based on the latest Slackware.

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Just tried to install the Fiesty Fawn thingy. It goes in alright but I need to be root to set the puppy up. I refuse to be crippled by some piece of .... that wants to protect me from myself. I refuse to put in my user password every damn time I want to do anything. You can always use these handy commands:

• SU

• SUDO

Actually, because of the no-root-password thing they've got going in Ub, it'd be sudo su.

(Here's to hoping my moderations don't disappear...)

Re:Slak Rules

[phiwum]

$ sudo passwd root
Password:
jesse is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.

What's the problem? The Slackware distros I've used have no sudoers by default, so this command doesn't do much of anything. Have things changed since 10.1?

Re:Slak Rules

[kollywabbles]

I wrote a program once that displayed "Hello World" on my monitor. What did you write?

Re:Slak Rules

[Skrynesaver]

$ cp /bin/sh sh $ sudo chown root sh $ sudo chmod 4755 sh

Get thee from my sight, if having no root user by default is supposed to be secure, having a suid shell to solve resultant problems of inconvenience is without doubt the most hideous idea I've ever seen

Please reply that this was an elegant piss take, please

Re:Slak Rules

[Vanders]

What did you write?

Quite a lot. A lot of the other developers who work with me run Ubuntu, too. Before I switched to Ubuntu, I ran Mandrake.

Now I'm not saying that Ubuntu is "leet" or something, but silly rubbish like "Ubuntu is for n00bs LOLROTFLCOPTER!!!1111!!eleven!" is demonstratively wrong. Just run whatever you like and be happy with your choice, but your choice doesn't elevate you above other users.

Unless you choose Syllable of course. The chicks love that.

Re:Slak Rules

[person132]

I did this. I read the Slackware book and installed it, my previous experience being a few boots with Knoppix. No better way to learn Linux, IMHO. Though setting up ndiswrapper made me go insane temporarily.

Re:Slak Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Dead on the money - if you want to learn Linux, dive in with Slackware. Aside from Linux From Scratch, it's the ultimate crash course in learning how to use everything :P Oh no, the Slackware mantra! This is the learning by doing philosophy, I'm in favor of learning by reading philosophy--

Read
(a) Slackware book
Read parts of, and have in hand for consultation--
(b) Unix in a Nutshell
(c) Unix Powertools
Use google to find names of programs to do things and then do these before using the program
(d) read the man pages of the programs and/or
(e) read appropriate wiki

Use this strategy and more on *any* distro and you will learn more about Linux than you ever would from picking up a hard distro to install and configure.

Re:Slak Rules

[notamisfit]

That was referring to the Ubuntu part of the OP's complaint.

Re:Slak Rules

[notamisfit]

Why do you think the *BSD port is called Project Evil? I had to deal with ndiswrapper for a Marvell card I had (did you know that some people think running cables along the floor makes a hallway look bad?) and it was utter pain. I've got an Atheros card using madwifi now; it's not a hell of a lot better on Linux, but FreeBSD (my main OS) supports it natively due to their "Heinz 57" kernel licensing policy.

Re:Slak Rules

[kollywabbles]

I am sorry for joking about your precious Ubuntu. I didn't realize I had offended you and your religion. You are correct, things like Linux are no laughing matter, and a person's distribution is something sacred. Next time I will tone down my sense of humor. I need to remember that I'm dealing with Ubuntu users.

Re:Slak Rules

[Scoth]

Way back in the Mists of Time, I'd heard of Linux and decided to try one. I went to the "Budget CDROM" section of Microcenter, and they had a whole section of distros. I pretty much eenie-meenie-miny-moed it since at the time I wasn't really aware of the whole kernel/distro/etc thing. I ended up with Slackware 3.4. Now, it was a heck of a lot of work to get going, especially since I had a isapnp modem and sound card, and eventually a Voodoo Banshee vid card which wasn't supported directly at the time. However, it gave me pretty thorough knowledge and comfort with the command line, which some friends of mine who got into Linux later still can't do much with. So, there's something to be said for diving in head first and getting your hands dirty. Compared to the trials and tribulations I went through getting the original working, Gentoo has been a breeze :)

Re:Slak Rules

[Vanders]

It's nothing to do with Ubuntu. It's your general attitude that you're better than other users because you've chosen a "better" distribution. If you'd taken the most cursory look at the link in my signature you'd now I don't particularly care for any Linux distributions.

Let's neither of us pretend you were joking. Attitudes like yours are posted on Slashdot all the time. People actually believe that sort of rubbish.

Re:Slak Rules

[kollywabbles]

Do you need a hug? Come on, let's hug.

Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[timmarhy]

The problem with slackware i found was i had to find and compile every single stupid dependency out there. Some people might find it "l33t" but i would suggest they haven't had enough experience with that kind of crud to be completely over it.

if it still lacks a ports or packaging system that allows easy to update packages and conflict resolution, it's not worth the time.

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[Anonymous Coward]

the only thing that slavckware is missing any ways is gnome dependencies everything else is there pretty much you might just find a few other programs that most distros don't include anyways

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[PenGun]

Hummm you don't compile a dependency. You compile binaries that need things ... those are your dependencies. The package system works well and what part of 'upgradepg' is giving you trouble?

  Ports is a BSD thing ... I think you fishing without a hook. You know, trolling with no point.

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[WilliamSChips]

He was probably thinking of portage.

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[timmarhy]

huh, ports isn't a BSD thing there's plenty of linux distro's that use ports.

and how do i not compile a dependency? i have a program i try to compile, it errors on a missing package, i have to download said package and compile it as well. Hence i have to compile dependant packages to get the package i really want to work. and if my dependency also needs other packages to work... well you see how the whole thing spirals into a big cluster fuck.

Last i checked i found the precompiled package list to be very lacking in current versions, it also screwed up upgrades on me rendering things useless short of removing and starting again.

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[WilliamSChips]

huh, ports isn't a BSD thing there's plenty of linux distro's that use ports. No, ports is a BSD thing. You're thinking of Portage, which is used by the Linux distro Gentoo and is based off of ports.

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[The Conductor]

That isn't unique to Slackware by any measure. Even Debian, with its fat 14-CD install set, can't include everything. You are more likely to find what you need in a Debian package, but once you step outside the repository, it's tough going. With Slack's simpler layout and simpler package tools, at least you have a chance when rolling your own.

AFAICT, there is no silver bullet, only trade-offs. Even Windows will get hamstrung by dependencies if you stray too far from the mainstream, though commercial Windows software often packages tons of OS updates with it, solving your dependency problems but often breaking previous software installs. Debian's repository is a walled garden, and they try to mitigate the pain of the walls by making the garden really, really big. Slackware is all open, but that leaves you on your own sometimes. RPM-type distros are somewhere in-between. Choose distro most suited for your needs. If, like me, you want to do lots of oddball stuff, automated package managers create more problems than they solve. But if you can live comfortably without ever installing things outside the repository, then Debian is for you.

Re:Slackware... ironic that it's too much effort

[bit01]

but once you step outside the repository, it's tough going

Not really. I've installed plenty of non-repository packages and it's rare to see more than one or two dependencies not already in the repositories. Things can get messy when you want to install something that is mutually exclusive with what's in the repositories (potentially forcing uninstalls of packages that have lots of dependencies) but that's rare.

Also, you may not have heard of the "checkinstall" package. It's an easy way to turn any install into a package and deserves to be more widely known. e.g. Just do "checkinstall make install" and answer some easy questions. Allows most unmanaged software to be installed in a controlled way. It insures no existing managed files will be overwritten and allows uninstallation just like any other package. Dependencies can be explicitly specified also if needed though I normally don't bother.

---

Terrorism. The all-purpose excuse.

You know what's an easier fix?

[ZakuSage]

sudo passwd root, or
sudo -s, or
sudo su

Re:You know what's an easier fix?

[kollywabbles]

Or... sudo sudo

Re:You know what's an easier fix?

[phagstrom]

how every Zen of you

Yay! The 2.6 Linux Kernel is finally ready!

[Anonymous Coward]

With the release of Slackware 2.6, it is now official that the 2.6 kernel is ready to be used by just about every Linux user out there.

Hooray! No more 2.4!

Oh wait...

your living in the past

[zakeria]

all those things have been superseded you should try gentoo

Re:your living in the past

[ghostdancer]

Nah... I prefer hardcore than softcore...

Re:your living in the past

[cp.tar]

Let me precede my comment with a disclaimer: I am a Gentoo user.

I haven't yet tried Slackware, though from what I've seen and read, it is a very nice distro. And aside from the attitude towards compiling, it seems pretty similar to Gentoo in the underlying philosophy.

All that being said, I fail to see the point of your post. Most people would rather not install every single thing by compiling it first, which is the default method on Gentoo as well as Gentoo's most distinctive feature.
Furthermore, such fanboyish trolling in a discussion about another distro is... well... fanboyish trolling.
And apparently, I have just fed you.

Well, never mind. But I've just come to wonder: was there even an article here when Gentoo 2007.0 came out? I know I haven't seen one - actually, I don't recall ever seeing an article about a new Gentoo release - but I do see Slackware articles.

It's probably just that Slackware has a better marketing team ;)

Re:your living in the past

[pwrtool 45]

Or, it could be because Slackware is the oldest surviving distro and the interest (from Slashdot and the other geek news sites) is purely historical. It's still out there, being updated and used.

Re:your living in the past

[cp.tar]

If it's still updated and used, then the interest isn't purely historical.

Re:your living in the past

[zakeria]

or it could be that my post was a joke but people lack the foresight and humor..

Re:your living in the past

[MightyMartian]

Other than the fact that the install has changed so little over the years. I first installed Slackware in 1993, and the fact that each iteration still keeps strictly to those early core principles is one of Slack's big plusses in my books.

I wouldn't turn a Slack-based box over to my great aunt Melba for her to write email to her kids. I think Ubuntu or Windows is much more in keeping with that, but for a server admin who likes to control exactly what goes in, and who likes how Linuxy an environment it is, Slack is the top of the heap.

Re:your living in the past

[post.scriptum]

http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/30/ 1615233

Re:your living in the past

[cp.tar]

... or just that it wasn't much of a joke in the first place. The FP in the Gentoo article linked below was both on-topic and funny.

Re:your living in the past

[zakeria]

rolls eyes; don't take it too seriously mate its a Linux distro not the second coming.

Re:your living in the past

[hollywoodb]

Slackware releases get news coverage for the same reasons Debian, RedHat, SuSE, and these days *buntu do: Releases are a big deal. They mean changes to the core components of the system as well as the "desktop" if one is provided.

Gentoo (and Arch for that matter) aren't less newsworthy really, its just that their system is more of a moving target without clear and defined releases that really stand for a stable set of packages tested and designed to work as advertised within the scope of the release.

Old Time Rock N' Roll

[Anonymous Coward]

I Luv Slackware. It has the essence of what an Unix system should be, clear, pure and concise. Call me a relic, call me what you will. Say Im old-fashioned, say Im over the hill. Todays Unix ain t got the same soul I like that old time rock n roll.

Re:Old Time Rock N' Roll

[krelian]

Don't you mean "I don't feel superior to lesser nerds if I don't use the console 100% of the time and compile everything myself"? :)

Re:Old Time Rock N' Roll

[Anonymous Coward]

It has nothing to do with feeling superior, it has everything to do with being superior. Even at my 73% console usage, I am clearly superior to you.

Re:Old Time Rock N' Roll

[krelian]

It has nothing to do with feeling superior, it has everything to do with being superior. Even at my 73% console usage, I am clearly superior to you. Exactly what I was saying.

no ZFS, lame

[Anonymous Coward]

We've been testing ZFS with OpenSolaris and FreeBSD and keep getting impressed by the things it can do. Like clones, which are effectively a free copy-on-write hard link. We do a lot of zoned/jailed virtual servers. ZFS makes it easy; just set up the default install and take a snapshot of it. When we need to create a new zone, we just make a clone of the snapshot (It takes up no space and no time). As new files are added/edited, each zone has their own copy, but 90% of the files are shared, so we avoid wasting disk space. If we could do that with UML or Xen, we would. But we can't, so we don't.

Re:no ZFS, lame

[drsmithy]

As new files are added/edited, each zone has their own copy, but 90% of the files are shared, so we avoid wasting disk space. If we could do that with UML or Xen, we would. But we can't, so we don't.

Do it exactly the same way. Install your master VM to an LV. Take [a] snapshot(s) of the LV. Use the snapshot(s) for your new VMs.

(With that said, I believe snapshots in LVM have a much greater overhead than they do in ZFS.)

Cleaning out my garage...

[tgd]

Cleaning out my garage a week or two ago I was going through an old box and ended up tossing a set of Slackware A floppies... That was such a refreshing change from downloading a boot disk and bootstrapping a system starting with compiling GCC.

I know its only peripherally related to the article, but man. V12 of Slackware? Time has flown, and things sure have changed.

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[colmore]

Cleaning out my garage a week or two ago I was going through an old box and ended up tossing a set of Slackware A floppies... That was such a refreshing change from downloading a boot disk and bootstrapping a system starting with compiling GCC.

well between the four digit user ID, and the old timer war stories, what are you up to these days? just chasing the rest of us off of your lawn, cane in fist?

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[Dicky]

Bah, kids of today!

And yes, until I emigrated last year, meaning a major home clear-out, I also had old floppy boxes with stacks of a*, d*, n* disks in them. I'll have to grab me a Slack 12, although I had been thinking of trying Gentoo next, for a sheer seat-of-pants setup...

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[Nimey]

It hasn't been that many versions. Patrick skipped from v4 to v7 because IIRC Redhat at the time was v7, and so was Mandrake.

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is true. It sounds sleazy unless you tell the whole story. Basically it was a joke and Patrick was completely up-front about it. The release notes said something like: "The other major distros are all at version 6 now and I got tired of everyone asking me when Slackware 6 was coming out. So I bumped the version number from 4 to 7. Sorry. I won't do it again (unless everyone else does it again)."

Patrick's sense of humor adds a nice touch to a great distro.

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[Rotting]

I too still have boxes of old slack floppies in the basement and for some reason I just cannot bring myself to throw them out. I'm pretty sure none of them will work anymore... I mean if you used to look at a floppy the wrong way it would break. I'll save them and pass them on as family heirlooms or something. That way the wife won't nag about getting rid of them haha ;)

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure none of them will work anymore... I mean if you used to look at a floppy the wrong way it would break.

It may not be as bad as you think. Two years ago I transferred the data from all my old BBC micro floppies onto my PC. They dated from 1982-1987, and only four out of about 100 had unrecoverable errors.

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[Ravenscall]

Heh, it was the "old timers" like you that got me using slack in the first place.

Re:Cleaning out my garage...

[wikinerd]

Version skipping is bad IMHO. I can understand that some uninformed users might pay some attention to that when choosing what to buy, but I hope that an OS could have other features to attract users than a version number. Innovation is the key to greater adoption among users, not version numbers.

And I just got around to installing 11

[Tmack]

To my new hardware! At least I was still burning it in and hadnt put too much into configuring it yet. Time to flush and reload once again!

tm

Re:And I just got around to installing 11

[pilbender]

What the heck!? Slackware makes it very easy to upgrade versions. I haven't had to do a fresh install on *any* computers once I put Slackware on them initially. There are a couple of docs included on the distro to help with upgrading. You should follow those and learn how to do it. You can also tar up Slack and move it to a different hard disk. No need to ever reinstall Slackware.

I highly recommend building confidence in the upgrade process. This way you will never have to worry about reconfiguring your systems or losing your data. There's no need to restore from backup and there's no need for your system to be down for more than a few minutes.

I don't know whether you do it or not but you should consider keeping a text log or a list or something of configuration changes in case you ever need to do it again. Mine is about 20 pages long but that's because I've customized or installed just about everything in creation at one time or another ;-)

Re:And I just got around to installing 11

[Richy_T]

Why bother upgrading a fresh install? It's not like you're throwing any work away and it's just inviting unexpected problems.

Rich

Re:And I just got around to installing 11

[pilbender]

Because he said he has _some_ customizations and it's not about the lost work. It's about learning the process for the future. If you want to use *any* computer system seriously you have to have confidence in the maintenance/upgrade process. It's *much* better to do it *now* when it doesn't matter then to have to do it later and not _know_ it's going to work.

This is the *perfect* time to upgrade ;-)

Re:And I just got around to installing 11

[Tmack]

What the heck!? Slackware makes it very easy to upgrade versions. I haven't had to do a fresh install on *any* computers once I put Slackware on them initially. There are a couple of docs included on the distro to help with upgrading. You should follow those and learn how to do it. You can also tar up Slack and move it to a different hard disk. No need to ever reinstall Slackware.

...

FWIW, I know upgrading is easy with slack, as is all the other stuff, it typically just works like it should without any "Magic" application builders/configurers/packagemanagment stuff. I have my /etc saved, backed up in several places (and to tape), and all apps that for whatever reason like to stow their configs elsewhere have them moved into /etc and sym linked to where they are expected to be so I can just pull over that dir and be good for the most part. Data drives are completely separate, as they should be, including the user homes. But with this new hardware I have, I had a fresh install sitting there waiting on me to apply these old configs, make sure none of the settings require different formats or have been moved (my last upgrade, 8 -> 10 I thnk, several files changed a good bit and required a little tweaking). Since its fresh, might as well start over and enjoy the installation process. It always feels better anyway, knowing its fresh, and no cruft hanging around.

tm

Re:And I just got around to installing 11

[pilbender]

I hope you didn't take what I said the wrong way. I'm just glad you already know what it takes to go through an upgrade. There is some tweaking and if you already *know* how to do an upgrade, then I can accept your reasoning. It only takes about 20 minutes to install Slackware from start to finish on fast hardware. But it takes a bit longer to diff all your "old" config changes with the ".new" config changes.

Happy Slacking.

PS After all that, I still haven't had time to do *my* upgrade! I promise I'm gonna do it as soon as I get through that last of this code for work ;-)

So...

[Anonymous Coward]

How many floppies this time around?

quick question

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you missing your sarcasm tags or are you really that lame?

Re:quick question

[PenGun]

I really am this lame ... heh. And you .... oh alpha AC ... how 'bout you???

OMFG!!!!1!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, I just rooted you!! LMAO!! ROFL!!!

Re:OMFG!!!!1!!

[PenGun]

Poodle ... come get some.

Fuck off is OK too.

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Well I was going for a funny by ripping off the old "does it run Linux" gag, but targetting being a bit edgy with everyone bitching about the iphone overhyping.

Edgy humor is always going to step on some toes so a few "fuck offs" is fully fine with me too since your feedback suggests I hit the mark.

If I gave you a pressure release valve in the process, thats great too.

Re:Fuck off is OK too.

[thealsir]

Yeah, right now I'm in a "fuck people who have no sense of humor" mood. You various posters can interpret that as you wish.

Re:Fuck off is OK too.

[newr00tic]

We have.

I'm sorry...

[r00t]

but I thought Patrick was dying?

**duck**

Seriously though, anyone know?

Re:I'm sorry...

[laejoh]

Netcraft never confirmed, so, think of it as if it didn't happen...

Re:I'm sorry...

[Anonymous Coward]

Like many people with an illness, he found a doctor who treated him.

Does that mean Patrick isn't sick anymore?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope he's feeling better these days.

Still too much work?

[Jason1729]

I used slackware on my desktop for many years (I started with 2.3 and kernel 1.0.8). A few years ago I decided it was just too much trouble, between regularly updating the kernal for security patchs (involving recompiling, redoing lilo, etc) and other system maintence, I was spending more time administering my system than using it.

Are things that different with linux now? (I'm not bashing slackware here, I tried many distros and always found slackware to be the best)

Re:Still too much work?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most other distros are much more automatic in the initial configurations. After that bit, I don't see much difference between them at all...

Slackware, as expected, remains much the same.

Re:Still too much work?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you need to regularly update the kernel for security reasons.

Re:Still too much work?

[oddfox]

Things are quite different with Linux now, but if you liked Slack back in the day then you most likely would want to check out the latest offering. I myself use Gentoo for a multitude of reasons, but the biggest one has to be the ability to determine what goes on my system and what support that software has enabled or disabled. This coupled with how easy portage is for me to manage (Paludis is nice and fast but until it's an official alternative to portage I do not care to use it on my main install) makes Gentoo ideal for keeping all my software up to date with a very efficient package manager. Slackware has great package tools and Slack packages off places like Linuxpackages tend to work well, but unless you are really interested in maintaining within your Slackware installation multiple pieces of software that you yourself have added over time, well, I'd recommend looking elsewhere. I tried slapt-get, prefered swaret, but haven't messed around with Slackware since GNOME was removed from the distro. That and a lack of dependency handling native to the package management tools eventually turned me off to Slackware for anything but a server, and even then...

Speaking of dependecy handling I'm amazed that it's apparently still not a feature Patrick considers worth implementing. Slack packages are the only ones I know of that don't handle what most people would consider a basic feature. Expect headaches when trying to get software installed manually when you don't have prior experience.

Re:Still too much work?

[Richy_T]

My experience with Debian is that the package maintainers tend to be way too conservative with their dependencies. This frequently leads to minor upgrades or installations forcing upgrades of many packages. This in itself causes other problems. It depends on what tradeoffs you want to make but I appreciate that Slackware allows me to use my judgement in these things.

Rich

Re:Still too much work?

[oddfox]

Yeah, Debian is really rock-solid and I love it if I don't need to do anything extensive outside of the official repositories. Then again, I would never profess to be very smart with Debian these days, the last time I gave it a whirl was with Woody, ever since then the Debian-based and actually user-friendly distros are the ones I've tested and recommended to newcomers. Meh, let's all just start using Linux From Scratch.

Re:Still too much work?

[jlehtira]

I always found it plenty sufficient to upgradepkg my kernel whenever Pat decided to put out a kernel update package. And that's very seldom. My reason for using Slackware is that it really doesn't get security updates often - depending on your setup, you might not see any security updates in several months..

Re:Who cares

[Anonymous Coward]

Dr. Who talks funny... like he's from good britain or something...

My knob only goes up to 11

[Anonymous Coward]

I got it from a Spinal Tap charity auction.

Re:*BSD is Dying

[kollywabbles]

Ah crap. And I just bought a copy of FreeBSD 6 Unleashed yesterday.

Version 12, wow.... I remember Slack in Dr. Dobbs.

[tjstork]

Back then, they touted Linux as having 50,000 users!

Re:MOD PARENT TROLL or REDUNDANT

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he was being ironic...

Timing is everything.

[armanox]

*Sigh* Right when I get Gentoo running on my desktop too. I think I'm just gonna give slackware it's own HDD this time. Although I may need to wait to upgrade my desktop until the nVidia driver updates. I'd install on my laptop, but I just got all of the drivers (networking aside) working right. Perhaps my server (running Ubuntu 6.06) is candidate for Slackware?

Just in time for X-Day

[TwoBeans]

Praise "Bob".

Re:Just in time for X-Day

[Anonymous Coward]

yiyiyiyiyiy!

DVD and CD sets are still on pre-order :(

[snikulin]

And yes, I always make a point by buying it, not downloading :P

Not ideal for servers

[laing]

I've used Slackware since the beginning (just after the SLS days). Recently I tried to install it on a high-end server. I was appalled to discover that Slackware does not support (at least not out of the box) 3ware RAID controllers. If you're serious about setting up a server, a hardware RAID controller is essential. 3ware makes some of the best that their Linux support is good.

Another gripe about Slackware is the lack of large file support. Unbelievable as it may sound, Slackware does not yet fully support large (>2GB) files.

Despite the above, I'm going to grab this latest release and play with it. I've got Slackware installed on 3 of my boxes now. Maybe I'll upgrade one of them to see what's new.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[Glytch]

I'll assume you're right about the raid cards, as I have no raid experience, but this:

>Another gripe about Slackware is the lack of large file support. Unbelievable as it may sound, Slackware does not yet fully support
>large (>2GB) files.

What do you mean, "doesn't support"? I'm running slackware 12.0rc2 (installed just a few days ago, it figures) and any out-of-the-box application handles any size file I throw at it. What's the context for your claim?

Re:Not ideal for servers

[PenGun]

Hmmm so this 8 gig HD .ts I got here is an illusion. Interesting, mplayer plays it and the big TV says it's real. Oh well back to fantasy land.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're serious about setting up a server, you should know how to compile the kernel with RAID support. And Slackware not supporting >2GB files? How the hell did you get modded informative???

Re:Not ideal for servers

[ChipMonk]

$ cd
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=8G bs=1048576 count=8192

I dare you to tell me that command failed on your system, with space remaining on your partition containing /home.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[TransEurope]

Only if you use fat32 as filesystem ;-)

I handled files with much more than 2GB since years on Slackware without any problems. What concrete "incomplete compatibilities" do you mean? They are definitely not related to the common filesystems like ext3 or reiserfs. Some tools had problems, but they had these problems on other distros too, because these issues where related to the code of these tools (years ago tar, was a bug, or parted, which is not part of Slack by default) not of Slackware.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[richlv]

weird.
are you sure you tried a recent version of slackware (like 11.0) ?
if so, did you try any other kernels from the bootdisk besides "bare.i" ?

scsi, raid and other controllers like that are supported by kernels scsi, scsi2, scsi3 and raid.

second, what about 2gb ? i'm handling backups on a server with single file sometimes exceeding several hundreds of gb. i would notice if files could go only up to 2 gb.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[ArTourter]

Recently I tried to install it on a high-end server. I was appalled to discover that Slackware does not support (at least not out of the box) 3ware RAID controllers. If you're serious about setting up a server, a hardware RAID controller is essential. 3ware makes some of the best that their Linux support is good.

Well funny that, but looking at the kernel config, the hugesmp.s version shows:

#
# SCSI low-level drivers
#
...
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_3W_XXXX_RAID=y
CO NFIG_SCSI_3W_9XXX=y
...

If this is not 3ware support out of the box, I don't know what it is.

There has always been several kernels you can boot from at install time. on 12.0 the huge-smp should be the one to use by preference as it contains pretty much every drivers available built-in.

on previous version of slackware the booting kernel raid.s contains support for 3ware scsi and ataraid.i has the SATA raid bit.

As for the large file support, other have already picked up on that but this is entirely not true. I have been making and burning dvd images since 10.1 (didn't have a dvd burner before that so I cannot comment for previous version)

Re:Not ideal for servers

[Ravenscall]

Then compile a kernel that does support them. I do not know anybody who is serious about servers that does not customize their kernel to improve performance.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[Just Some Guy]

$ mount | grep home
/dev/hda3 on /home type ext1 (rw)

Ahh, found the problem.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[laing]

I think I said doesn't FULLY support as in the NFS client and server. I understand that you must force the version to >2 but it still doesn't work (at least with 11).

It's amazing that my parent was moderated at 0 - troll.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[laing]

RedHat's NFS large file support has been solid since version 7. Slackware still had problems as of version 11. I'm downloading version 12 now so we'll see how it's doing now.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[laing]

Tried booting the 11 DVD with every available kernel and none of the would recognize my 3ware 8xxx 2.5TB array. Of course I know how to build a new kernel and this is what I did back before anybody supported RAID out of the box. I stopped building custom kernels (at least for initial installation) 5 years ago.

Re:Not ideal for servers

[ArTourter]

Well all I can see looking at the config files is that on slack 11.0, both raid.s and huge26.s have support for the 3Ware 7xxx and 8xxx series (2.6 adds support to 9xxx series). so basically it is basically intended to work. If it doesn't I guess there is something that is missing in the kernel config., and therefore it might be a good idea to notify upstream (i.e. in this case, Patrick) with if possible a solution.

Slack Vs. Other Distro

[deimios666]

If you learn Ubuntu, you know Ubuntu. If you learn Slackware, you know Linux.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Anonymous Coward]

I use Slackware (11.0) at home and Ubuntu (6.10) at work. They both have their strong and weak sides. In Slackware I mostly miss config tools to just make things work quickly. But perhaps that's more of a Linux-general problem...instead of distro-specific tools I always wanted an independent framework, that each distro could build on top of. Like CUPS which has just about every printer driver included regardless of what distro it runs on. So in a way Slackware is perhaps even closer to that goal by refusing to use their own config tools and using the generic one's, like alsaconfig, X -configure etc..
Package management is OK. I don't use slapt-get and derivatives but still do manual installing or upgrading of each package. The "lack of dependency-checking" is highly overrated and was never an issue for me. In fact, I think it made package management easier, not harder. Programs once installed usually work without a hitch. The system as a whole is cleanly organized and feels professional, UNIXy and not over- or under-engineered.

Ubuntu is also OK...hardware support out of the box is decent (though I can't get a farking internal modem to work at a friend's house...I can see it with lspci but I can't get it to do anything. Pisses me off!). Software setup is easy and most things even work after installation (like with Slack). System tends to be bigger by default though and needs some trimming later on. Default graphics are nothing to write home about..they work, but aren't stunning either (Gnome interface). Menus are designed for newcomers and have the same Windowsy paradigm which I personally despise. But it works and I use it.

All that being said....thanks Pat for Slackware in general and 12.0 in particular! Looking forward to my subscription CD's. Still want to see HD/filesystem encryption (LUKS) out of the box though ;-)

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[fractoid]

Any time I have to spend f$%king with my OS instead of playing games, reading web pages, checking and answering my email is wasted. It's this spending-time-on-your-OS-is-your-ultimate-goal mentality that's holding Linux back from more mainstream adoption. The perfect OS would 'just work', let me run applications, and not require my attention in any way.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Anonymous Coward]

My perfect Automobile would just work and not require oil changes filter changes, tune ups etc............. And not blow up.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[godfra]

Come on, mod parent up!

He's exactly right, most people don't WANT to screw around with dependencies etc, they just want to turn the thing on and get some work done. Or some games played. Or some porn surfed. Ok, maybe that's just me.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[uglydog]

On the other hand, the more time I spend f$%king with my OS instead of playing games, reading web pages, checking and answering my email, the more I learn about how Linux works. I learned Windows the same way. No, it ain't for everyone, but I find it educational. 'Course by now, Linux "just works" for me, but I know that's not the case for everyone.

I don't think you'll ever get a perfect OS for everyone. I need an OS that doesn't use a lot of resources and is fully customizable. I'm sure I'm not the only one. My coz finds Windows easier to learn. Another friend, a female librarian with no formal computer training, had no problem with Ubuntu. She liked it 'cause it was "cute".

If I had the same control over Windows as I do Linux, I wouldn't find it so annoying. But Windows certainly doesn't cater to me.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Lumpy]

Incorrect.

If you know slaclware you know linux and almost all System V based unix systems. You even know enough about solaris to be dangerous and look like you know what you are doing.

Slack teaches you things that the others dont and there is one tiny difference between slack and the others.

you can grab a random source package, untar; ./configure; make; make install
and most of the time it will work. Under CendOS, fedora, ubuntu and others that is not always the case. Many time very useful but old and no longer maintained software apps fail to compile on anything but slackware. (/usr/local/lib not in ld.so.conf in most EXCEPT slack by default)

Slackware also converts to an embedded system instantly. You cant do that with the others without gnashing of teeth and pain.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Slashcrap]

Any time I have to spend f$%king with my OS instead of playing games, reading web pages, checking and answering my email is wasted. It's this spending-time-on-your-OS-is-your-ultimate-goal mentality that's holding Linux back from more mainstream adoption. The perfect OS would 'just work', let me run applications, and not require my attention in any way.

Well, what's wrong with OSX or Windows then? It's quite simple - you just pay money to Apple or Microsoft in exchange for never having to learn anything.

Nobody is forcing you to use Linux or any other OSS. I know you hear all this talk about the Linux "community" and "Open Source Evangelism", but it's really a bit overblown. I use Linux and I couldn't give a shit whether you live or die, let alone how comfortable you are using Slackware. I'm pretty sure the vast majority feel the same way. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[phiwum]

Any time I have to spend f$%king with my OS instead of playing games, reading web pages, checking and answering my email is wasted. It's this spending-time-on-your-OS-is-your-ultimate-goal mentality that's holding Linux back from more mainstream adoption. The perfect OS would 'just work', let me run applications, and not require my attention in any way.

Then choose a different distro. The tinkerer who wants to learn about Linux can use Slackware while you use something else.

What's the problem?

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Richy_T]

Fortunately, the obsession some seem to have with Linux achieving mainstream adoption is not holding it back from getting serious work done.

Rich

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Eudial]

Any time I have to spend f$%king with my OS instead of playing games, reading web pages, checking and answering my email is wasted. It's this spending-time-on-your-OS-is-your-ultimate-goal mentality that's holding Linux back from more mainstream adoption. The perfect OS would 'just work', let me run applications, and not require my attention in any way.

I'd like to introduce something I like to call "outside the computer screen." It's that area you can't move the cursor to, where there are old cola cans and other rubbish laying about. You know that place? It pretty much sounds like what you're describing. You don't have to configure a book, or boot up a chair before sitting down. Try that place. I think you'll like it.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Phroggy]

Any time I have to spend f$%king with my OS instead of playing games, reading web pages, checking and answering my email is wasted. It's this spending-time-on-your-OS-is-your-ultimate-goal mentality that's holding Linux back from more mainstream adoption. The perfect OS would 'just work', let me run applications, and not require my attention in any way. That's what I like about Slackware, compared to, say, Fedora. Yes, you kinda have to know what you're doing when you set it up, but I've had bad experiences with other distros just doing something as simple as installing security patches. I recently installed Fedora 7, only to find that the "network" service wasn't running, for no obvious reason. It's the little things like that that bug me.

Re:Slack Vs. Other Distro

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post can be interesting and informative if you follow up with what the useful apps are that you mention. As it stands you've made a vague, unsubstantiated claim.

I used Slackware once.

[CCFreak2K]

Really, it was great. I even submitted the Slackware 11 release story. I got turned to it right when 10 came out because I wanted to try Linux. The problem was, I got tired of spending hours configuring everything. For example, getting everything ACPI-related on my laptop was possible, but getting something like the lid to work was a real pain because I had to A) figure out what was wrong (which would entail finding people with similar problems usually with DISsimilar distros), B) find the necessary software to make it work, if applicable, and C) configure it, sometimes with trial and error, so that it did work. So, really getting nice, modern features working was sometimes unbearable. This is why I switched over to CentOS, at least for the time being: it's 100% RedHat compatible, and I get the ease of using a distro that's more or less popular. If something doesn't work, I get the benefit of help from either CentOS or RedHat (not to mention I can use RedHat and maybe Fedora packages, which can help for some obscure tools and proprietary packages like fglrx).

Slackware has a plus side, though: it's easy to diagnose problems manually. If there was a bad driver, for example, it would usually dump to dmesg or some other log, without any filtering. There also were next to no distro-specific software and settings to get in the way of problem solving. If you had a problem, it was solvable with generic instructions (e.g. RedHat does it this way and Gentoo that way, etc).

Now that 12's out with Xorg 11 7.1, I might pick it up for a bit again.

Re:I used Slackware once.

[Anonymous Coward]

Parent here. Just thought I'd mention that Slackware 12 also has gcc4 and glibc 2.5, although you probably could've seen that on Slackware 12's announcement page. Posting anonymously to not karma whore.

Re:I used Slackware once.

[hollywoodb]

I know what you're going through with the ACPI related stuff. The problem isn't just Slackware though. There's no default ACPI handler for the LID switch event on my laptop as well, and this happens to exist in *every* distribution I've used with the exception of OpenSUSE. You'll likely have the same ACPI "issues" with latest versions of Slackware and many other distros, but if you buckle down and learn to write proper ACPI event handlers for all the little things that should be handled via ACPI you can use those scripts on ANY semi-standardized distro. There's a lot of info about this via google, linuxquestions.org, and gentoo's documentation & wiki.

ISO Mirror

[Anonymous Coward]

Making Direct download ISOs mirror(CDs only)...

http://proyectos.pixelamigo.com/software/slackware /12/iso/

Please be patient and not abuse.

The General Idea Of It All Is That

[Sammy Loo]

Ubuntu/Fedora are accused of being "watered down linux." But its good in a way - at least for non-server users. People in general dont like spending a billion years to get stuff installed. People really like apt-get for everything. Or yum install. When it comes to make install ./configure and all that crap, most find it tedious.

However slack is stable, because you configure everything from scratch. It is building every block of your linux system, and people who like that like slackware.

And thats generally the way it goes - its not whether one is better than the other, its if you have time for something like this, if you like something like this and if you feel you need something like this, you will go for slackware. Otherwise stick to your Ubuntu/Xubuntu/Fedora. Cause its really not worth the trouble.

Macs

[ramoutar]

Does anyone know how Slackware performs on Mac hardware?

Re:Macs

[andyr0ck]

(no sarcasm intended but) i imagine the same as it runs on pretty much any other new intel-based gear, apart from the EFI stuff, of course.

i found a link to a howto the other day: http://macbook.mared.com/linux/ and it looks like it didn't need too much tweaking.

i inherited a G4 the other day and tried to install slackintosh on it but it wasn't having it. not sure why yet.

Also great:

[TransEurope]

http://slacky.eu/

Site is in italian, but the interesting thing ist the repository at http://www.slacky.eu/repository/
Especially the complete VLC-Package including all dependencies (codecs and so on).

Thanks to mr. Volkerding. My distribution of choice since almost 10 years.

Almost any hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

One piece of hardware not mentioned at all is the Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi. If it isn't supported then I won't be using Linux anytime soon.

Blame Creative.

[Svenne]

You won't be using Linux anytime soon. Q3 2007 at earliest.

http://opensource.creative.com/soundcard.html

X-Fi series
The X-Fi series of products are not supported under Linux. (Yet)
Closed-source drivers will be available for the X-Fi series of sound cards.
It looks like the first public Beta will be available end calendar Q3 or early calendar Q4.

Re:Blame Creative.

[Tim_UWA]

Q3 2007 at earliest.

So, any time after 2 days ago, then?

Re:Blame Creative.

[Tim_UWA]

Sorry, didn't see end calendar Q3 at the bottom of your post.

Slackware rulez :)

[theologu]

This is BIG news for Slackware fans, and Pat did a great job as allways... Kernel 2.6.21.5 by default, latest KDE, Xorg 7.2, Compiz, Apache 2.2.4, PHP 5, HAL and Dbus, udev, gcc-4.1.2, and many other great software. Updated versions of the Slackware package management tools make it easy to add, remove, upgrade, and make your own Slackware packages. Who thought that we will see Compiz and HAL in Slackware? :) due to its conservatorism over the years.

who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

1992 called and wants its Linux distro back. Sorry, the world moved on about 13 years ago: slack->redhat->mandrake->debian->ubuntu

Shameless self-promotion

[rg3]

First off, excuse me if I'm going a bit off-topic here. While the Slackware team was preparing version 12.0 I worked on a new package/update manager for Slackware, called SlackRoll. I can't think of a better place to mention it than the Slackware 12.0 announcement thread in Slashdot, because it's probably going to be read by hundreds if not thousands of Slackware users.

One of the defining points of Slackware is the small set of official packages it features. On top of that, the native package management tools don't track depencencies and don't have the notion of remote repositories. All together, this doesn't adapt very well to users who want to try new software all the time and spend their days installing and removing packages. Doing that is hard with a vanilla Slackware, so people have created tools like swaret or slapt-get to simplify the process and be able to use remote repositories like the one at linuxpackages.net and similar, where they can download many unofficial packages that sometimes include dependency information slapt-get can use. I don't think that's "right". Let me explain. It's cool that Slackware is flexible enough to let you do that, but your system ends up in a very chaotic state after some time, in my experience (specially if you use slackware-current instead of slackware-stable). You can manage your system that way if you want, and maybe you're careful enough to do it, but it's very hard. That type of users would probably be happier with Arch, Gentoo or even Debian (I never understood the rivalry between Slackware and Debian; I've used both and both are great in their styles).

Patrick Volkerding probably thinks that way too, because he doesn't include those tools in Slackware. If I recall correctly, swaret was included for some time but in the end it was removed. He includes, however, a tool called slackpkg, which is clearly targetted at more "classic" Slackware users, because it lets you use one official mirror and manage systems composed of official packages for the most part, and includes some mechanisms to let you have some custom packages without being a headache (maybe downloaded from linuxpakages.net or slacky.eu or built with your own slackbuild scripts that you can also download from sites like slackbuilds.org). The problem is that slackpkg is slow (it's a big shell script), and doesn't let you track many corner events that happen frequently in slackware-current, so that's the starting point of slackroll.

Think of it like slackpkg on steroids. I specifically designed it to detect situations which are frequent in slackware-current, but it can also be used for slackware-stable without any problems. By design, it can:

• Detect packages being added to the remote tree.
• Detect upgrades and reverts.
• Detect packages being deleted from the remote tree.
• Give you the chance of choosing which package version to install if there are several available (main, extra, testing, etc).
• Be told which packages are not official.
• Detect when an unofficial package gets an official version.
• Detect when a package with a custom build is removed from the remote tree.

And more stuff. Like I said, slackpkg on steroids. It's much faster, uses less bandwidth, detects more events and it's probably more flexible. I'm pretty satisfied with the result, so I wanted to invite people to read the program's webpage and try it if you think you fall into the target audience. It would be fine if I was the only user, but more eyes mean less bugs and I think it's always a shame when you create a tool which you are proud of and SourceForge only shows 20 downloads because people do not actually know it exists. Its main problem is that the initial setup may be more complex than usual and you need to read a bit more to know how it works. Howev

Re:Shameless self-promotion

[kv9]

I can't think of a better place to mention it than the Slackware 12.0 announcement thread in Slashdot, because it's probably going to be read by both Slackware users.

there, fixed that for you.

Re:Shameless self-promotion

[neersign]

it was interesting reading about your project. I must say that I was personally hoping to see slackware package management emulate FreeBSD Ports. I haven't used slackware in a year now and I left it because I was getting tired of creating my own slackbuild scripts. I am amazed that slackbuilds.org is still running and still current. When I was using slackware (for 3 months or so last year), I hung out in #slackware and I came up with the idea for the central repository. I stayed long enough to give my opinions on how the inner workings of the site should function, but hopped over to Gentoo very shortly after.

At any rate, the reason I jumped to Gentoo was for the package management. I still had the control I loved with Slackware, but I had a package manager that was easier to use. I never wanted to use slapt or swaret because they weren't "native", and I even contemplated using pkgsrc (from netbsd). While portage on gentoo is nice, I was really looking for something exactly like FreeBSD Ports, but I could not use FreeBSD because of my hardware. When I suggested making a slackbuild repository, I was hoping it might turn in to a Ports-esque package manager, where you have a local directory (similar to /usr/ports/) that had all of the slackbuilds in it. You would cd in to the directory you wanted, run the build script (similar to 'make install clean'), it would download the source, grab dependencies, and install the program...exactly like Ports does. And the tree would be updated by cvs, like Ports.

realisticly, Portage in Gentoo is very similar to Ports and it does have some nice additions to it, which is why I love using it. I don't know if I would give up portage to use slackware w/ 'Ports', but the addition of a 'ports' tree would definitely make it more appealing.

My advice to you is to hang out in #slackware if you don't already, and talk to rlworkman (can't remember his handle, but he runs http://rlworkman.net/pkgs/ and is/was a major part of slackbuilds.org). I'm sure Rob and the others in #slackware will give you pointers and help you test.

Re:Shameless self-promotion

[Anonymous Coward]

Like you, I'm also a fan of the BSD ports tree, and of course Slackware... There's a distribution called voltalinux that aims to bring a ports tree to Slackware users. I haven't tried it yet, but you may be interested. Here's a blurb from it's web page:

What is it?
Voltalinux is a GNU/Linux distro based on Slackware GNU/linux and the pkgsrc package system from NetBSD. The two pieces of software put together give you great power.
Great availability of software for a strong and solid distribution as Linux Slackware. The pkgsrc is already available to the linux user.

Now this project want to offer a prebuilt distribution with those features readily available. Any user can enjoy the clean design of slackware with the availability of more than 5900 ports ready to be installed.

Re:Shameless self-promotion

[neersign]

Yes, I did check that out, and there was another slackware based distro that was attempting the same thing too. The problem I saw was that pkgsrc wasn't 100% integrated into the system; some base packages were dealt with completely seperate of pkgsrc. I was looking for a 100% integrated solution so I wouldn't have to track 2 sets of packages. Now, maybe things have changed and maybe i'm remembering wrong, but it is definitely worth looking in to again. Thanks for the heads up.

Feisty

[newr00tic]

Yeah, *Gutsy* humour is the way to go now; -Feisty-, at the very least.

upgradepkg --install-new humour-post-1979*.tgz

Of course there's a new version

[OrangeTide]

because I just installed 11.0 last friday and spent a while customizing it on this decTOP/PIC (366MHz with no DMA support in the default kernel takes a while to compile linux 2.6)

Re:Of course there's a new version

[Bandman]

You can change the target and compile it on a faster box.

(or just use the kernel you just compiled, since you know it works)

Re:Of course there's a new version

[OrangeTide]

I would but it's hard to compile Linux on MacOS X. So I was stuck doing it the slow way.

Re:Of course there's a new version

[Bandman]

touche

Slackware is like a box of mechano.

[Anonymous Coward]

Slackware is like a box of mechano. It allows you to build wonderfull stuff, but it takes time. But it's not right for everyone, if you just want a toy car, then buy a toy car not a box of mechano.
Slackware will never be the average man linux desktop distro. Ubuntu does a much better job at that. For people who want to run a server and keep it 100% up to date and easy to manage, you pick debian. And if you want full controll of your system, and bolt in some extra stuff, then you pick slackware. Sure, it's not top of the line, but it does a great job at what it does.

An HD of mine died this weekend, and the only spare thing I had lying around was a 100MB zipdrive. Which it now uses to happly run slackware 11.0, try that with your average distro.

slackware experience again!

[edis]

Thanks to Patrick and his helpers! Just got least expensive, but well equipped, Duo Core iMac last weekend with partition awaiting for some nice linux distro: and here you are! Except for SuSE (with other benefits of Linux world), somehow other distros did not stick with me: absolutely do not like Gnome UI experience, so those well meant distros, basing on it, never impressed. But slackware was always fun of learning or recalling what contemporary linux distro is made of. Thanks again!

What about Patrick's health, really? Couldn't find quickly how well he turned out with those former problems?

Ah, Slackware.

[jnelson4765]

I'm working for a company that had Slackware as its primary server OS. Until I showed how much time it took to operate and maintain.

Slackware is great for many things - single-purpose machines, getting that old P1 running, etc. It has a few major flaws that make it unusable in businessland:

1: too #$%) hard for a new admin. It requires a lot of arcane skills to get set up properly - skills that don't come cheap, and are hard to find in the marketplace.

2: No dependency management. Debian- and RH-based distros have had dependency tracking for ages, and the capabilities of up2date, yum, and apt-get are far in advance of what you can do with any slackware package management system. Plus, there is literally nothing in Slackware that matches RHN.

3: Proprietary software. Although with enough hacking, you can get a lot of it to run on Slack, the provider will not give you any support. And without that, you're hosed. We've ended up using RHEL on a Websense box because they would not recognize a bug that showed up in CentOS. You know what? The bug went away on RHEL.

Given all that, I still like Slackware as a Swiss Army knife-type distro that I can use for things where I don't have to maintain it too much. It runs on just about anything, and can be slimmed down far further than any other distro. I just can't justify businesswise the amount of labor it takes to maintain, when we are short on skilled *nix admins anyway.

Re:Ah, Slackware.

[Anonymous Coward]

1: too #$%) hard for a new admin. It requires a lot of arcane skills to get set up properly - skills that don't come cheap, and are hard to find in the marketplace.

If you're hiring monkeys, they're going to fuck it up no matter what OS you run. As you're aware, knowledgeable admins will pick slackware because it is remarkably clean, has simple BSD style init scripts and still uses shadow instead of the bogosity that is PAM.

2: No dependency management.

The loader tells you when a pre-compiled binary can't find a lib, what more do you need?

3: Proprietary software.

This isn't a problem with slackware (or any other smaller distro), it's a problem with the proprietary vendors. For server software, I'm not sure I'd want to run anything so poorly written that it relies on bugs in some specific distro.

Re:Ah, Slackware.

[Bandman]

You make very good points. Strangely enough, only one of them is among the reasons I'm moving our servers from Slack.

We need commercial support for some of the drivers we're going to be using for our fiber array, and Slack isn't among the choices (big surprise). RHEL is, and that will solve another problem that we've been running into.

There is no possible way to do a universal login / user management system with Slackware without rolling your own solution. And it is SO aggrivating.

I'm tired of telling my users that they have to change their password on all 12 of the servers they talk to, plus their samba passwords on each machine. I realize that Pat doesn't like PAM, but there needs to be support for it so that network-wide user administration is possible.

It's very possible to do a roll-your-own, where you write a daemon to go to each server, change the password, change the password on Samba, and for good measure, change the password on the mail servers, any odd FTP servers you might have running, and sure, why not change the password on the VPN box too, however that's a hell of a lot of scripting to accomplish something that LDAP already does, and quite well, to boot.

I wish I could continue to install Slack on the various servers, but I can't. There are going to be some machines that are always Slack, however. My network utilities (Zenoss server, externally facing web servers, machines that need no user interaction and don't rely on commercial drivers), but the majority of my new machines will be RHEL or Ubuntu (on the desktop).

I've used Slack for literally 10 years, and it makes me sad to have to do this.

Re:Ah, Slackware.

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you try nss_ldap

Re:Ah, Slackware.

[hollywoodb]

I actually work for a university and administer a bunch of RHEL boxes via ssh. I really, really, wish they were Slackware boxes. It irritates me to no end when I read official httpd or svn documentation and when I'm using this knowledge to make changes to the RHEL server providing these services I realize that almost NONE of the configuration files are in the same place or have the same contents as the documentation specifies. Yes, RedHat has good documentation for their system, no it is not as good as the *official* documentation for the software I'm using.

It also irritates me to no end how they use -devel packages. I end up doing a LOT of custom software installation, making my own (S)RPMs, maintaining a Yum repo, the whole nine yards. It is supremely irritating when software fails to build on a RedHat system vs a Slackware system (yay for vanilla sources). I also have yet to find any benefit to using the RHN service.

Don't get me started on installation numbers, I know why they exist and I understand RedHat's insistance on using them, but I just happen to be completely capable of managing my boxes without having to have pre-specified package sets laid out in front of me.

All that being said, RHEL4 and 5 have been perfectly stable in our environment, but I get the distinct impression that I spend way to much time working around RedHat-specific issues.

Re:Ah, Slackware.

[jumperboy]

1: too #$%) hard for a new admin. It requires a lot of arcane skills to get set up properly - skills that don't come cheap, and are hard to find in the marketplace.

True. At least, I think it's true that skilled professionals tend to use more arcane tools, no matter what the discipline, as part of the search for excellence. As always, talent is hard to find in the marketplace, and replacing a highly skilled professional is never easy. Don't blame it on the tools used. A gifted, efficient employee is always going to leave a void.

2: No dependency management. Debian- and RH-based distros have had dependency tracking for ages, and the capabilities of up2date, yum, and apt-get are far in advance of what you can do with any slackware package management system. Plus, there is literally nothing in Slackware that matches RHN.

Thank God! While I think apt-get is one of the absolute best admin tools for people who want to keep a vanilla system well-maintained, it's still a ball-and-chain (and sometimes that's a good thing). But RHN? It's been a few years since I dumped RH for Debian (then dumped that for Slackware), but I've seen too many admins trapped in a corner by the RH package management system, left with a system they can't comprehend enough to repair.

3: Proprietary software. Although with enough hacking, you can get a lot of it to run on Slack, the provider will not give you any support. And without that, you're hosed. We've ended up using RHEL on a Websense box because they would not recognize a bug that showed up in CentOS. You know what? The bug went away on RHEL.

Absolutely true. Proprietary vendors tend to support only 2 or 3 of the top distributions, mainly to contain development and support costs. As you said earlier, the required skills don't come cheap, and are hard to find, so this makes good business sense. It takes a lot of courage to toss away that support, unless you've determined that you're gaining a more stable environment that decreases your dependence on the vendor (and I mean that, you really have to prove it's going to work). On the other hand, one of the reasons I like to use Slackware is because I have a better chance of fixing the bugs myself, and I share these fixes upstream so they'll improve the product on all platforms. It may be "harder", but I've also made my job easier by solving my own problems quickly. In the process, I've improved my skill set, which makes me a more valuable employee to current and (potentially) future employers.

It all boils down to the right people choosing the right tool for the right job. Let's face it, there's no more difference between choosing a "business" OS (Windows, Solaris, RHEL, Slackware, etc.) than there really is for choosing a "business" computer (Dell, HP, Apple, Sun, etc.). The important thing is that you select then leverage your talent for as long as you have them. Let them develop and refine your business infrastructure using the tools they know and trust. Slackware is as capable as any other Linux in a business environment, and no distribution/OS automatically gives you a larger pool of true talent.

Re:Ah, Slackware.

[Anonymous Coward]

"1: too #$%) hard for a new admin."

Ludicrous. I moved to Slackware from an Apple II that barely HAD an operating system -- drivers came with the apps, not the OS -- and didn't find it showstoppingly difficult.

Simplicity of design leads to simplicity of use. I'd far rather configure my own fstab than deal with automount software that DOESN'T WORK PROPERLY.

"2: No dependency management. Debian- and RH-based distros have had dependency tracking for ages"

Gosh, yes, there's nothing I enjoy more than trying to remove some unnecessary drivers from X or remove ALSA on a machine with a bad sound jack only to have the package manager tell me it wants to uninstall half the system. The Ubuntu PM was more trouble than Slackware.

REJOICE!

[Anonymous Coward]

time to rejoice! thou shalt install good 'ole slackware and rejoice!

Not flame bait, just an observation..

[Nichole_knc]

Come on come on come on.. I have read through these post and a vast majority of them sound like they come from windows cry babies... "oh I have to build this" "you have to build it" "too hard"... "I need a GUI installer" WTF.. Get windows lazies... I use Slack for those very reasons.. Most of my systems are self complied. Custom wares, custom kernels, max hacks.. My main computer is extremely fast and stable beyond all belief.. I have tried other distros Strangely they reminded me of windows with all their silly issues and lack of hardware support. With Slackware if I have issues, need something or just want to test something it is just to plain easy to build it in Slack.. That is if you have your system configured correctly to do just that. Of course the way people here cry about Slack being "hard" I doubt they even customize their own kernels to their machines... Windows lovers.. Go figure...

Re:Not flame bait, just an observation..

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got point and clickers trying to learn unix and market demands for ever cheaper labor. The mass market is for a cheap, garish, readymade solution, something like ubuntu. Slackware is simple, customizable and rather elegant, it's like a luxury product in comparison to other distros.

Re:Not flame bait, just an observation..

[newr00tic]

Agreed.

Is it just me?

[Ravenscall]

Now is it just me, or does reliance on a package manager defeat one of the Biggest strengths of open source, which is customization. When I run Linux, it is a heavily modified slack machine. The reason for this is that I get a nice, tight base system in very little time, but I then have the freedom to compile my own programs from source at will, without having to worry about non-standard directory structures or breaking the system if I create an actual root account. If there is a package for it great, if not, I am not locked in, and I have yet to find a Linux app I want that does not have source.

Re:Is it just me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now is it just me, or does reliance on a package manager defeat one of the Biggest strengths of open source, which is customization. Even though it's probably not just you that thinks so, you're wrong nonetheless. Fully featured package managers like Debian's apt/dpkg, Fedora's yum/rpm, Arch's pacman etc allow you to

(a) install binaries from the repos resolving dependencies automatically
(b) install binaries you downloaded resolving dependencies automatically
(c) create binaries (*.deb, rpm etc to be tracked by the package manager) from source packages from the repos and install them customized your way similar to what you are doing on Slack, but easier.
(d) create binaries from upstream source packages and install them.
(e) maintain and track multiple versions of your software installed in any of the ways mentioned above.
(f) recompile your system (yes you can do this on Debian).

A fully featured package manager is what gives us the strength to easily customize. Many people only do (a) but the package managers of Debian, Fedora, Red Hat, Ubuntu etc are much more powerful than that.

Re:Is it just me?

[Ravenscall]

But why learn a proprietary system to do it for me when I already know how to do it on my own?

Re:Is it just me?

[DarkAvZ]

Talking about customizations and package managers, I feel obliged to mention portage, gentoo's package manager. Its superb USE flags lets you retain control of the customization you get by compiling the source code while you also enjoy the benefits of having a package manager behind the curtains dealing with dependencies, version conflicts, etc.

Re:Is it just me?

[poofyhairguy82]

But why learn a proprietary system to do it for me when I already know how to do it on my own?

To save (tons of) time. Or to make it easier to upgrade in the future (or heck, just get security updates without hassle).

Sure, you can get the source for everything. But it takes time to compile, it takes time to chase dependencies and it takes time to upgrade each package in the future when you want to upgrade. I don't care how good you are at putting together a Linux setup with source packages, I can do it faster with apt-get and Ubuntu. So honestly, the advantage of an apt-get/yum/etc is to save time and make things more convenient- which is the name of the game for any desktop OS.

Re:Is it just me?

[TheSHAD0W]

Just because you CAN customize doesn't mean you're required to. Conveniently available default packages combined with the ability to tweak things means the best of both worlds.

12

[edittard]

12. For when 11 just isn't enough.

You mean there's another one ...

[pbhj]

Other than me. Here's me thinking I was the only person Mr Volkerding was making the distro for.

Shucks.

*rolls-eyes*

5;o)>

Clue

[Viol8]

What did unix use as a global logon mechanism before PAM came onto the scene?

There, you go find that one out and get back to us...

Re:Clue

[0racle]

Do you still use PDP-11's?

Re:Clue

[Viol8]

No clueless newbie, we run NIS on modern Sun boxes. Fancy that.

Re:Clue

[Bandman]

No different than rsh. Something better came along and so now we use ssh.

If slackware didn't come with ssh, and it was a major pain in the ass to install it (such as PAM is, even with the dropline packages), I'd still use something else, because it fit my needs better.

It's a shame that Slack will probably never have PAM, too.

Slackware was fine for 1990s desktop hardware

[Viol8]

...when all you had to worry about when setting up the kernel/modules was what type of hard drive you had, any serial and parallel ports and a few other subdry components such as a zip drive.

These days you have all sorts of wierd and wonderful USB devices which people expect to be recognised when they get plugged in , and not have to sudo to load the module manually , plus laptops have various different bits and pieces such as battery monitors , lid buttons and on and on.

Yes , you *can* get all this to work in Slack , but boy is it painful. Slackware is fine for vanilla servers sitting in a cupboard using bog standard hardware , but for anything slightly exotic , forget it. Life is just too short.

Re:Slackware was fine for 1990s desktop hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you even used slackware at all since the 1990s? It works fine for all that stuff.

Re:Slackware was fine for 1990s desktop hardware

[Viol8]

Yes actually. Installed slack 11 on my laptop. After getting most of it to work I gave up and went back to Suse which worked out the box.

Praise "Bob"!

[Ignatius D'Lusional]

For, the SubGenius must have SLACK!

Thanks Again, Patrick! =)

[v3xt0r]

I may be one of the few people who still appreciate Slackware, and wouldn't really change much about it, despite the differences between it and other distros. Those differences are what sets it apart! (imo)

Cheers

You've still got root..

[CranberryKing]

I refuse to put in my user password every damn time I want to do anything.

That's crap. If you want to run as root you just do it. Ubuntu just doesn't require creating root password/environment during install. Their approach is smart for most. If you must, just do a 'passwd root', then su and you've got your precious root.

Widespread desktop and soho adoption does not mean educating new users on this new thing called 'root access'. That will only aggravate/intimidate the new user or give them a dangerous new curiosity. Why give a kid out of drivers-ed a 2007 Enzo Ferrari when he should really have a 1995 Honda Civic?

Re:You've still got root..

[PenGun]

Yeah my 69 Cutlass with a 502 is what I drive. Passwd root lets you set it but you can't login with it. I ain't typing su to become what may be dangerous for you but is what I've been for many years.

  I guess I knew I'd hate Ubuntu but it was easier than I thought it would be.

  No don't touch the car it's way to hot for you ;). Where can I get a Slackware bumper sticker?

Whew! Thank God!!

[gregarican]

Glad that he overcame that acute health crisis. That likely was just a case of tonsil stones. Roffles!!!

Re:Whew! Thank God!!

[Anonymous Coward]

fucking respectless wanker..

NIS?

[higuita]

forget the correct soluction of nis_ldap, did you even tried NIS!! or even winbind+AD (or sort of with samba)? here you have at least 3 ways of doing the same thing

Yes, but does it have compiz and XGL?

[christoofar]

Slackware is still the one and only distro were setting XGL working is a MAJOR bitch.

I hope this has been fixed.

Re:Yes, but does it have compiz and XGL?

[hollywoodb]

No XGL, but if you need it it shouldn't be as difficult now that Slackware ships with X.org 7.2.

That being said, the new X.org comes with AIGLX which I prefer (but doesn't support all cards) and yes, compiz is officially a part of the Slackware distribution now although only with kde-window-decorator by default.

If you need gtk-window-decorator (for xfce), check out http://slackware.com/~rworkman/compiz. Does not include gconf support, so you'll want to be starting compiz and {kde,gtk}-window-decorator via CLI or a script to load with your DE of choice.

I've been running AIGLX+compiz+xfce on slackware-current in the weeks leading up to this release using rworkman's packages and it has been dead stable.

Re:Yes, but does it have compiz and XGL?

[person132]

I envy you NVIDIA users. We poor, ignorant ATI customers are stuck with XGL for Compiz (or that is my understanding.)