Slackware Linux 14.1 Released

An anonymous reader writes "According to the official announcement, Slackware 14.1 includes the following: 'Slackware 14.1 brings many updates and enhancements, among which you'll find two of the most advanced desktop environments available today: Xfce 4.10.1, a fast and lightweight but visually appealing and easy to use desktop environment, and KDE 4.10.5, a recent stable release of the 4.10.x series of the award-winning KDE desktop environment.' Installation ISOs can be found here."

Comments

amused that they talk about the DT environs

[themushroom]

when real Slackware users only use command lines :)

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[ShanghaiBill]

when real Slackware users only use command lines :)

Real Slackware users use a Desktop so they can run command line shells in six xterms simultaneously.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

All 5 of them?

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't need an entire Desktop Envrionment just to use a Window Manager. Fluxbox still does everything I need.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[SigmundFloyd]

Hi, I'm a real Slackware user and I run ctwm and GNUscreen.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[evilviper]

Real Slackware users use a Desktop so they can run command line shells in six xterms simultaneously.

You only need a window manager (like Fluxbox, fvwm, xfwm, sawfish etc) to manage multiple xterms, not a full desktop environment.

And you don't need X11 at all, since tmux will allow you to do all of that from a text console.

eg.: http://tmux.sourceforge.net/tmux3.png

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you and thought the same thing. My thoughts as my eyes scrolled the text here were "Don't care about that, don't care about that either, don't care... maybe I'll just stick with my installed base of ~60 12.1 machines if there's nothing really new. Yay command line!" /not trolling - all truth.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Charliemopps]

No, real slackware users use punch cards for input and have a single red blinking LED for output. Although I used to know this guy that shaved, thought he was better than the rest of us... he had a green LED. Fucking pretentious asshole he was.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[farrellj]

Actually, us Slackware Users us whatever the fsck we want, because we know how to do it all! CDE, KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment, raw X, screen, and anything else we can dig up. We not only know how to use it, we customize it so that other users on the same machine have a hard time time using it! What's more, we probably also know how to use Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, RHEL, CentOS, SUSE, Debian, Arch, *BSD, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Mac OS (7-10), and another dozen operating systems that most of you haven't heard of! We can even make Windows useful! We Kick OS BUTT!

All single OS users must cringe in the shadow of our awesomeness!

Really!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.nerdyshawn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/tmuxCentOS-ssh.png

You can run a terminal multiplixer on any terminal device.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

... use punch cards for input and have a single red blinking LED for output.

I thought it was the other way around: use a single blinking LED for input and punch cards for output.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

How fat are you?

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[slack_justyb]

They put it there for the casual on-lookers. For whatever people bang on it, when you say Linux in an interview and they ask you which distro, you say Slackware. If you know how to hold it together with Slackware, things like installing 3rd party drivers from the command line on Ubuntu or SuSE or knowing the entire purpose of everything in /proc is the kinds of things they know you do 300% better asleep and drunk than most admins could muster running full steam.

Here's to the release of yet another amazing version of the best Linux distro to date.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Skapare]

Six?? ... no way ... I use seventy two xterms.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

except your terminal has blurry bits. maybe your multiplexer if not working

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[wiredlogic]

That's what screen is for.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not about the length around the waist, it is about how much of the beard that covers the belly.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

you think Real Slackware users don't know about 'screen' ??

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[goarilla]

He's not fat, he's highly specialised for the job.

Re: amused that they talk about the DT environs

[captjc]

Pfft, noob. Use real professionals have over 9000 xterms open and each one of those has screen running with over 9000 command prompts. Every one of those command prompts has over 9000 commands running as background tasks!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[K. S. Kyosuke]

If he's a Slackware user, he's not fat; he's most likely ext2.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this modded funny? I'm a slackware user, and he's exactly right. A simple desktop environment (like xfce) makes running multiple xterms all the more productive.

Slackware is about taking the best of the "old" (i.e. traditional unix) and the best of the new and creating the perfect harmony. It's an acquired taste that most linux users can't appreciate until they have a solid 10 years under their belt.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Trigun]

I would just like to take the time to point out that we have a 3-digit User ID here... So by default he knows what he is talking about.
He remembers the 23 disk A-series of slackware.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[arfonrg]

Only six? Amateur!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[dpiven]

We not only know how to use it, we customize it so that other users on the same machine have a hard time time using it!

You let OTHER USERS on YOUR MACHINE? They should get their OWN machine!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

It's "the command line", not "command lines", similar to how a programmer doesn't write "codes", but rather "code".

Make it easy on yourself and just call it "the terminal".

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[evilviper]

I would just like to take the time to point out that we have a 3-digit User ID here... So by default he knows what he is talking about.

IIRC, it only took about a year to go from single-digit to 6-digit UIDs, so it's largely a matter of timing (or luck), and all the lower-numbered UIDs were created about the same age, and only means we were on the internet, reading about Linux circa '98.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[farrellj]

Thanks...:-)

As usual, the newbies are clueless about humour/sarcasm...mixed with a bit of truth.

I've been using Linux since kernel 0.12 or so...and was using Slackware before it was Slackware!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[farrellj]

Truth!

I do know all of those operating systems, and many more. But, I was trying to inject a bit of humour too! If you take Linux, or anything (hint *BSD/Debian users...) too seriously, you annoy people, and make them less likely to use your operating system. Slackware (come on, *think* about the name!!!) is never going to be able to take itself too seriously! And that is why I still use it, as well as Mint, Mac OS, and Windows 7 (at least on this system...). One of the few nice things you can do since Apple switched to Intel from Motorola/PPC hardware!

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[farrellj]

Do I detect a green sheen of envy, mr 135100? :-)

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[evilviper]

Fwiw, I've also got a lower-UID account than this (not 3-digit, though), that I prefer not to use.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[TheTurtlesMoves]

you can't watch porn on a text terminal.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[evilviper]

you can't watch porn on a text terminal.

Yes you can!

mplayer -vo aa $FILENAME

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAlib

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Galrion]

Real Slackware users use screen so they don't need to waste resources on a desktop.

Re:amused that they talk about the DT environs

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be talking about good old SLS linux. That was my first 'distro' before slackware.

Cheers!

"Award-winning"

[krkhan]

Please stop using arguably the most useless of marketing slogans. Every desktop environment which has been around long enough has won an award of some kind. (Yes, even Gnome.)

Re:"Award-winning"

[Chris Mattern]

If necessary, the marketing department will simply *create* an award in order to give to their product. Usually they can dredge up something a little less blatant, though.

Re:"Award-winning"

[Anonymous Coward]

Please stop using arguably the most useless of marketing slogans. Every desktop environment which has been around long enough has won an award of some kind. (Yes, even Gnome.)

Your comment is great.
Here, have an Award.

Re:"Award-winning"

[Anonymous Coward]

If Gnome can even win an award for environment of the year, I am so sure my new Toolbars Environment will be a hit with the people!

Re:"Award-winning"

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

How about "Industry-Leading"?

Panic!

[jfdavis668]

Another version of Linux released!

SystemD vs SysV

[Anonymous Coward]

I read both of the threads (in entirety) of how many people are opposed to systemd.

I am still learning Slackware (I am not what I would call an expert yet), and I enjoy/respect everything about it. The simplicity is superb, and its capabilities/power make you feel like a ruler of your box.

I would hate for systemd to ruin what I have come to love in Slackware.

If you don't like systemd, if you want to stick with "old school" then start brainstorming ways to improve upon sysvinit to give it a "new life" without sacrificing it.

If everyone just sits around complaining about Systemd it WILL happen.
It will slowly but surely take over the linux universe.

Does this mean systemd is better? NO

But does it mean that it has more people who are behind the vision of selling it?

Yes.

In short we do not need 15,000 threads flaming the creation of systemd, rather we need every developer who hates it to come together and figure out a way for sysvinit to be updated, or modernized (without losing it's original essence) so it can be sold as the BETTER alternative to SystemD.

Complaining will get you no where.

Brainstorming ideas for making what you love better WILL.

Competition breeds cooperation.

If you hate Systemd enough, maybe it is time for a rebel alliance.

If you do not want Systemd to be the future of linux maybe it is time to come up with a revisioned version of sysvinit or something better based upon it.

Otherwise there is no reason to complain.

It would be great if we could start a list of changes that sysvinit would benefit from.

Re:SystemD vs SysV

[Anonymous Coward]

The project you are looking for is OpenRC. Help spread the word!

Re:SystemD vs SysV

[fisted]

Use a BSD instead of reimplementing half of it in Linux. Help spread the word!

Re:SystemD vs SysV

[epyT-R]

openRC supports both already. Last I checked, none of the bsds use it, and the only linux distro to use it as a default is gentoo.

Re: SystemD vs SysV

[Anonymous Coward]

Alpine Linux also uses openrc by default.

Re:SystemD vs SysV

[fisted]

none of the bsds use it

What a surprise.
Either you didn't read my post, or you didn't understand what it implies. OpenRC is a reimplementation of the BSD RC-system. Designed to sanitize the various substandard init systems commonly used with Linux. Dropping the (very well-engineered) original and using OpenRC would be a ridiculous thing to do on a BSD.

Re:SystemD vs SysV

[fisted]

Designed to sanitize the various [...]

Well, that should of course read: Designed to sanitize the insane situation which arose due to the various [...]

Re:SystemD vs SysV

[Anonymous Coward]

Really, Daedalos you are gonna start this crap again? You didn't learn your lesson the last time on LinuxQuestions.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/anti-systemd-how-can-we-improve-sysvinit-4175483488/

FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk

[hodet]

The 3472 1.44MB floppy disk set will be available immediately. :-) Ah the good old days downloading 30 diskettes all night on my dialup connection.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk

[Anonymous Coward]

Laugh if you want, but this is the only distro that puts most of its joy on DVD. I *WISH* ubuntu would have dvd downloads. Instead, they stick to CD's (and the only reason I keep CD's is for this, I store basically everything else on DVD or hard disk). And the kicker? Right after downloading Ubuntu, you must keep your network connection because it needs to download more stuff. Why not just dump more to a bigger disk? Argh! There isn't even an option to "Go DVD" as opposed to being forced to "Go CD".

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk

[Anonymous Coward]

You know you can burn a CD iso onto a physical DVD?
I have been doing this for many years with K3b with no special or extra steps.

But yeah, I wish they did full dvd isos.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk

[SalafranceUnderhill]

Been there, done that, was amused.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk

[hodet]

I'm not laughing but reminiscing. I am going to d/l it and give it a spin. Nothing but respect for slack, even if I haven't used it in ages. Time to correct that.

Re:FTP Download Available on Floppy Disk

[JackieBrown]

Ubuntu does have DVD versions.

http://www.ubuntu.com/download/alternative-downloads

packages

[dmbasso]

I used slackware from 97 to 2000 -- too long ago -- so I was curious about the state of package management:

One of the major complaints by new users is the fact that Slackware does not automatically track dependencies and install dependencies when you install a file. To many this may seem like a negative mark against Slackware, but I prefer to know exactly what is installed on my system and what it is for.

So, no, thanks. I'll stay with my Debian based distros. Which btw I know exactly what is installed... I'm not sure why one would assume automatic dependency installation imply the dependencies are installed secretly. :p

Re:packages

[mark-t]

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently... which means that if you want to uninstall a package, and you don't want to keep around any other packages whose only purpose for being installed was to support the package that you no longer want, if you had to manually install those dependencies in the first place, you are in a good position to be able to know which packages you should be removing as well.

Re:packages

[seyyah]

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently... which means that if you want to uninstall a package, and you don't want to keep around any other packages whose only purpose for being installed was to support the package that you no longer want, if you had to manually install those dependencies in the first place, you are in a good position to be able to know which packages you should be removing as well.

The problem with automated dependency checking is that when it breaks you are often fucked. So it's not so much that dependency checking is bad, but that it is very hard to get absolutely right, more so when you throw in extra repositories into the mix.

Re:packages

[rusty0101]

Good dependency management keeps track of such things for you over the long term as well. apt-get _will_ tell you of libraries that were installed in support of applications that you've since removed, and gives you the ability to remove those libraries as well with the auto-remove function. It does not automatically remove them with the application, which can leave cruft on your system, but has the advantage that if you've found the library handy for some program you're writing, but haven't explicitly toled the package management system that your app depends on it, you're not breaking your own application.

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

I jump shipped from Slackware to Gentoo myself. Gentoo is basically everything that's great about Slackware plus a fantastic package manager. The first install process is a bit painful though. Always a trade off somewhere.

Re:packages

[Chris Mattern]

No, that's actually not generally a problem. Package managers remember which packages you asked to be installed and which packages it installed automatically to satisfy dependencies. When an automatically installed package has no more packages dependent on it, it gets uninstalled.

The real problem is, as another poster pointed out, is the same as any automated procedure--if something goes wrong enough, it can put you in a very deep hole very quickly and if you don't understand what it was doing for you, you'll have a great deal of difficulty digging yourself out again.

Re:packages

[mark-t]

Well, that was my experience using a distro with auto-dependency checking... I gave up on it after a year and went back to slack.

Re:packages

[TheRealMindChild]

You were a slackware user and you used packages? Either you are/were a filty casual, or you were of the very few who depended on such.

Installing things on slackware was/is almost always 'tar xvjpf source.tar.gz && cd source && ./configure && make && make install', aside from the initial system install, of course

Re:packages

[dmbasso]

You misunderstood me. I used slackware until 2000, when a friend suggested to me to try Debian, which he had installed in a computer of our lab. The first thing I tried was to edit a configuration file using midnight commander (mc -e), which was not installed by default. I pointed to the screen and made a face implying "is this what you call a decent OS?", but he said "wait", and typed the magic words "apt-get install mc".

From that moment on, I would never use an OS without package manager again... at least not by my own volition.

Re:packages

[jones_supa]

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently... which means that if you want to uninstall a package, and you don't want to keep around any other packages whose only purpose for being installed was to support the package that you no longer want, if you had to manually install those dependencies in the first place, you are in a good position to be able to know which packages you should be removing as well.

Under Ubuntu/Debian those supporting packages are marked "automatically installed" and can be removed with "apt-get autoremove".

Frankly, I thought Slackware already had a package dependency system in place. If not, I have better things to do than manually track dependencies. It's not productive work for me.

Re:packages

[reub2000]

How often do users get into that type of hole? It might happen if you enable too many addon repos or are running a development branch.

Re:packages

[ApplePy]

The problem with automatic dependency checking is that because the computer is doing that checking for you, you are less likely to personally know what, exactly, what all those dependencies are for packages that you've installed, unless you've installed them very recently...

That much is true, I reckon. And it's all fine and dandy to know every package on your machine... if you only have one machine. When you start administering a few hundred different servers that serve different purposes and have different software and belong to multiple clients... good luck with that. Old systems get crufty, sure. But I'd rather backup & reinstall once in 5 years than to fuck with trying to manually remove orphaned packages all the time. Just seems like an enormous waste of time. As far as I'm concerned, APT and YUM are godsends. So... I'll just bow to your enormously impractical 1337-ness and go on my merry way.

Re:packages

[Clsid]

Wait I must be on drugs or something, but during the brief period I used Slackware, I thought you were supposed to create Slackware packages yourself from every source install, which is extremely easy to do and one of the major reasons I liked Slackware in the first place. Hell, there was even a website called Linux Packages or something like that, where you could just share whatever packages you created if anybody didn't want to go through the process.

In my case I ended up using Gentoo for personal use even if the install is burdensome, Debian or OpenBSD on servers and Ubuntu for desktop installs.

Re:packages

[seyyah]

Installing things on slackware was/is almost always 'tar xvjpf source.tar.gz && cd source && ./configure && make && make install', aside from the initial system install, of course

Slackware is never that. Slackware is all about packages. Always.

Re:packages

[CronoCloud]

Wait, you wanted to use Midnight commander to edit a conf file instead of vim or emacs? Freak!

Probably easier to use for simpler edits though.

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

Mc is great for moving around a file system. Beware the delete, tho! It's a hard one.

On the package management, I found with stock Ubuntu the bigger packages were not compiled with the proper options, like mplayer not having all of faad or other things in place. With a situation like that, one must throw away the package manager and install the slackware way anyway.

Been there done that. Slackware, all the way for 12 years now.

Re:packages

[Skiron]

Linux packages is now gone, but there is http://slackbuilds.org/ today!

Re:packages

[SigmundFloyd]

but he said "wait", and typed the magic words "apt-get install mc".

Just FYI, on Slackware that would have been "slackpkg install mc".

Re:packages

[dmbasso]

mc was installed by default, and in 2000 there was nothing resembling "slackpkg". But nice to know it exists now!

Re:packages

[dmbasso]

Back at that time I was still dual-booting, and used to code in the IDE of Turbo C and DOS edit... mc's editor was the closest match.

In 2006 I forced myself to use vim during one month. There were some things that I fell in love with, but overall I didn't like the experience. So I just made a plugin for gedit with everything I liked in vim, and that's what I've been using since (now with Pluma, because gedit3 broke compatibility).

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

It's something that can't be appreciated until you have actual experience with the system. Of course, for somebody coming from debian, it automatically seems archaic, but consider that I started with debian (in 1997) and after 10 years moved to slackware -- not the other way around. There are many reasons why slackware is the longest standing linux distribution, dead-simple package management being just one.

Re:packages

[geminidomino]

Pretty much this. I love Slackware, I cut my linux teeth on Slackware, Slackware held my hand as I plunged into the world of FreeBSD. Unfortunately, manual dependency tracking (and, gods forbid, updating) dozens of machines...

Sadly, I don't have time for that (who does?). That's the only reason I haven't dumped ubuntu-server in the bin.

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly have not used Slackware for a while or if you have you have not kept up with the current trends. Most users do not do this. For packages not included in the official repository they make use third party repos or use SlackBuild scripts to produce packages and then install them

Re:packages

[arfonrg]

This is the biggest FUD out there about Slackware.... You want automatic dependency resolution? USE DAWNRAZOR'S SBOTOOLS

http://dawnrazor.net/sbotools/

Re:packages

[Dr.Dubious DDQ]

For those that otherwise recognize the awesomitude of Slackware but have gotten too old and feeble to track dependencies themselves, I would recommend Arch. (Yes, that does include me...)

To me, it's got a very Slackware-like feel to it (including a SlackBuild-like system called ABS), but also a pretty comprehensive repository.

Re:packages

[dmbasso]

"FUD" implies that I was intentionally spreading misinformation, which was not the case, so please tone down. Btw, have you read my comment above?

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to dislike the lack of dependency checking myself when I was new Slackware user. Now I really think that it is good thing, because when I alter package (via SlackBuild file) to use or remove some dependencies, lack of dependency checking is actually good. It is much harder to do this with some other distributions, well -- those with dependency checking.

I saw in OpenBSD that their package management utility (pkg_add) sometimes offer different versions of packages for a single application (say, xmonad with default setup, which doesn't need heavy dependencies and xmonad which does, but it is customizable by user and adds ghc, a haskell compiler, which is huge), but it isn't as flexible as changing a simple shell script which makes a package e.g. SlackBuild file.

There are some other issues, too. I remember when I was using Debian I wanted to install Iceweasel with suggested dependencies, recursively. Yes I know that Debian is shipped with Iceweasel, but it was a minimal install. Sometimes Synaptic asks you to remove some packages due to conflict. Well, at one point it asked me to remove Iceweasel, as well. I was really buffled, because I was adding recommended packages.

As for fellow Slackers who think that dependency checking obscures user's knowledge why some package is added, there is other question: what about the packages that come with Slackware? I don't have a clue about dependencies on that level. And a simple trick which I often use: I am adding comments to package description file (slack-desc), so it does tell me why I installed it.

Finally, there are some unofficial projects which actually add dependency checking feature (slapt-get back end and gslapt, a Synaptic look-alike front end on top of it, come to mind), so that isn't that bad. What is bad is that people often talk about lack of dependency resolving as if it were hybris. I do not prefer dependency checking, but I prefer to easily change packages, as I see fit. Slackware is one of very few distributions that actually gives me what I need. Don't take it away from me.

Summa summarum: use distribution you like and don't let rude and mouthful fanboys of (insert name) OS stand between you and your OS of choice, dependency checking or not. There are numerous distributions (or BSD projects, etc...) which differ in some way from one another - and I hope that there will be even more, because that is what healthy *NIX ecosystem is. A choice for everyone. Lets not make it a flame war again.

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

I used slackware from 97 to 2000 -- too long ago -- so I was curious about the state of package management:

One of the major complaints by new users is the fact that Slackware does not automatically track dependencies and install dependencies when you install a file. To many this may seem like a negative mark against Slackware, but I prefer to know exactly what is installed on my system and what it is for.

So, no, thanks. I'll stay with my Debian based distros. Which btw I know exactly what is installed... I'm not sure why one would assume automatic dependency installation imply the dependencies are installed secretly. :p

The fact as a developer the debian system pretty much breaks.UNLESS your going down that certain PPA. and for me to always worry about apt-get installing system wide and breaking my older Libraries has become a real hassle. so the first thing you have to remember about the debian world is they don't need the apt-get. but seems all the distro's push it down your throat. dependency tracking is for people that just want to conform to your ppa.
    I am a Slacker I got my slack. and run all my systems weather they are what flavor of the GNU as a Slacker should. Freedom.

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

sbopkg with queuefiles and your dependency woes are gone. Yes, sbopkg is technically third party, but then, unless volkerding or alienbob personally implement something in slackware, it's ALL third party. sbopkg uses slackbuilds.org as a repository, which is full of most software in wide use.

Not having dependency handling on a modern distro would be silly. I'm surprised how many people still seem to think Slackware exists without this functionality.

Re:packages

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, it's 21st century, Portage has like forever added packages that are explicitly installed by user to a file called world and then it uses that info to build a dependency tree. It also tracks every installed file, md5 hash, size and timestamp included, I believe, so generally you can find out which package installed that one file deep under /usr with cryptic name and binary content. I say generally as I have had situations where Portage complains that while installing something it found untracked file that would have to be overwriten (and in my configuration they are overwritten automatically), though reasons can be anything from originating from the installation (at least I suspect the installation images do not actually provide a list of files it has) to somehow evading tracking when they are installed to being left there after uninstallation (it seems there is/was a bug when a feature that preserves uninstalled but still needed libraries is in use) but if you care enough, you can always mix up some crazy script to find files that do not belong to anything as basically everything except most /boot, part of /etc, all of /home, part of /opt and /var and all of /usr/local is likely to only contain tracked files meaning if you find an untracked file in, say, /usr/share, it's probably safe to delete manually.

Re:packages

[TheTurtlesMoves]

I use slackware because of that. I hate when i get 5 gigs of crap update that is 99.9% not needed, and then breaks things. Its like people are taking the worst of windows and putting it on linux.

My last slackware install has need just 2 packages updated because of security advisories in the last year. JUST 2. I get work done, not piss around on the internet with updates every 3 hours.

Re:packages

[TheTurtlesMoves]

It has happened to me more than once with nothing but default settings and repos on Fedura and Debian i think?

Re:packages

[TheTurtlesMoves]

God no. You compile to a slackware package. Either with a Slackbuild script someone has already written (true of just about everything out there), or write one yourself and release it to the community.

Never used

[map200uk]

Slackware..always heard it#s pretty hard to configure..maybe I'll try it someday Used to Debian/Ubuntu/CentOS

Re:Never used

[BringsApples]

It's all I've ever used. It was version 10.5 when I first got heavy into it though. I use it as my only desktop now. I'm able to do anything that I need to do, it just takes me about 5 hours longer than it should. ;)

They have come a long way as far as updates however (slackpkg). Rolling things from source is really cool and makes you look old-school, or so I'm told. I work for myself doing IT work locally, and even other "Linux guys" tell me that I'm hard-core, simply because I run slackware, do to it's very mechanical nature. I just go with it.

Re:Never used

[jmccue]

I think the hardest part of the install is disk partitioning, if you opt for a full install you will have a fully functional working system. All you need to do is run useradd after the install and your are ready. Anyway I understand what you mean by 'useto', for me I am very much use to Slack and haven't tried a different distro in a very long time :)

Re:Never used

[FuegoFuerte]

Anyone who told you it's hard to configure was either running it on a VERY oddball hardware setup, or was lying to you. I originally switched to Slackware (in 2001) because it was so much easier to make everything "just work" than it was with the other distros. I still use it for that reason. I can go from bare metal to fully working system in a half hour or less.

Also, I got tired of the circular dependency hell from the other distros of the time. Maybe they're better now, but Slack's package management works just fine for me, thankyouverymuch.

Re:Never used

[Clsid]

You should try Gentoo when you get the chance. The install process alone will make you understand a lot more about your computer than you ever wanted to know.

Re:Never used

[goarilla]

There never was a 10.5, you might mean 10.2.

Re:Never used

[Anonymous Coward]

"a lot more about your computer than you ever wanted to know."

You really shouldn't take a job as a sales person.

Re:Never used

[BringsApples]

Hell, yes I did mean that. Now that I think about it, I don't know if there's ever been a .5 of any release since I've been involved. Thanks!

Damn.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was hoping I could run the 13.37 version forever.

Thank you Patrick.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you Patrick.

Like the Eveready Rabbit

[stox]

It keeps going and going.

True to its users.

Congratulations, on another fine release, to the Slackware Team!

Re:Like the Eveready Rabbit

[Hillgiant]

I am embarrassed to say that I stared at the screen for some minutes before realizing that "Eveready Rabbit" was not some cutsie release name for the latest Slackware release.

Thank You, Patrick V!

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you, thank you, thank you! Slackware has been, is, and continues to remain the finest distribution of Linux ever.

Yes, it's a struggle to configure and use. It's Unix at its best. It's not meant to be easy to use, you have Windows for that. If you want the true power of a Unix system, then that is what Slackware is for.

Long life and good luck to you always, Pat!

Yawn!!!!!!

[AntEater]

I've been anticipating this release for several weeks now. What's funny, is that there's not much to say about it here. Predictable. Reliable. Maybe even boring. Still, Slackware is an awesome system that is a joy to administer. I'll be updating several machines as soon as my DVD arrives in the mail.

Still tarballs?

[oldhack]

Slackware still uses tarball packaging?

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

And they install in seconds.

(If you are surprised by this, then you probably aren't familiar with the slackware philsophy. It's founded on simplicity and vanilla-ism, which is a lot different than, say, debian.)

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, now go back to your noob distro.

Re:Still tarballs?

[mishehu]

OMG they're not using $flavor_of_the_month!!!

Re:Still tarballs?

[Nimey]

More importantly, it still doesn't use a dependency-resolving package manager. If that works for you, great, but it doesn't for me.

Re:Still tarballs?

[oldhack]

Well, that really is the main point of the question, isn't it. I would have thought fewer idiots use slackware, but the replies above suggest otherwise.

Re:Still tarballs?

[Nimey]

Well, you know. Some people need to do things the hard way to prove how manly they are; also nerds aren't stereotyped as being ill-socialized for nothing.

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

You use the word "still" as if slackware is planning on implementing such a thing, and just hasn't gotten around to it. That's wrong. Slackware is deliberately designed to avoid that kind of complexity, and hence, there will never be a dependency-resolving package manager in slackware. Believe it or not, to most slackware users this is a plus, not a minus. It's something you can't easily understand until you have experience with the system.

Re:Still tarballs?

[bencollver2]

A tarball is hard, but 2 tarballs wrapped in an ar achive is easy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deb_(file_format)#Design

From the 14.1 release announcement: "Have fun! :^) I hope you find Slackware to be useful."

I see a happy smiley face and friendly tone, but we shouldn't let empirical evidence get in the way of a good stereotype.

Re:Still tarballs?

[Nimey]

Obviously I wasn't talking about Patrick, but the subset of Slack users who are aspies.

You're perpetuating the stereotype (ill socialization) a little bit.

Re:Still tarballs?

[Nimey]

No, I'm using "still" in the sense of "Patrick hasn't made this change and he may never, but until he does I'm not interested". I used Slack for a year or so before giving up and switching back to Debian because the lack of package management drove me crazy.

See the other reply I made in this thread where I mentioned the stereotype about nerds? You're reinforcing that a little too.

I can't see how a dependency-resolving package manager would be /that/ complex. I mean, Debian's had a very good one in apt since '99, and that's an eternity in computing terms... but I know that Slack is basically Patrick, he's one person, and he's got his priorities (and there are tons of distros with that feature anyway), so I don't really expect it to change, it would just be a nice feature.

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

As you point out, it's not necessarily that it's not complex to build a package manager, it's just not a priority. In fact, it doesn't even seem to be necessary given that plenty of people seem to get along fine without one.

Re:Still tarballs?

[higuita]

Yes, tgz (or txz) is just a tar.gz (or tar.xz) ... just like a .deb is just a .ar achive (try ar x name .deb) ... but this is a good thing, you can open then with standard tools if the pkgtool or dpkg or apt-* don't work.

rpm can only be open by rpm (or converted to standard archive by tools that usually require again the rpm), making very hard to open if the rpm really dont work.

Re:Still tarballs?

[bencollver2]

Aww shucks, tried to have reasonable discourse and all I got was an armchair diagnosis of a mental disorder. Makes me feel all warm and social.

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is more that it is not needed http://my.opera.com/ruario/blog/2011/09/26/slackware-package-and-dependency-management

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Having used slack for many years. I gave up on it also because of the package mess.

On your first install you dont care.
On your second one its a bit tedious but workable.
On your fifth reinstall because of a new version you are getting a bit tired of this crap.
On your tenth one you look seriously at debian or redhat.

They have fixed up their upgrades since then. But for awhile it suuuucked. It usually involved 'screw it I will reinstall it all'.

A lack of a good package management system was ok in the 90s. Now not so much. It is pretty much a given now. Hell even the recompile everything from scratch guys have one. It is the one thing I would say holding slackware back.

It would make upgrades nice and easy instead of a pain of tar.gz hell with a smidge of bash.

It is why I moved on. I would come back if it had a decent package system.

Stable in the case here has basically become we can not figure out how to upgrade smoothly with our package system. So you have many packages that are 1-2 years out of date at this point. For no real good reason other than there is no one to fiddle the rudimentary package system to make it work.

People started building decent package systems for Slack. The Slack guys basically said 'thats cool but we want nothing to do with it and are reinventing it again on our own'. It was at that point I threw up my hands and decided to go looking at other systems. They are usually not as well put together and have a very spray whatever you need at it till it works mentality. But they work and are usually up to date (something I found more and more important as I use the internet).

Slack doesnt even have to reinvent a package system at this point. Pick one of the 3 popular ones and just use it. Same packages. Just a decent system to tie them together... They have already done the hard work of figuring out the libs needed. They just need to do the tedious work and translate it. They even have some utils to do just that.

If they could smash together the arch system and slackware and debian that would be a pretty cool system. They *almost* have it. But they want to keep that archaic package system.

Unfortunately Slackware is an excellent system but it is from 1994 in its build environment. You can go far on that. But come on...

signed:
Former slack user 1994-2002

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually aren't rpms cpio archives?

Re:Still tarballs?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can open rpm using only grep, tail, cpio and a decompressor. Search for "minimal rpm2cpio" on Google

No its not

[ArchieBunker]

The config files in Slackware are pretty straightforward. These days its near impossible to set up a Ubuntu or Debian install via the command line. Nothing but a pile of scripts that call for more scripts. When something doesn't work you can't even look in the logs because its not reported.

Re:No its not

[ulzeraj]

I could be wrong but booting with network without X11 on Ubuntu requires Grub command line arguments. What the hell man.

Bundled with proprietary software...

[Anonymous Coward]

Shame on you Slackware! http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html#Slackware

Re:Bundled with proprietary software...

[Wild Wizard]

To get on that list you only have to include the full unmodified kernel.

Since Slackware always uses the full unmodified kernel then it will always be there unless the kernel devs fix it up.

I also believe there is a special agreement regarding the non-free program xv.

Re:Bundled with proprietary software...

[unixisc]

No mainstream distro passes the FSF tests if you look there - only some fringe distros like gNewSense (Stallman's favorite), Trisquel and a few other Latin America specific distros available only in Spanish (English is a separate localization download for them).

And there was much rejoicing in Slacker Land...

[Noryungi]

Here is to another great release!

Thanks to Patrick Volkerding and the entire crew - I am going to buy my CDs and DVDs right now to support Slackware.

Slack is back!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hail to the king baby!

Nice

[Slackhead]

Another fine release. Not that I'm biased or anything...

Slack is the God of linux distros

[satan666]

If you are a real SA, then you use slack.
This is my quick, 1 line, summary of most
distributions today:

1. Fedora -- Fuck no. I want my video to work.
2. Centos -- Not too bad actually. The only thing I would run other than Slack.
3 RH - No! I dont have $10,000.00 a month for support.
4. Debian -- De-what ? Die motherfucker!
5. Ubuntu -- Ubu-suck-my-dick -- another African word that means suck-my-dick
6. BSD -- Hey, listen to me: Fuck off. Go play with OSX... bitch!
7... Whatever...

Yeah, I run Slack, I compile my own kernel, I build my packages from source.
I kill and eat my food. I live in the woods. Grrrrr....
Now leave me alone people. I have a Word document I need to finish,
for management :P

slackpkg install mc

[Anonymous Coward]

I see you have not used Slackware for a while: "slackpkg install mc"

Which means Slackware was easier

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it was installed by default. That is kinda the point. Slackware has a decent selection of packages preinstalled so no need to have to type such a command. Surely that makes it even easier. Before you reply you might wan to read this:

http://my.opera.com/ruario/blog/2011/09/26/slackware-package-and-dependency-management

XFCE isn't lightweight.

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenBox. Now that's lightweight.

Yep, Slackware

[DiamondGeezer]

Slackware - still proudly refusing to be virtualized. VMware Tools won't install.

Still, according to some people here its better than sex - but how would they know?

Re:Yep, Slackware

[higuita]

Of course it installs... you have to fix the script to stop thinking that everyone is using redhat or debian

Re:Yep, Slackware

[Anonymous Coward]

mkdir /etc/pam.d then install vmware tools. This just goes to show you that people who do use the other distros really have no clue what is going on.

Slackware 96

[srobert]

I'm grateful for Slackware because that's how I discovered that it was possible to use a PC without being trapped in the tyranny of MSWindows and various other expensive proprietary software. I still have the 4 CD set Slackware 96 from Walnut Creek as a souvenir. I wonder if old software CD's are a collector's item like baseball cards or comic books.