Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Slackware, Oldest Actively Maintained GNU/Linux Distribution, Turns 25

Posted by msmash on from the streak-continues dept.

sombragris writes: Slackware, the oldest GNU/Linux distribution which is still actively maintained, turned 25 this week. The latest stable version, Slackware 14.2, was released two years ago, but the development version (-current) is updated on a fast pace. Today the development version offers kernel 4.14.55, gcc 8.1.1, glibc 2.27. mesa 18.1.4, xorg 1.20, and the Xfce and KDE desktop environments as default, with many more available as third-party packages. Other points of note are that Slackware is systemd-free, opting instead for a simple BSD-style init.

Since its first release ever, this has been a distro with a strong following due to its hallmarks of simplicity, speed, ease of maintenance and configuration. Happy birthday Slackware!

32 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. Is Slackware usable? by DogDude · · Score: 2

    Slackware was my first (of many) attempts at using Linux, and it was less than successful. I love the fact that it's still going after such a (relatively) long time, compared to other OSS projects that often don't last very long. My question is: Is it usable yet? Is it worth trying again? Or, is it still only for super hardcore Unix people, only?

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Is Slackware usable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes it is usable. Yes it is worth trying again. Yes it is for people who use Unix.

    2. Re:Is Slackware usable? by Schnapple · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm no expert but this quote from Distrowatch has always stuck with me:

      There is a saying in the Linux community that if you learn Red Hat, you'll know Red Hat, but if you learn Slackware, you'll know Linux. This is particularly true today when many other Linux distributions keep developing heavily customised products to meet the needs of less technical Linux users.

      https://distrowatch.com/dwres....

      It seems to me that if you want to get into using Linux, use Ubuntu or Mint or something. If you want to get into Linux the hard way and really get your hands dirty then Slackware is up to the challenge.

      --

      Schnapple

    3. Re:Is Slackware usable? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Slackware was my first distribution, but mostly because I didn't have any other options at the time.
      To answer your questions.
      Is it usable yet? It was always usable. It isn't a Desktop OS, but for a server system it has been really good, because it has such a small foot print.
      Is it worth trying again? I tired it out a few years ago, it is about the same. If you didn't like it then, you probably won't like it now.
      Or, is it still only for super hardcore Unix people, only? Slackware (Linux) and FreeBSD (Unix) are rather similar. However OS X is Unix, while Android is Linux. That said if your are a Traditional Unix guy, Slackware probably feels most comfortable. But if you are trying for a Desktop system then Probably not.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Is Slackware usable? by junk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Slackware was my second distro but the first (RedHat) was only on the box for a couple days before my really geeky friend shamed me into using Slackware. Soooooooooo painful. Soooooooooo hard to use. I was soooooooooo lost. I'm so much better off for it. I've been using Linux since the 90s and haven't ever stopped. I've run Slackware on laptops, desktops and servers for a lot of that time. I'm much lazier now and much more employed, so I use something with a native package management system that handles dependencies and laziness. When my home racks are online though, they're Slackware because it works, has always worked and will always work without any BS.

      Patrick and team have done a great job for a long time and they deserve a lot of thanks for their work.

    5. Re:Is Slackware usable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is it usable yet?

      Come on, dude. Do you really think it would still be here after 25 years if it wasn't usable? It was perfectly usable back when you tried it. The fact that you found it "unusable" tells us more about you than slackware.

      Slackware is simple, fast, stable, and has been used on production systems for a long, long time.

    6. Re:Is Slackware usable? by q_e_t · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Production systems very often use a commercially-supported distribution, as support is valued, or one of the open versions of those, as they tend to get patches pretty promptly. Whilst you could use Slackware on a production system, it wouldn't be my first choice from a risk perspective.

    7. Re:Is Slackware usable? by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

      Well, look at this: I am a Windows user, and yet you know what distro I use when I want to do something in Linux that reminds me of a desktop and when I have free time for experimentation? Slackware. No kidding, Slackware.

      Why? In Slackware I can do whatever I want, in the way I judge best, without worrying about idiocies like those caused by GNOME, cyclical dependencies in half-assed package managers or now recently bizarre things like systemd.

      P.S: When I'm lazy or in a hurry I use Linux Mint

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    8. Re:Is Slackware usable? by fisted · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux is not for you, as per the (spot on) GP. You don't want to learn things, and that's fine. Just go with Windows or Apple.

      Nobody will ever turn Linux into "a perfect replacement for Windows" because that's not the goal, most people already knowledgeable in Linux see no point in dumbing it down for the masses, not only because like everything else in the world, "the masses" ruin it. Also if the goal was to copy Windows, then why not use Windows in the first place.

      Oh, because you want it to be free, sure. Well it isn't free, it comes at the price of actually being interested in computers and wanting to learn at least basic concepts. If your time is worth anything, that'll turn out a lot more expensive than paying the MS-tax and buying an Apple device, so there's one more reason to get on with your life and run something you can use without having to understand anything about it.

      IOW stop trying to be something that you aren't. The only way Linux is actually long-term usable for computer illiterates with no desire to learn (not judging, it's fine to be) is if someone else admins the box for them (e.g. my parents are "long term Linux users" without a faint clue about Linux, for about 7 years now. But they only manage because I took care to provide them with the means to do what they want to do). If you're completely out of options but have a bunch of money, you might hire someone to do that for you, if you really this badly want to use Linux (for whatever reason that would be)

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    9. Re:Is Slackware usable? by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      As somebody who started with slackware, learned linux, and then switched to RedHat, I have to call bullshit on this one.

      If you already knew UNIX, all there was to "learning linux" for the average user was learning how to compile a kernel; back then it was often necessary in order to get all your hardware working. New USB device? You might need to compile the kernel again. And that was exactly the same on every distro. And then when the kernel's module system was more mature, and they could just ship all the compiled binaries, then the kernel became the same as any other *nix; something users don't need to know about.

      And for sysadmins, you'd need to learn ipchains and a few things, but those are the same on slackware or RedHat.

      Switching from csh to bash was a bigger change than the total net difference between slackware and RedHat.

    10. Re:Is Slackware usable? by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      I just wanted to say that for software developers, slackware was always a perfectly good desktop OS. It is mainly non-developers who will feel the dependency/configuration pains. Software developers have to manage that shit anyways.

    11. Re:Is Slackware usable? by novakyu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's such bullshit. If you want to learn Linux, you use LFS. Anything else is for posers and babies.

    12. Re:Is Slackware usable? by novakyu · · Score: 2

      Well, if your point is LFS isn't meant for a production system, sure, point taken (and to echo an AC sibling, if all you are doing is copy-and-paste, you are missing the point of using LFS, which is not to practice masochism).

      But if the primary purpose of choosing a distro is to learn how the operating system works (not just where a particular distro places its configuration files), then Slackware does not occupy the distinguished spot; it's just grouped with all the other distros with package management system that have not yet made GUI primary configuration tool—I myself am partial to Debian, which is the last distro I used regularly before my job more or less made me use Windows.

    13. Re:Is Slackware usable? by deathguppie · · Score: 2

      I've been using Linux since 1997, on a 386. My first attempt was slackware, my second was redhat, and my 3rd wash mandrake (which finally got my 64k baud modem working :). I moved to Gentoo in the early 2000's and then to Ubuntu just because I was lazy. Still using it in one form or the other. My point is not to brag about all of my years on Linux, it's to mention that I spend less time maintaining and working on my Linux systems then I ever had with MS.

      Often when using Windows I'd wake in the morning to check the news only to be looking at a blue update screen.. then wait, and wait and go to work, then come home and click "ok" then wait and wait. This still goes on with Windows 10. Something stupid about losing inode markers while re-installing so that programs in memory can't access the original file (which they could have fixed by now) but I digress.

      Linux has no real virus threats, no serious malware issues, Has all of your basic desktop software available at your fingertips on install, for free, doesn't lock up your system when it upgrades and worst case scenario you can re-install the latest version for free in less than an hour if everything goes wrong.
      Those people who say that Linux is too hard to use just have never used it long enough to get it. In the long run you'll spend far less time working on your Linux system and far more time using it then you ever did with Windows. My current install on an amd 8320 still boots up in 20 seconds or less after over a year. Prove to me that your windows install does the same thing with as little maintenance as I've put into this (other than upgrades) none

      --
      once more into the breach
    14. Re:Is Slackware usable? by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      You don't just save money when the roof leaks. It gets done faster and correctly the first time. People who depend on others for everything are often appalled at the level of service they receive. For the things I do pay people to do for me I also have to learn about it in order to be diligent and spot their fuck-ups. Ever taken your car in for a repair? Good luck.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    15. Re:Is Slackware usable? by strikethree · · Score: 2

      Slackware was my second distro but the first (RedHat) was only on the box for a couple days before...

      LOL, #metoo

      My reason for bailing on Red Hat was different: I was on version 1.x of Red hat and the latest 2.x was out so I decided to upgrade. I downloaded all of the files, over a 14.4 modem no less. But, I couldn't upgrade because all of the packages were wrapped with a new RPM format... even the RPM utility itself. No way to use ANY of those packages without doing a fresh install... so instead, I went to Slackware and I am VERY glad that I did. Slackware kept the vision of being Unixy and of the user being in control.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  2. I like it. by Qbertino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I considered moving to slackware during the height of the anti systemd ruckus, but went with Manjaro i3 instead. However, for a focus non-bloated Linux slack should a good choice, even if you have to keep a eye on your dependencies. ... I wouldn't want to install a full KDE setup on it though.

    Either way, distros like slack are very much needed in the distro ecosystem IMHO.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:I like it. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Slackware to me is the Traditional GNU/Linux. It is as close to a Pure Unix without being Unix.
      That said in 2018 is the need for the Traditional Unix as important as it was in the mid 1990's to late 1990's

      However a non-bloat distribution is good for more embedded systems, or semi-embedded such as appliances, where you have a PC doing a few things and doing it well. Slackware which you can setup on low resources is still useful.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  3. First linux by Glasswire · · Score: 2

    Installed from about 6 x 3.5" floppies onto a 386SX system with less than a meg of memory. Needless to say, no X and no GUI :-)

    1. Re:First linux by lgw · · Score: 2

      I installed on some ancient POS, probably 386. I remember 16 floppies for Slackware, and 32 for xwindows. Had to manually configure monitor settings (number of scan lines and timings) for the GUI. Good times.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:First linux by r_pattonII · · Score: 2

      It was not my first, but l eventually found Slackware through a man named "Wes" at the Tacoma Linux Users Group in 1996. Slackware was a few years old, but it got the job done! It really helped me get myself "under the hood" so to speak in a Linux distro. I still use it today and have Slackware 14.2 installed in my full tower PC, an old Dell Optiplex, and my laptop! I loved Slackware back then and still love it today! Happy Birthday Slackware and I wish you many, many, more too!

  4. Why is this spam tolerated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, why does Slashdot tolerate this spam? Trolls have decided to harass a user, creimer, and continue to post spam comments about him even though he apparently doesn't post here any longer. It contributes nothing of value, isn't really even trolling, and gets posted in multiple threads in story after story. Given that it often references people by name, this content is actually defamatory in nature. Surely Slashdot can do something more to combat this persistent spam. Moderation just isn't preventing it from being posted repeatedly.

  5. Re:inb4 systemd trollship by r_naked · · Score: 2

    Cue systemd hating crowd blah blah slackware is the best, no "shitstemd", the unix way, tradition, "stupid package managers and who needs them", "it's like BSD but it's not BSD and I have no clue why I'm not running BSD if I admire it so much", etc....

    Savvy?

    I wouldn't want some monolithic daemon infecting my system even if it was GOOD, but the systemd virus sucks. It isn't good at a single aspect of what it has sucked in.

    --
    -- http://anonet.org -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
  6. Good old Slackware by Nethead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember back in the mid 90's I hosted images.slashdot.org on a Slackware box (Pent 90, IIRC) because Rob Malda's T-1 circuit was getting constrained. I was working for the Seattle ISP Wolfe.net and we had a whopping T-3 with 45Mb/s direct to Sprint.

    Slashdot start off on Slackware.

    This, of course, was back in the dial-up days. Nothing like trying to find a ring-no-answer in a 400 line hunt-group.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    1. Re:Good old Slackware by Nethead · · Score: 2

      Doug?

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  7. Re:Any reason for the slow release schedule? by junk · · Score: 2

    Because they don't care about versions. In 1999 Slackware jumped from version 4.0 to version 7.0 for marketing reasons. The other big distros were putting out higher versions and the visuals made it look like Slackware was behind. I don't recall the exact statement but the general message was something like "if we bumped versions like other distros, we'd be at 12 (or something) by now." It was a weird move but there was some sense to it. Linux isn't new. People understand that distro versions and kernel versions aren't the same thing. They don't need to uprev but -current is always moving.

  8. 23 years of Linux by toofast · · Score: 2

    Like many, I cut my teeth on Slackware in 1995. There was just something about it -- even then, Windows sucked, OS/2 was cool but lacked the "tinker" factor and unix was unix. I would have never thought back then that Linux would become what it is today.

    Congrats Slackware, you've certainly helped many a generation of sysadmins and tinkerers along the way.

  9. Old Fogies by xsspd2004 · · Score: 2

    Wow, you want to bring out the three and four digit uids just post a story about Slackware! :-)

    I still like it, though I haven't used it in the last couple of years.

    --
    This is not an illusion, a rip-off, or a ninja technique!
  10. Re:Sys V init? by wjcofkc · · Score: 2

    Pretty sure you can find info on systemd in the Book of Revelation.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
  11. Re:My only complaint by DCFusor · · Score: 2

    Pulse broke audio *again* on raspberry pi 3 b+ and they took it out of the distro - adding it back breaks it all again. But ALSA - if you work it out right, can still mix two sources, which is all I needed. I have a pi doing homestead database, security cam, background radio, and audio alerts on various events sent over the wire from other pies or ESP machine around the place. So it just had to be able to play a .mp3 or .flac while VLC was busy playing background music and I'm happy again...sadly, raspian still has systemd and all the issues of that. The reduced reliability of booting and shutting down in a network with a lot of things shared/talking to one another is VERY NOTICEABLE with systemd, no matter which workaround you look up and find that actually works - which will only be a fraction of those on the 'net because of so many changes after it was more or less forced on us. Like pulse, cult of personality got it into "production" long before it was ready - again.

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!
  12. Re:So.. by sombragris · · Score: 2

    How many floppy disks does it take to install today?

    Well, since a ISO image of Slackware-current amounts to 2.8 GB, i'd say that a full install of Slackware-current would take about 2000 1.44 MB 3.5" floppies.

    --
    -- Look to the Rose that blows about us--"Lo, Laughing," she says, "into the World I blow..."
  13. SLS still works....if you don't mind upgrading it by crispi · · Score: 3, Informative

    Via a lot of compilation it's possible to update SLS 1.05 to the latest tools. I haven't the heart to delete /etc/motd. Big challenges were getting ELF going. getting libc6 going and cross compiling 64 bit from 32-bit. Now it's a 100% 64-bit system: /:softland:~$ cat /etc/motd

    Softlanding Software (604) 592-0188, gentle touch downs from DOS bailouts.
    Welcome to Linux SLS 1.05. Type "mesh" for a menu driven interface.
    Fresh installations should use "syssetup" to link the X servers, etc. /:softland:~$ uname -a
    Linux softland 4.16.14 #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Jun 10 02:52:51 EST 2018 x86_64 unknown /:softland:~$ ld -v
    GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.30 /:softland:~$ gcc -v
    Using built-in specs.
    COLLECT_GCC=gcc
    COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.3.0/lto-wrapper
    Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
    Configured with: ../configure --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --enable-languages=c,c++
    Thread model: posix
    gcc version 7.3.0 (GCC)