Talk:Slackware/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Slackware-based distributions section

What a mess this was in. I've fixed the list style, checked the links (they were all fine, one had moved, updated it), and removed a particularly spammy mention of LTSP from the Lorma linux part which claimed it was a Slack-based distro:
LTSP is an add-on package for Linux[1]

Also, not all the External Links are external links.

Fixed

200.195.30.165 has added a rather hefty list of Slackware-based distributions. For now I've moved it down the bottom of the page, near the See Also section, because the long list of links belong down there if anywhere. It was just after the History and Name section before, which I think was an inappropriate position.

The list is very long, I reckon something has to be done about it. I think it should either be placed in a List of Slackware-based distributions page, or into the List of Linux distributions page. I don't think that such a long list belongs on the Slackware page. --James Hales 14:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I concur, someone who knows their distros needs to cut it down to the more noteworthy items. Also, "Linux Distribution" shouldn't be linked on every line. I haven't decided yet if I can be bothered to fix this personally, since it's clear at least one editor suffers from OCD and will revert it. Chris 17:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Opening sentence

The current opening sentence:

Slackware was one of the earliest Linux distributions (and is still being maintained), created by Patrick Volkerding of Slackware Linux, Inc.

This is a little ambiguous, as well as being an awkward sentence structure. It could be taken to mean:

Slackware was one of the earliest Linux distributions to be created by Patrick Volkerding.

How about this?

Slackware was one of the earliest Linux distributions, and is the oldest distribution still being maintained. It was created by Patrick Volkerding of Slackware Linux Inc.

--Annoying anonymous guy #94804327

By the way, some interesting info from vivaolinux.com.br user stats(top distribuições): Slackware is the second most used distro in their community, at 5074 users, beaten only by Conectiva at 5109 users.

Should we use "lilo-slackware" boot screen picture, instead KDE desktop? It's the first slackware logo in 15 years that include in the distro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.121.241.203 (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The KDE desktop picture is somewhat misleading: it could be any distro with a generic KDE install. KDE is packaged with Slackware 12.2, but it is not Slackware-specific.152.2.67.61 (talk) 16:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Dont know if it was a bug or a glitch, but the parser on the server wasn't parsing the links to other articles and dropping the text for the links out of the article completely rendering it unreadable. After changing the first link slightly, all of the subsequent ones were parsed correctly. If this was a temporary glitch, feel free to change the formatting back to the original. 205.217.251.33 (talk) 18:22, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Media error

Er... Slackware uses packages. See http://www.slackware.com/packages/. --Stephen Gilbert

Beat me to it... pkgtool is their package tool. Not as fancy as RPMs, but it works, and works reliably, too. --Malcolm Farmer

Packages

I've taken this passage out, as it's varying levels of inaccurate, confusing, and seems poorly written to me:

There is a disdain for packages, where related files are grouped together and managed as one entity. For example, even a simple application such as cron would be packaged as a set of files containing the executable, documentation, and configuration files. While this can make installing a new application relatively simple, some Slackware users feel that packages limit their flexibility.

A rewrite and clarification is certainly in order here. The page is left a bit thin, but it's better than distributing inaccurate information. --nknight 03:15 Dec 4, 2002 (UTC)

As per my Summary any thoughts on my shot at describing the package management issue? --Moss Hart 01:23 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Looks reasonable to me. Thanks. --nknight 01:47 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I took the liberty of fleshing things out, including the package management section. I'm sure it could use a good editor at this point. I tried to keep things neutral despite my personal prefernce for Slackware. I also added a section on init scripts, but my understanding of the issue is limited, so it might be in need of some factual corrections. --Greyweather 03:46, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

"Slackware's approach to package management is unique." - The reason given is that it lacks a somewhat controversial feature. While it may actually be unique in that no other distribution has this approach (which I am not sure is true), I think labelling it "unique" shows a bias towards it. Or it may just be me; English is not my first language. I was pointed to this wording in this article on a different Linux distribution. --Haakon 20:34, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

As old as this comment is, I rather agree with it. Slackware almost does not have a packaging system at all, each package is just a tgz file with some rather basic info for the database. (package name, version & discription) Having a lack of packaging system not really unique, LFS also does not use a packaging system, and many livedisks don't either. How about changing the sentance to read something like this? "Slackware employs a minimal approach to package management."

Live CDs don't generally have package management because they are put onto static, fixed media, which makes packages kinda pointless. And the ones which aren't intended to be static (eg Puppy linux and Knoppix with the UnionFS, both on a RW disc of some sort) do have package management. And LFS doesn't include it because LFS... is a book. --Maru 12:55, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Say what you want, but if other (rather specialised, I'll admit) distros have it, it's not unique. --Jamesgecko 16:49, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I think you are misunderstanding me. I was replying to the unsigned comment which claimed that lacking a packaging system is not unique (I think it is very rare), and gave examples of lacking. I was pointing out the examples were flawed for various reasons. --Maru 16:53, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Slackware's packaging system is .txz now for x zip, someone might want to fix that. 66.30.79.125 (talk) 14:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Well the .txz format is tarred and compressed with the XZ Utils, so the x does not stand for x zip. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.142.112.37 (talk) 18:21, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

And, most importantly, what is installed by a Slackware package is almost exactly what you would get by running "tar xvzf source-pkg.tar.gz ; ./configure ; make ; make install".

Changes

I added a few changes, including an unofficial version history, more external links, and move the subentry for CollegeLinux, to the subheading for Slackware based distros in the external links. --moorcito 11:58 02 Sept 2004

I've moved the dependency resolution to a separate section rather than a subsection under Package Management. I've also clarified the slackbuilds.org statement so it does not appear that the source tarball is available at slackbuilds.org (since they're not). --Ken Roberts 15:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alisonken1 (talk • contribs)

I made the following changes:

In Line 33 Patrick Volkerding was mentioned as "Patrick" - I feel this is "buddy talk". There's no encyclopedia where people are mentioned with their first name. I changed this to "Volkerding".

In architecture I added (again) support for IBM' 390 arch. The reasons are: On the Slackware HP it is still listed as official port. Second, the project's HP shows a rather dated current release, but it don't think that it has been sufficiently dated to infer that the port is dead. Maybe I am wrong :-)

Line 226: I removed ALSA as a feature. The predecessor OSS is not supported anymore in any modern distro. So ALSA is not a feature but just plain regular. In exchange I added some other updated programs, mainly in accordance with the release announcement made by Volkerding.

Line 57: the slackpkg sentence was marked <clarification needed>. it was mentioned on the board that this mark is ambiguous, possibly meaning the lack of reference as well as the term "remote" - i hope that I catered for both possibilities. ;-) Germanopratin (talk) 16:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

In the 2nd paragraph I added "and a small set of shell scripts" - because the former phrase simply was not correct

I made a quite huge amendment to the DESIGN section. It feel that the section was a stub. You can't explain Slackware's design principles only be saying it adheres to the KISS principle. It does, yes, but thats far from being precise. Slackware is very special in a host of system features, I guess I mentioned only a part.

Addition to RELEASES: Nothing had been said about the general release policy, still this is a vital point.

Added 2 external links (PV audio interview and SW forum)

The whole article has been qualified as "incomplete", which it clearly was and clearly still is. It would be great if we added more content, not for the sake of adding but in order to give a profound and well-balanced picture of Slackware. I feel, it deserves it :-)

Germanopratin (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I made changes to some phrases in the section PACKAGE MANAGEMENT.

Paragraph 2 cited "gzip" as a compression method. This is plain wrong. "gzip" is a (de)compression utility not a method, and it uses the compression method "DEFLATE".

One thing that is still not clear to me: are there really packages with ".tbz" and ".tlz" extensions? I only know that there used to be TGZ, and now there is TXZ. Speaking of the official slackware repositories.

Could someone please clarify this? Please give evidence for these (rare?) extensions!

In Paragraph 3 I changed the prose a bit. the phrase "the files that form part of the software being installed" of sentence 1 was 1:1 repeated in sentence 2. This is bad prose, mine is still not good, but at least slightly better.

Anyway, the whole paragraph still sounds unclear and inelegant to me. it would be great if someone could fix this

Germanopratin (talk) 09:57, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Cleared up the package manager section. Adding that is network capable. Moving slackpkg from the alternative packaging tools to the "package management" section, as slackpkg is part of the official package management now. Moved references to dependencies to the appropriate section - before duplicate infos were scattered over many sections.

Germanopratin (talk) 09:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I added Sections DEVELOPMENT and POPULARITY/RELEVANCE. In DEV I had not intented to put the nick names there, in the first place. Then I realized that they are of public (or historic or whatever) relevance, since PV often refers to developers using their alias names.

I filed a request for a new rating. A promotion to "B" should be possible ;-) Germanopratin (talk) 21:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

BSD vs. SysV init procedures

Here's an excerpt from the slackware-current ChangeLog:

+--------------------------+
Fri Feb  9 22:59:51 CST 2007
a/sysvinit-2.86-i486-1.tgz:  Upgraded to sysvinit-2.86.  Split the actual
  init scripts into a new package to avoid needlessly compiling sysvinit
  over and over again.
a/sysvinit-scripts-1.0-noarch-1.tgz:  Added a new package containing the
  system startup scripts.  Thanks to Piter Punk for 2.4 kernel cruft
  removal and other bugfixes and enhancements.

... and the slack-desc for sysvinit:

sysvinit: sysvinit (init, the parent of all processes)
sysvinit:
sysvinit: System V style init programs by Miquel van Smoorenburg that control
sysvinit: the booting and shutdown of your system.  These support a number of
sysvinit: system runlevels, each with a specific set of utilities spawned.
sysvinit: For example, the normal system runlevel is 3, which starts agetty
sysvinit: on virtual consoles tty1 - tty6.  Runlevel 4 starts xdm.
sysvinit: Runlevel 0 shuts the system down.

I feel that this proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Slackware uses System V-style init scripts rather than BSD-style scripts. -- H3xx 05:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are wrong. Slack uses BSD scripts, the sysV scripts that you mention are there for compatibility reasons only since Slackware 7. If you are a technical enthusiast, you may want to check by yourself in /etc/rc. There is an additional script called /etc/rc.sysvinit that provides the compatibility and is linked to the sysv package, thus its presence on the system. Hope that answers the questions.

Umm you do know there is no /etc/rc right in slackware

You're right that there is no /etc/rc in Slackware, there is however an /etc/rc.d/ and /etc/rc.conf - 86.160.43.187 (talk) 23:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Package Managers

In the bit about third party package managers, should it be mentioned that those are external outside links, or should they be wikified to stubs which contain the outside links, or what? As it is, it is a bit surprising to click on an apparent wikilink and be somewhere completely else. --maru 15:48, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

IMHO, the different color and the little arrow icon should be enough to indicate that they are external links. --Yath 22:05, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is true that to an experienced Wikipedian, those indicators are more than sufficient; I noticed it right away. But is Wikipedia designed only for experienced Wikipedians, or is it designed on a basis of 'don't suprise a basic user'? --maru 16:10, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

VectorLinux?

I believe VectorLinux is a Slackware derivative. Could we add that to other derivatives? http://www.vectorlinux.com/ for more info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.233.193 (talk) 00:12, 30 May 2005

Live CD section

Why do we need a section devoted to Slackware-based live CDs? This is an article about Slackware after all. I think this section should resemble the section on Slackware-based distributions - One link and one line devoted to each live CD, linking to wikipedia stubs as appropriate. Any thoughts? --Grazer 2005-06-09

OK, I've made the change. Hopefully you won't want my head on a plate. --Grazer 2005-06-10

Live CDs introduce users to Slackware and its file organization http://freshmeat.net/projects/linuxlivescripts/ exerpt "There are many excellent projects build by using these scripts, like Slax, GoblinX, Mutagenix and gNOX"

Not as widely used as it was in the 90's?

I've been in university for many years now and I've yet to meet a classmate who also uses Slackware. Everyone is "Debian this, RedHat that, Ubuntu this, Gentoo that" -- I feel like I'm the only one on the entire campus who uses Slackware! It used to be in the 1990's that I didn't have such a hard time meeting Slackware users (in the real, physical world I mean, not the Internet), but these days I think I have a better chance of seeing a leprechaun riding a unicorn. --I am not good at running 18:18, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I hope you've not been there too long... But you are right- I personally think the reason is obvious: one of the major advantages of Linux distros over all the other OSs (I'm excluding *BSD here) is the various packaging systems, which are a unique selling point. MS can't do that, nor can Apple. Slackware does not really have one. --Maru 21:11, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I'd say that the main reason is that Slackware is still percieved as "old-fashioned". Things like the text-based installation routine put "average" people off of using it. However, for me, design decisions like that are WHY I use Slackware - it's fast, clean, simple, small and runs on ANYTHING (even going back to monochrome monitors and text-only displays)... plus playing with the menus is a cinch. All of the distros you mention are mainly graphical from boot to desktop. Slackware can run a modern Linux desktop no problem but people see that they have to work a little at it ("What? I have to TYPE?") and that will put them off, even if it is just for the first boot. People who grew up on DOS or UNIX won't even question it.

Your average person doesn't want to know as soon as they realise they have to do something in a CLI. Your experienced computer technicians will choose it over the graphical systems because of the flexibility - I have PC's that can't even run X, can't display to screen, don't even have a graphics adaptor installed, run over serial console etc. That's where you need something like Slackware. And then the fact that it can be a graphical desktop too if you want makes it the primary choice of people who use Linux for a wide range of tasks every day.

Fads come and go. But you tend to find that the people who stick to a particular OS, rather than hop to whatever is fashionable, are the ones who are actually using their computers to get stuff done. The others spend most of their lives installing and complaining about every OS that comes out... :-) --ledow 10:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

As a proto-hacker aspiring to become truly "L337" with every OS, I wholeheartedly agree with you. It's one of the best comments that I've read in a long time. I'm so annoyed of all those Apple and Ubuntu fanboys, but really looking forward to get my hands on Slackware. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.85.199.228 (talk) 13:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I have a couple of thousand machines running FC and Debian, but my desktop is running Slackware, as are all my machines at home (since 1995). Guess which ones have never been brought down by an "update"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.115.31 (talk) 20:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it is old-fashioned. But fashion is not always a good reference point. ;-)

The simplicity of the design and the heavy use of the CLI are features to me, that's what slackware is all about.

Clearly, Slackware's popularity will be in further decline. who cares. I never met anyone who uses a BSD, still FreeBSD is a great OS. But if you look for a popular OS you would not want to use linux anyway. Even Ubuntu or Fedora, Debian or Mint make up for a very tiny fraction of installed OSes. The media fuss Linux is still getting blurs the fact that Linux and the BSDs are only used by a minority, 5% on the desktop roughly, if those statistics are correct.

Germanopratin (talk) 15:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Zipslack

Anyone familiar enough with zipslack willing to include a paragraph or two about it? --Unconcerned 10:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the Zipslack paragraph is in the wrong place; it is right after design philosophy and package management, which IMO are definitely not similar topics. --maru (talk) contribs 02:54, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree completely. I have just moved the Zipslack section to underneath the Releases section, which I believe is more appropriate. James Hales 05:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Release History Table

I do not like the release history table that is aligned to the right hand side of the screen. It leaves a large area of blank space between headings. The only alternative that I could come up with was to use a table like on the Fedora Core page, and place it underneath the text of the section, without aligning , which makes a slight improvement. I had previously tried a few experimentations involving removing the <br clear="all" /> so that proceeding headings would appear to the left of the page, but the release history section was too short and the release history table too long and narrow to make it look attractive.

Has anyone any alternative suggestions? Here is the table I've written up. Hopefully someone can come up with something better. James Hales 05:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I just came up with something and tried it. Moved the <br clear="all" /> to underneath the Zipslack section, so that they would sit closer to one another, which I think is proper anyway, but it does not allow the release history table to sink into the design philosophy section, which is a larger and unrelated part of the article. James Hales 11:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Slackware x86 Release History

Version	Date
1.0	July 16 1993
2.0	July 2 1994
3.0	November 30 1995
3.1	June 3 1996
3.2	February 17 1997
3.3	June 11 1997
3.4	October 14 1997
3.5	June 9 1998
3.6	October 28 1998
3.9 / 4.0	May 17 1999
7.0	October 25 1999
7.1	June 22 2000
8.0	July 1 2001
8.1	June 18 2002
9.0	March 19 2003
9.1	September 26 2003
10.0	June 23 2004
10.1	February 2 2005
10.2	September 14 2005
11.0	October 1 2006

Citing sources

Someone's tagged this article for not citing its sources, and I've taken a crack at adding some. I mostly made links to various pages of the Slackware web site. Places where it's lacking at the moment are the KISS section and the packages section. I couldn't find a reference for those on the main pages of the web site, so I'll keep looking. Once those two sections are done I'm taking away that tag.

For most of the other sections I've added references, except where there is a link to another article or web site which would serve as the relevant reference.

--James Hales 15:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

There are references all over the article now, so I've removed the notice box, as the article is mostly referenced now. There are still a few comments around the article which require citations, and I think that they're mostly the subjective comments, or are about technical details not mentioned on the official website, but I'm looking around the net for reviews or guides related to Slackware which might back these points up. --James Hales 07:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

SlackWare Screenshot

Could somebody get a SlackWare screenshot up? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.76.56.155 (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Not much point... Slackware is text-based installation with well-known window managers under XWindows. So a screenshot would consist of a text screen (of which there are only a handful "unique" to Slackware, i.e. the installation dialogs) or a screenshot of XWindows with a particular window manager. --ledow 10:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The screenshots in nearly all distro articles are superfluous. I mean, you got to have them for a proper look of the article's entry, but their info is more or less zero. KDE is a natural choice. I would not use a distro-typical screen, because that is uncommon. using a liloconfig CLI screen would make Slackware appear to be stemming from the stone age to some people. so better leave it as it is :-) Germanopratin (talk) 17:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

File Formats

Does Slackware use RPM files, DEB files or what? ^Talk User:Fissionfox 12:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Slackware#Package management. Chris Cunningham 12:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Gnome

desktop environment was removed from the pending future release,[5] and turned over to community support and distribution. The removal of GNOME was seen by some in the Linux community as significant because the desktop environment is found in many Linux distributions. In lieu of this, several community-based projects have filled the GNOME void in Slackware, by offering complete GNOME distributions for Slackware.

Is this really worth mentioning? -- Pauric (talk-contributions) 10:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Considering the popularity and pervasiveness of GNOME, I would think it is. Dismas|^(talk) 11:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Slackware dropped Gnome, so I dropped my subscription to Slackware.

It was a significant design decision by Pat, I think it does bear mentioning. At least two dedicated users switched away from Slackware for a more integrated Gnome distribution;) 66.57.100.48 (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it is significant. It also got a lot of media coverage. It is a very rare event that a distro gets rid of KDE or GNOME. There are many people who use gnome. Some may install it from the SlackBuilds but many will drop a system that doesn't support it. Germanopratin (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Slackware's relation to the Church of the SubGenius

I noticed that here on the Slackware page the claim is made:

There is persistent speculation that it is a reference to the term "Slack" as defined by the Church of the SubGenius[3], but Volkerding is not known to have confirmed this.

Yet on the Patrick Volkerding page there is a link to a Slashdot article where Pat clearly says that it was based on the SubGenius, and even mentions the Dobb's head on the CDs (which I have also read elsewhere).

Anyone want to shed some light on why this page contradicts Pat's (and as it would seem, the evidence)? MS3FGX 12:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

You don't even have to look at a slashdot post. The install.end file in early versions (which signals the install scripts that you are on the last floppy) has the name and mailing address of the Church of the Subgenius. Later versions rot-13 obfusated it, but it is still there so theoretically you can still install Slackware off of 950 floppies. 2^127-1 is prime (talk) 05:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Another Church of the SubGenius question: I just tried Slackware for the first time, and I'm astonished how little Bulldada is present in the distribution. Bulldada is central to the Church, and other distros generate a culture based on their design philosophy. Why doesn't Slackware? --Moly 18:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moly (talk • contribs)

The install.end thing was completely new to me. That's the typical Volkerding humor :-)

Germanopratin (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

if [ -r $PACKAGE_DIR/install.end ]; then

OUTTAHERE="true"

fi

That's part of the pkgtool script in my current 13.37 Slackware. All there ;-)

Germanopratin (talk) 20:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Unclear sentence

"The removal of GNOME was seen by some in the Linux community as significant because the desktop environment is found in many Linux distributions." - significant in what way? It might be obvious to Linux geeks, but it isn't to a general reader (me!); please explain this better. 86.132.138.205 03:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)