Slackware 7.2 [Not] Released 235
Pete Blackley writes: "The best Linux distro out there has just released a new version; check out the README. And it comes with kernel... 2.2.18! Some things never change, and I am glad it works that way. Don't forget to check the autoslack package in the unsupported dir: it means the imminent death of all the "Slack lacks apt-get" arguments. PS: If you browse the ftp.slackware.com/pub tree, you'll see that Slack currently runs on vanilla x86, SGI VisualWorkstations and SunSparcs; I'm just waiting for the PowerPC port! PPS: All the crap about Slackware's death really is an exaggeration." That's what I like: a distro that isn't afraid to say that its death is an exaggeration. Update: 01/13 01:47 PM by michael : Slackware says - rudely - that 7.2 isn't released yet. This situation - confusion about what is released and what is not - is one that most software developers avoid by utilizing new-fangled conventions such as "beta".
Re:When do we get a distro with 2©4? (Score:1)
Re:Damn you Volkerding! Thank You Volkerding! (Score:1)
TANJ TANJ TANJ TANJ TANJ TANJ TANJ TANJ TANJ!!!!
But, as usual, Thank you for an excellent Distro!
ttyl
Farrell
Re:The deth of Linux will come... (Score:1)
Hey pinhead, the italics in a story are the words of the author (not a /. person). Thus, they are the author's opinion, not a statement or indication (necessarily) of fact.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Re:FTP... (Score:1)
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Re:"The Best Linux Distro Out There" (Score:1)
Re:The newest Linux?! (Score:1)
Re:2©2©18 - All most people Need©©© (Score:1)
(For which I typically use FreeBSD)
Oh, and for the record, I'm using 2.4.0 on my main workstation (a dual 466 celeron.) While the 2.4x kernels bench a bit faster when compiling, I really don't see an incredibly noticeable difference. (Apart from my APIC errors in 2.4.x, these have to do with heat and the notorious BP6.)
Every OS (and OS distribution) has its place. For simple IPMASQ have you checked out Coyote Linux? Pretty sweet!
Cheers,
Ben
Re:DRI question (Score:1)
- tux racer
- UT (and UT demo)
- Quake3
- Sof demo
- Sin demo
- anything else I put it through.
I'm running Debian unstable w X4.0.2 and 2.4.0, but it was also just as fast with 2.2.18 and the 2.4.0test kernels.
The nVidia may be faster, but I challenge anyone to find a more supported video card than my Voodoo 3... (Linux, FreeBSD, BeOS, QNX, oh, and Win32 too..)
I'd gladly send you my XF86Config file, if you'd like. Also, I've read that using fancy video modes in LILO can have an adverse impact on your card's speed. I'm not too sure about that though.
Hmm, try disabling some unneeded services too, Mdk 7.2 throws in a _lot_ of stuff by default.
Ben
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:What the hell happened to ./ ? (Score:1)
Look around you... the cause of that deterioration is your fellow 5-digit buddies.
Re:SGI ? (Score:1)
Re:SGI ? (Score:1)
Windows users (Score:1)
When I started playing with Linux (2.5-3 years ago) Slack was my first distro. Some guy I worked with gave my a CD and just said "try this".... A day or so later, I was up on the network (in Linux) and using lynx, emacs, vi et al.
Don't sell people short based on the OS they are currently using... Eveyone can learn a new trick or two
Rude Slack? (Score:1)
Re:Windows users (Score:1)
What I find interesting is how long I was lurking on
Re:Windows users (Score:1)
Cheers
Re:Slackware with a package manager? (Score:1)
Stick to Slackware, because you certainly lack the required number of brain cells to grow out of it.
--
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:1)
Quick, hurry to the head of the HR department and tell them that maintaining a central database of all employees is stupid! Don't forget to tell the same to your account manager at the bank!
--
Re:Large system maintainance with BSD (Score:1)
--
When do we get a distro with 2.4? (Score:1)
Re:Slackware with a package manager? (Score:1)
Check out a Slackware system and look at installpkg, removepkg, and upgradepkg, among others.
Re:Damn you Volkerding! (Score:1)
If you walk through the changelog, you will note that -current is just about as open as it gets. We've made changes only to retract those changes days later because they didn't quite work. How many other distributions hang their development out in the open like that?
Yes, Debian does too. But to imply that Slackware does not have an open development model is wrong.
Re:Still on my boxen... (Score:1)
While none of those methods are really automatic from the viewpoint of the operating system handling it for you, the end result to the users is the same. Libraries are magically dealt with.
The only times you ever really run ldconfig are if there's a broken "make install", you're doing something really complicated, or you are in exceedingly deep shit.
same (Score:1)
---
Large system maintainance with BSD (Score:2)
This isn't to say that SysV is harder, instead of editing one file, you create some symlinks. Slightly more convoluted than setting a variable to expand to YES or NO, but certainly feasible.
To this point, there's another guy who takes care of the Linux portion of our product, and he has no troubles either. This with both of us having thousands servers 'round the world.
The fact of the matter is, if you can't handle any given startup method, you probably shouldn't be working on the servers. Maybe you should consider making a powerpoint presentation, showing your expected decrease in defects/KLOC after all projects are written in Java, or something. I've heard rumours that directors are good at that kind of thing.
--
"Don't trolls get tired?"
Why reboot? (Score:2)
--
"Don't trolls get tired?"
Re:GET_A_CLUE_SLASHDOT.TXT (Score:2)
There's even a response to michael's whiny, petulant updated message.
THIS_IS_NOT_A_BETA_EITHER.TXT [slackware.com]
2.2.18 (Score:2)
And it comes with kernel... 2.2.18! Some things never change, and I am glad it works that way.
I for one would have lost respect for Slackware, or any other distribution, had it shipped with 2.4.0. Excepting "bleeding-edge" distributions, does anyone really expect distributions to ship a x.y.0 of any kernel? Do we always have to be so divisive?
I'm still running test10 (or maybe 11) on my box, and I'm looking forward to having the time to try 2.4.0 out. But that doesn't mean I want it in any distros yet as part of the default installation.
Re:How can this be the best (Score:2)
Redhat 7.0 is 2.4 READY.
Re:How can this be the best (Score:2)
Saturday morning, Slack Linux and cold beer from a glass bottle.
SLASHDOT = GAY (Score:2)
i think it's funny how slashdot can claim to be an unbiased news source when personal opinions are so freely interspersed with the stories!
------------
a funny comment: 1 karma
an insightful comment: 1 karma
a good old-fashioned flame: priceless
Re:2.2.18 - All most people Need... (Score:2)
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
The original poster provided us a specific example. Perhaps you could be so kind as to do the same.
--
Re:Well... (Score:2)
In support circles this is called "WFM", stands for "works for me". It's a perfectly good state for a problem to be in, but problems in a "WFM" state are considered *open* (often closed as "Cannot Reproduce" when the user can't make the problem come back). If the Linux community really cares about support by and for its users, it might want to try solving problems that require a little investigation. In this case, the problem is caused by a missing pthreads dependency, the sort of thing which, incidentally, packaging systems were designed to solve. Even the
--
Re:Well... (Score:2)
--
Rudeness (Score:2)
-
Re:Damn you Volkerding! (Score:2)
--
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
You're delusional, aren't you?
It requires a database (databases are evil!) to track packages, it doesn't mesh well with compiled software, it has stupid dependency management,
Databases are evil? Care to cite a few reasons, or is it just that you don't understand them?
and it takes too much control away from the user.
You really are delusional. What control does an RPM take away from the user? You do realize you can still build RPMs from source, right?
How is anything in Slack 7.x NOT recent? They're glibc 2.2.3-based distros, and Slack 7.1 was the first distro to come with a KDE2 beta.
Let me suggest a course in reading comprehension. Go back and read what I wrote again. I pointed out one package from slackerware 7.2 that is old, but harkened to the days when half of the packages were 3 or 4 versions old.
--
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
Which circular dependencies are those? Oh, you're probably one of those people that can't manage to grasp the concept of installing two mutually-dependent packages at the same time solves this "problem".
While KDE on RedHat is a mess of a dozen RPMs, the same thing on Slackware is kde2.tgz.
Not a fan of modularity, or a maintainable package model, eh? Slack's fine for one or two machines, when you go beyond that, it's a nightmare to maintain. Consistent package management is key. Doesn't matter if you're talking about RedHat, Mandrake, Debian, SuSE, or even one of the "fringe" distributions like Connectiva or Immunix. All of those have good working package models. I'm sorry, but tar and gzip does NOT constitute a packaging system.
It is nice, however, to see Pat Volkerding putting some *RECENT* versions of software in his distribution, at least for the most part (XFree86 is a notable exception). It wasn't all that long ago that Pat & co. shipped packages that were 3, 4 or even more versions old...
--
How can this be the best (Score:2)
The only time this is not true is if you don't know anything about linux or distros. Then you have to trust your friend that knows more than you do to choose a distro for you.
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
It depends on where you're coming from. Some people think shuffling symlinks around is easiest. Others think commenting and uncommenting lines of shell script is easiest.
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
But there are many ways to to "bsd" style scripts. Slackware does it one way. FreeBSD does it another. Under FreeBSD all local configurations are captured in rc.conf and rc.local. rc.conf is simply a list of options, where later options can override new options. Creating a script to add a new line at the end of rc.conf is trivial. I don't know how the other BSDs do it, but this method gives you the best of both worlds.
Re:Who's to blame? (Score:2)
Slackware-current is an ongoing staging area for the next release.
As README72.TXT is in slackware-current
Plus
Re:Why...? (Score:2)
Quoted from the slackware.com site:
"Slackware [is]
Bleeding edge isn't top priority
If you want XFree86-4.0.2 in Slackware
If you want the 2.4.x kernel
Re:How can this be the best (Score:2)
Red Hat 7 has support for kernel 2.4 [redhat.com].
Re:Awww, poor michael (Score:2)
-Restil
Re:Hold it right there! (Score:2)
Wed Jan 10 12:46:50 PST 2001
(* security fix *)
glibc-2.2 contains a local vulnerability that affects all setuid root binaries. Any user on affected systems will be able to read any file on the system through a simple process: The user sets the RESOLV_HOST_CONF environment variable to the name of the file that they wish to read, then runs any setuid root program that makes use of that variable. The file is then written to stderr.
a1/glibcso.tgz: Patched sysdeps/generic/unsecvars.h to fix the problem with RESOLV_HOST_CONF, and also to add HOSTALIASES to the list. (this change is noted in glibc-CVS)br> d1/glibc.tgz: Patched sysdeps/generic/unsecvars.h as above.
Re:How can this be the best (Score:2)
Re:Commodities prices (Score:2)
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
Agreed that most of the vulnerabilities are associated with the programs themselves. Newer versions fix old holes, but may make new ones.
The distro can influence the final result by
Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
The thing that utterly frustrates me is that NOTHING COMPILES! I'm not sure which iteration of Slackware I'm using (current circa March 1999), and unless I'm compiling from GNU source I seem to be missing some obscure library that's pre-installed on RedHat and missing from Slackware. I'm not sure if its a libc vs glibc thing, but it's getting extremely frustrating and has made me consider shictching to another distro (likely Debian) the next time I install.
OK, all of this is just Troll unless I can back it up. Let me go pull something from freshmeat and watch it not compile.
OK,I admit it, it took me until my third try to find something that wouldn't compile for me. Must be a good day.
I picked at random "BannerKiller". We've been having problems at work and need a simple dumb web proxy.
phobos:tbradley:~/bannerkiller1.01> make
(cd src; make)
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/tbradley/bannerkiller1.01/src'
cc -pthread -D_REENTRANT -DDEBUG -c proxy.c -o proxy.o
cc: unrecognized option `-pthread'
cc -pthread -D_REENTRANT -DDEBUG -c gestion.c -o gestion.o
cc: unrecognized option `-pthread'
cc -pthread -D_REENTRANT -DDEBUG -c connexion.c -o connexion.o
cc: unrecognized option `-pthread'
cc -pthread -D_REENTRANT -DDEBUG -c filtre.c -o filtre.o
cc: unrecognized option `-pthread'
cc -pthread -D_REENTRANT -DDEBUG -c utilsText.c -o utilsText.o
cc: unrecognized option `-pthread'
cc -pthread -D_REENTRANT -DDEBUG -c utils.c -o utils.o
cc: unrecognized option `-pthread'
utils.c: In function `startThread':
utils.c:29: `pthread_attr_t' undeclared (first use this function)
utils.c:29: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
utils.c:29: for each function it appears in.)
utils.c:29: parse error before `attr'
utils.c:30: `attr' undeclared (first use this function)
make[1]: *** [utils.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/tbradley/bannerkiller1.01/src'
make: *** [all] Error 2
phobos:tbradley:~/bannerkiller1.01>
OK, now, probably this isn't a good example; someone will be able to point out something I'm doing wrong or that the software I'm trying to compile is crap. Perhaps so. But often I see something cool I want to try out that flops horribly on Slackware.
Should I jump distros, or become more realistic about what constitutes good source, and not try to compile everything I see on freshmeat? Would upgrading to Slackware 7.2 be a good choice for me in the future?
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
>>>>>>>>>
Why does everyone assume that when I complain about a problem in Linux, I can't fix it? I've been using RPM quite a lot. I can figure out how to type rpm -i XFree86*.rpm in order to install all the circularly dependant packages. It is still a stupid idea. If two packages depend on each other, they should come as one package. Given the huge amount of bandwidth available these days, there is no excuse for KDE to come as a dozen different packages that only
Not a fan of modularity, or a maintainable package model, eh? Slack's fine for one or two machines, when you go beyond that, it's a nightmare to
maintain.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Slack's a pain to maintain? How? I don't know what experiences you have (I'm not a sysadmin and proud of it) but I see RPM's "modularity" as a stupid splitting of of stuff that really shouldn't. Modularity does not refer to splitting stuff up for the hell of it. There has to be a good reason for doing so. Its like if Linus seperated out the Linux VM into a seperate module. You can't use a different VM with a particular kernel, and in order to use the kernel, you have to load the VM. So what's the point of splitting the two up?
Consistent package management is key. Doesn't matter if you're talking about RedHat, Mandrake, Debian, SuSE, or even one of the "fringe" distributions like Connectiva or Immunix. All of those have good working package models. I'm sorry, but tar and gzip does NOT constitute a packaging system.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
RPM is not a packaging system. It is a POS created by people who obviously hate you. It requires a database (databases are evil!) to track packages, it doesn't mesh well with compiled software, it has stupid dependency management, and it takes too much control away from the user. That's why the packaging system I'm writing for BeOS will (hopefully) offer the power of a packager without all the crap in stuff like RPM.
It is nice, however, to see Pat Volkerding putting some *RECENT* versions of software in his distribution, at least for the most part (XFree86 is a notable exception). It wasn't all that long ago that Pat & co. shipped packages that were 3, 4 or even more versions old...
>>>>>>>>>>
How is anything in Slack 7.x NOT recent? They're glibc 2.2.3-based distros, and Slack 7.1 was the first distro to come with a KDE2 beta.
Re:Still on my boxen... (Score:2)
As for the GUI and browser, BeOS is a microkernel. It even implements networking in userspace. I think positively ugly that Linux implements stuff like audio in kernel space
Re:Still on my boxen... (Score:2)
Re:Still on my boxen... (Score:2)
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
Re:Still on my boxen... (Score:2)
Re:Still on my boxen... (Score:2)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except not really. Every other OS in the world is smart enough to automatically register DLLs without running programs like ldconfig. Without rebooting even. In fact, I was reading on article on dynamic linkng a few days ago, and they talked about how BeOS goes to great lengths to make sure that the cached and on-drive copies of DLLs are the same, and can add DLLs on the fly and have the relocated images updated.
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
>>>>>>>
Good drugs.
Databases are evil? Care to cite a few reasons, or is it just that you don't understand them?
>>>>>>>>>
Right. I'm stupid. That is why I disagree with you. Grow up, jackass. I say databases are stupid when they are not used properly. Just as keeping a central database of all configuration data (the Windows registry) is stupid, keeping a central database of all files (locate) is stupid, and keeping a central database of all packages (RPM) is stupid. Package info should not be stored in one big database, but spread throughout a hierarchy and contained within the packages that they refer to. For example, I'm writing a package manager for BeOS. It has no central database. Instead, all dependency and package info is stored within the attributes of the folder where the package was installed. For example, if I install app.pkg to
A) No single point of failiure, and the importance of keeping the database's state correct dissapears.
B) Packages can be moved, removed, renamed, etc, without having to update a central database, or having to go through tools like RPM.
C) The user has total control over where packages are installed, and how dependencies are satisfied.
D) The user has access to this data through any tool that deals with the (system standard) attribute system. This is unlike RPM, where only software coded for the RPM database is useful in accessing its data.
While this would be harder to implement in Linux (which doesn't allow filesystem attributes) it wouldn't be terribly hard to emulate.
You really are delusional. What control does an RPM take away from the user?
>>>>>>>>>>
You don't get to decide which dependencies are filled, the package maintainers do. You don't get to decide where stuff is installed (not without breaking things anyway) the package maintainers do. You don't get to decide how your system configuration is updated, the package maintainers do.
You do realize you can still
build RPMs from source, right?
>>>>>>>>
That doesn't solve any of the problems I just mentioned.
Let me suggest a course in reading comprehension.
>>>>>>>>>>
Let me suggest a course in common courtesy.
Go back and read what I wrote again. I pointed out one
package from slackerware 7.2 that is old, but harkened to the days when half of the packages were 3 or 4
versions old.
>>>>>>>>>>>
When I say that the Debian distro is out of date, people tell me to go use -unstable. If you're telling me that Slackware is out of date, then I'm assuming you're talking about 7.x, because the previous versions are too different to warrent any consideration.
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
That's right, because on any recent BSD, you have a ports collection. cd /usr/ports/misc/foobar && make install, you're done. Nothing like the trouble on Slackware!
And don't argue that it's harder to compile non-ported software. I have written and maintain a couple FreeBSD ports, and I'll tell you that it's nothing more than a few minutes of effort. Most people are good at writing portable code, you know.
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
Er, no. If it's using a server, and you're working for a company that has a valid reason for installing a new network service [for example, an intranet or instant messenging server], fairly frequently. That's one of the advantages of Linux [compared to the NT world] - you can actually run more than one service on a machine and maintain stability [security is a different matter, and DMZ etc are still an important consideration].
For a desktop machine, all the time. Update monitoring tools, indexing tools for fast searches, ssh if you decide you need secure access to your CLI and GUI apps, etc. Desktop machines change services a lot.
And despite knowing a few hundred Linux users, I've rarely seen anyone actually do the symlinking behaind the scenes themselves. They just run whatever tool came with their distro [especially for business use - wasting time on your clients watch is not a good thing].
Then again, I also know of nobody who actually uses Slackware, apart from the odd IRC encounter. And everybody else knows Slackwares `packaging system' isn't [its a way of installing software and nothing more].
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
No, I'm not. That is obvious. I'm saying people often add services after they've installed and set of their box, because they want to use those services.
A client of mine recently found a need for a external webmail server. This will be added as a service onto an existing box within their DMZ. The same client was also previously using sendmail to transfer mail between the internel mail server and the outside world. As sendmail runs as root [and should, thus, in my opinion, be uninstalled wherever it is encounted] sendmail was replaced with another, straight mail forwarding only service.
Another client recently replaced all their insternal sendmail servers with qmail. Again, this was after the machines were originally installed.
Is it that hard to grasp that a company might not be able to predict its future at the time its servers were installed, and may instead adjust their IT towards their own changing needs?
Instead of making it easier for the user to perform these calisthenics, perhaps the best solution is to tell them to STOP!
The users aren't performing calisthenics. They're doign what all good businesses to: acknowledging need and deficiency and adjusting their systems to meet those needs and address the deficiencies.
Are you telling me that even business servers change their services on a regular basis?
No, I'm telling you they change them on an occasional basis.
How often are companies going to install a new network service? Daily? Weekly? Monthly? How often do new network services even arrive on the scene?
Depending on the needs of the business. This ranges anywhere generally from yearly to bi-monthly, if you must know.
Wow! You don't get out much do you?
I suggest it mis you who needs to get out into the real world where companies actually change, and are smart enough to change their systems to meet those needs.
Grow up.
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
Excuse me? (Score:2)
Umm, how long was there between Slink and Potato?
Debian is geneally a LOT more out-of-date then Slackware.
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
Re:How can this be the best (Score:2)
Maybe you have heard of Mandrake? The Cooker distro from Mandrake has both, 2.2.18 and 2.4.0
And Cooker IS the best linux distro by far.
Slackware with a package manager? (Score:2)
Damn you Volkerding! (Score:2)
And so what do I see as the top story on /. the next day?
THIS!!!
Man if this is how my year's gonna go I may swear off keyboards. Damn damn DAMN!
Re:Linux Enthusiasm (Score:2)
The last thing we need is an army of thoughtless marketing droids.
You mean things like this? "The best Linux distro out there has just released a new version"
I'm always glad I can come to Slashdot for "valid, insightful opinions about features and technolology, rather than roboticly mouthing a party line."
--
Re:Good news but... (Score:2)
Best? I think so... Finally a new release (Score:2)
Re:Getting frustrated with Slackware. (Score:2)
And before you go complaining about a distro check the program you are trying to compile. What is -pthread supposed to be??? It probably should be -lpthread. Thats not slackware's fault the author of your program screwed up.
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:2)
Next up was Redhat 4.2, 5.0 followed. After I hosed the libs with rpm, I was reinstalling in custom mode and decided I didn't want xscreensaver installed. If I am away from my computer, I just shut the monitor off - it uses less power that way.
The installer warned me that XFree86 REQUIRED xscreensaver, no problem I thought, no it doesn't I'll just continue and ignore it.
The installer quit at that point.
The Redhat guys had engineered xfree86 to require xscreensaver, user be damned.
That is when I decided to switch distributions.
Uhh, why? (Score:2)
--------------------------------------
I'm a karma whore, mod me up damn you!
Re:How can this be the best (Score:2)
You'll find life much calmer; and you won't have to type the same old tired tripe: "the best is what does the job", or "the best distro is always the one that you like the most"
-- Eat your greens or I'll hit you!
Really now? (Score:3)
And all this time I've been thinking that this situation -- confusion about what is released and what is not -- was one that most reputable web sites avoided by utilizing new-fangled ideas such as "research".
----
"A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind."
2.2.18 - All most people Need... (Score:3)
This means that 3D Acceleration works with XFree86 4.x, so all of the newest games are a go!
Really, from and end-user point of view there isn't much difference between 2.2.18 and 2.4.0.
As for slack, never used it, but Debian Unstable sure is sweet!
Cheers,
Ben
michael, you moron (Score:3)
Why shouldn't they be rude? Some linux-kiddie site presumes to announce their releases for them, when they're still working on it - I think it's reasonable to tell them to get lost. And what most software developers do is make a new-fangled "release announcement" when the release is ready. If slashdot would put even the *slightest* effort into verifying stories before they run them, these things wouldn't happen. Fuckwit.
-lx
Still on my boxen... (Score:3)
I was showing a couple of MS consultants how to install a program that didn't have an RPM available on a redhat box. I did the 'make install' and then an ldconfig. One asked what the ldconfig was, and they laughed as I explained it... until I told them they'd be rebooting on an MS box at that step... There are people out there that still think anything with a command line is behind the times... But when I go to a W2K box, cmd still works. I think Slackware gets a lot of the same comments from other distrib users that Linux gets from Windoze users. Kinda odd.
Until I can see the ISOs... (Score:3)
Just because Patrick has put the README72 into the Slackware-current folder doesn't signify a release, impending or otherwise...
having said that... should I go into the office to download possibly available ISOs tomorrow.... hmmm...
Re:"The Best Linux Distro Out There" (Score:3)
ftp://ftp.slackware.com/.1/slackware/slackware-cu
Then came:
ftp://ftp.slackware.com/.1/slackware/slackware-cu
But Slashdot fools never noticed that:
ftp://ftp.slackware.com/.1/slackware/slackware-cu
has always been there.
Re:Hold it right there! (Score:3)
Re:"The Best Linux Distro Out There" (Score:3)
Well... (Score:3)
One good example of why I like Slack better: the NVidia drivers. I could not get them to work on Red Hat 6.2 or 7.0. When they did work, they were very crashy. It also took forever to get them to a usable state. But when I dumped RH and put Slackware back on here, the drivers installed flawlessly in minutes.
Also, somebody on here posted: "The thing that utterly frustrates me is that NOTHING COMPILES!" -- I've never had a problem compiling programs on Slackware. In fact, programs I could never get to compile correctly on Red Hat, Mandrake, etc. work just fine on Slack.
I'm not saying Slackware is the best, but it's certainly ONE of the best, especially for server-side uses. Use what ya like; the other distros are good, but I'm sticking to Slack.
Linux Enthusiasm (Score:3)
Debate is a healthy thing
And besides, people who are expert can even offer valid insightful opinions about features and technologies, rather than roboticly mouthing a party line.
The last thing we need is an army of thoughtless marketing droids.
"Check out this years' new color scheme!"
The deth of Linux will come... (Score:3)
I thought Linux was about choice and freedom... I have [rustle, clatter, as he sifts through piles of CDs] five different distributions, all with their good and bad points.
Diversity is the fuel for evolution; let's quit arguing about "my distro is better than yours", and start working toward making Linux even better through competition.
Slashdot, BTW, should be ashamed for publishing an inaccurate (the release may not have happened yet) and biased (is Slackware really the best?) article. Get some journalism lessons, guys.
Re:Slackware rules, but 7.2 is not out yet (Score:3)
GET_A_CLUE_SLASHDOT [slackware.com]
Re:FTP... (Score:4)
Why not try out the NFS install? It's simple and really really easy.
I use it for all my machines without CD-ROM drives. It's really quick too.
Re:Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:4)
Comment removed (Score:5)
GET_A_CLUE_SLASHDOT.TXT (Score:5)
GET_A_CLUE_SLASHDOT.TXT [slackware.com].
While you are at it, checkout the topic at #slackware on irc.openprojects.net.
Check the story BEFORE posting (Score:5)
Well if you would take the time to verify a story submission, they wouldn't have to tell you what a dumbass you are. They didn't use the word BETA because it has not been released as a beta yet.
Best? maybe - BUT for what ??? (Score:5)
I certainly wouldn't call Slackware the best distro for newbies accustomed to MS-Windows and uninterested in learning the guts of Unix. That would be RedHat (or maybe Corel).
But Slackware has some unique features that probably make it the best distro for someone coming from BSD (or SunOS) or who wants to learn the guts of Unix.
Slackware runs a little behind the times in terms of program updates, but that also means that it has the fewest security holes (URL forgotten).
AFAIK, it is the only distro with a BSD-style
Slackware rules, but 7.2 is not out yet (Score:5)
Anyway, if you head on over to ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware you will see there is no slackware-7.2 directory yet and no announcement on www.slackware.com. All they did was update the README file in the slackware-current directory in _preparation_ of releasing the next version.