An Old Hacker Slaps Up Slackware 240
cdlu writes "What do you get when you mix an old hacker with an old distribution? A good old review of the recently released Slackware 10.2." Joe Barr over at Linux.com (owned by the same company as Slashdot) lays down his thoughts on everything from the install to reliability and user loyalty.
not a great review (Score:5, Insightful)
If I was going to run Linux again. (Score:2, Insightful)
I have to say slackware's name is perfect in a number of way, it's easy to get into, interesting to use, good to learn from, and good to modify how you want it to be modified.
Kudos I might actually have to get the new version and get my old linux box back on it's feet.
Re:Where's my slackintosh? (Score:2, Insightful)
No. PPC is dying and we need to stop wasting resources porting everything to its architecture. We could use these resources to continue focusing on improving the platform that the vast majority of people are going to use in the future. People told you not to buy PPC garbage but you decided to follow Apple instead. Apple has realized their stupidity and has now decided to follow along with everyone else and now you're going to pay the price.
Re:Seems like a basic review of a basic Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
I've always thought of Slackware as sort of the HeathKit hobbyist version of Linux... sort of the build your own robot dog, vs. the Aibos of Linspire, SuSE, or Mandrivacoriscalifragilisticexpialidocious.
When I first decided to play with Linux, many many moons ago, I think I bought the Walnut Creek CD-ROM of Slackware at Fry's or by mail order. I got a decent install up and running with XFree86 and a window manager. But it was very definitely a steep learning curve.
Recently, trying out a free copy of Linspire, it was probably the easiest install of any OS (Microsoft, BSD, or Windows) I've seen. Ubuntu was pretty simple too. I could have given my parents Linspire and had them up and running almost without my help.
But if you want to learn Linux, not just install it, Slackware is probably one of the best for that. IMO, Despite all the up-and-comers, it's still a good starter kit for the people who want to learn a little about how it works while getting it working.
- Greg
Another useless "review" (Score:5, Insightful)
Can somebody please explain why every single Linux review has to spend so much time on installation? Monday's post of a SuSE review spent a third of the article just on installation. Today's Slackware review spends half of the review on installation (actually a bit more than half if you cut out the conclusion that takes up a quarter of the last page). People, installation is a solved problem! SuSE and Redhat have had competent installers for nearly a decade. Even Debian is slowly getting into the act. When Corel first integrated a game of tetris while packages installed, installation was a done deal. What possible reason can there be to spend all of your time reviewing the installation process, rather than everything else? (and by "everything else", I mean the integration that a distribution brings -- how well are menus configured in your chosen desktop environment, does it have a good package installation story that keeps those menus up to date, does it provide you with recent and stable versions of popular software, etc)
Yes, I know that installation of Linux is critical since you can't easily go out and buy a PC with Linux pre-loaded. I get that. However, the installers for pretty much every distro are simple and clear enough that it doesn't take a genius to use them. Skim your chosen distro's installation manual and have a go at it. Just please stop wasting review space writing about the installation process! Here's a hint: If your review is too short when you leave out the installer part, maybe you don't need to be writing a review.
Re:Seems like a basic review of a basic Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
Keep in mind ALL of the distros have come a long way since the old Walnut Creek CDs. Back in the day Red Hat was no picnic to install. I'm sure a Slackware install is more difficult than Linspire, but the 10.x versions are really not that hard to install. Most common tools are included, and many of the ones that aren't can be downloaded from linuxpackages.net.
That said, there can still be challenges. Hardware configurations are the primary obstacle I sometimes have difficulty getting around, especially for X. That said, I am writing this from a Slackware desktop, I run a Slackware desktop at home and have three testing machines at work running VMware under a Slackware desktop.
Re:OSTG (Score:2, Insightful)
Isn't it interesting that, for all the bitching Slashdotters do about corporate-owned shills, advertising, poor service, and biased reporting, they turn none of that critical eye toward Slashdot?
You must read a different slashdot than I do. There aren't any articles I've ever read on this site where the comments don't bitch about dupes, shills, "slashvertisements" (advertisements disguised as stories), bought and paid for stories from pro bloggers (there are bloggers who make a career out of this site, like pipsquelle or whatever his fucking name is).
We're all aware of the problem, and we all bitch about it; but when presented with Viable Alternatives [technocrat.net] we don't follow through on them.
Therefore, it's fucking obvious slashdotters get what they deserve.
A real hacker (Score:4, Insightful)
Or at the least choose BSD, which is much older and mature then the very idea of 'linux'.
Beyond crowing for my fave distro (Score:5, Insightful)
(1) "Open Source" means "you can access the source code". Source code is nearly useless if all you can do is read it - you have to be able to compile it/interpret it. Do not strip out every single possible file having anything at all to do with source code. Slackware keeps the compilers and interpreters and libraries and header files and documentation needed for programming in about 15-20 different languages. You'd think that is a given - "Open Source" - "programming tools" - DUH! - but in fact, it's an exception. Damn near a freak.
(2) "Following the herd" is for lemmings. Slackware has kept it's text mode installer while the whole world has gone GUI-crazy. Listen, GUIs are a great idea when you're watching a movie or editing graphics or surfing the web - get it? That's what you need a GUI for. When all you need is to read and write text, a GUI is a useless, superfluous, wasteful, unnecessary overhead.
(3) "Popular" is for homecoming Queens. Slackware has gone halfway to divinity by ditching Gnome. Now I'd love it if it took the other step and ditched KDE, too. Check out the two-disk distro - know why you need two disks instead of one? KDE. The other window managers are any one better than Gnome and KDE combined, but if nobody ever tries them, no one else will ever know.
(4) Distributions are released on disks for a reason - to put the operating system ON THE DISKS! Not putting in a patch-work kernel that's just enough for it to wheeze it's way online and download the other 99.99% of itself. I don't know which I get more annoyed with with other distros - wasting the money to burn all those disks, or discovering I am expected to pay for another internet connection just because the system is helpless without the umbilical cord of the internet connected to it. You can take a computer, an electric generator, and your two Slackware disks to a desert island and end up with a complete system ready-to-go - and able to reproduce copies of itself if need be, thanks to those handy programming tools. I just can't figure out how Slackware does so much more on two disks than other distros do in five.
(5) Read docs - documentation good. Slackware has the full compliment of man pages, info system files, docbook, and various contents of /usr/share/doc, and in addition includes HOWTOs and FAQs from the Linux documentation project.
(6) Keep it simpler than simple. I've practically thrown up when I explore the directories of soem distros. Pointers to pointers to pointers to nothing, programs missing half the files they need to run, everything scattered to hell and gone. Then people wonder why their system can't detect it's hardware and freezes up. Slackware follows the traditional directory structure and abides by it, going by the rule that conventions form over time because they make sense, and are not to be disregarded in the pursuit of arrogantly asserting how bold and creative you are.
(7) There is no Slackware For Dummies. And well there should not be, because this distro is one that actually *compliments* your intelligence. And you'd be amazed how smart you are, when you're given the chance to be! So the package manager is minimal, and I hope it never changes. Packages are un-needed anyway, when the system can handle any source-code tarball you throw at it.
Thank you all for glancing through it. We now return you to your regular grandstanding about Photoshop, Ubuntu, and Star trek.
Re:Another useless "review" (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong. I prefer slackware for my personal systems, mainly because, once setup, it is rock solid. Still I hesitate to try to wring new functionality from an install, as it invariably requires days of research, trial and error before I reach the new plateau of stability successfully. In fairness, I have to say that this is somewhat true of all distros, and if one has a particular task in mind, one should find the distro that is custom-configured for that task (hence I use DeMudi for my audio work, and OpenBSD for the firewall).
Otherwise, here is the rest of the review for you:
I browsed the web, it worked.
I played some music, it worked.
I sent some e-mail, it worked.
I wrote and printed my resume from kword, it worked.
I computed my mortgage payout in gnumeric, it worked.
I downloaded pictures from my camera, it worked - except I had to figure out that "mount" thingy,
... so you get the idea.
Re:Another useless "review" (Score:3, Insightful)
Aw, it's peer pressure plain and simple. Every reviewer feels compelled to walk the reader through the install process for all the chirping lusers out there chanting, "too hard! too hard! too hard!" What I say to anybody bemoaning the difficulty of installing Linux - don't talk until you've installed Windows starting from a bare hard drive and a Windows CD. I've done that, and actually found Linux to be less hassle by comparison.
Re:OSTG (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:...IMHO (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right as rain - but there's a problem. See, 99% of the distros are now "dumbed down" so much that they're useless for a power-user. To make a NEW Linux distribution, or write a NEW Linux program or make an update/bugfix/patch for existing examples of same - guess what? - you need one of those distros you can "fsck with" because that's the only system you can program on. Right now, that's down to Slackware, Debian (allegedly), Gentoo, and Linux From Scratch. Now, when the Great Steamroller of Group Opinion has flattened Linux out into One Big Ubuntu - where will we get more Linux? And what will be the difference between Linux and a proprietary, closed-source system?
I'm looking to keep my Slackware disks in a safe in a secret location. So that if present trends continue, I'll eventually own the only free development platform left on Earth. And I promise to make an insufferable dictator!