Slackware 12.1 Released 244
SlackFan writes "Slackware 12.1 has been released, with kernel 2.6.24-5. 'Among the many program updates and distribution enhancements, you'll find better support for RAID, LVM, and cryptsetup; a network capable (FTP and HTTP, not only NFS) installer; and two of the most advanced desktop environments available today: Xfce 4.4.2, a fast, lightweight, and visually appealing desktop environment, and KDE 3.5.9, the latest 3.x version of the full-featured K Desktop Environment.'"
excellent question (Score:5, Interesting)
But of course I was standing on the shoulder's of giants. Someone created the look and feel of that and made all the config files work. But how much of that is what goes into a distro and how much is pretty much set by the packages them selves. e.g. choose gnome and is basically the look and feel set?
these days everything seems like it comes down to four looks, KDE or gnome in user interface and redhatish or debianish in directory layout and packages.
THe only distro I've played with that felt amazingly original in every aspect is Damn Small where everything is different and very tight. (never tried Puppy).
So what exactly goes on to make a "distro". What makes say ubuntu different than one of the four chioices (kde,gnome, debian, redhat)
Re:Que pasa? Nada. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Will it like my Hauppauge PVR-150 TV card (Score:1, Interesting)
I've been using Slackware forever, and there is one simple reason - it seems like it's the only distribution out there that is still Linux.
Wtf do I mean by that? Every linux distro out there is branching off into their own little world, making them look like they are complete different operating systems. In fact, a lot of new linux users look at distributions that way. They don't like the fact that, yes, I can compile the sources of all your special ubuntu software, and make my slack install literally clone your standard ubuntu installation. Hardly anything has changed in the framework of slackware since the beginning, which is why I look at it as the only distribution that "is" still "Linux"
Back to the parent post; you want to know how to get your wireless card to work? you compile the driver (a ton easier than you think) and read the README and INSTALL file that comes with it. Aka follow directions.
I had to deal with my girlfriend's openSUSE installation because she was struggling to get ndiswrapper to work. She had to download a new kernel, download patches for the new kernel that enabled ndiswrapper, which required more patches to the kernel in order to support the dependencies for the ndiswrapper module. After that, she runs the program to have it read the windows driver for her broadcom card, and it was a no go.
I come over, took a look at the situation, and I downloaded the source code for ndiswrapper, compiled it (a simple make; make install) - loaded up the module (modprobe) and ran the ndiswrapper command line program. it worked.
I guess you can use this as proof that linux isn't yet ready for your mainstream user, but it also shows that distributions are going in their own little directions. Slackware still works, and works well. I applaud the person who posted about stability and such, because it's true.
And for your PVR-150, here you go: http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/index.php/Hauppauge_PVR-150 [mythtv.org] - read up :)
Re:Que pasa? Nada. (Score:2, Interesting)
I compiled everything myself, for two main reasons: not everything was available as a Slackware package, and I patch a large number of packages to tweak them in a way I like. The issue with Slackware was package management: it has a package system, but not a terribly sophisticated one. I wrote a little Perl script that works similar to checkinstall, meaning I created all my own packages from source. But Slackware's package management just was not enough for me. No dependency checking, really no features at all, apart from recording the output of tar xfvz.
I could have, probably, gone with a distribution that does everything for you, and learned to appreciate that. Instead I wanted more control, and with Slackware, that would have been too haphazard. So I created my own distribution, with my own package system, init scripts, and so on. It really is from scratch, and it scratches an itch (hah!). I even ported over a lot of BSD tools to replace GNU coreutils, gzip, findutils, etc. It's been great fun.
Slackware was a wonderful learning experience for me but in the end it wound up either doing too much, or not enough, you could say. I'm glad it's the one I picked up first, but I've outgrown Slackware and can't see a need to use it again--I sure did defend it for a long while, though!
Re:Que pasa? Nada. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:excellent question (Score:3, Interesting)
Illness (Score:3, Interesting)
System Requirements (Score:5, Interesting)
* 486 processor
* 16MB RAM (32MB suggested)
* 100-500 megabytes of hard disk space for a minimal and around 3.5GB for full install
* 3.5" floppy drive
Does one really need a floppy drive to install it? Of my two desktops and single laptop, none have a floppy drive anymore.
Re:excellent question (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually Mandriva has one of few distros what use upstream version of KDE. KDE developers like it when distribution builders works with KDE project together and does not "fork" own version from it as Kubuntu does.
There was story about this when KDE4 came out on dot.kde.org where KDE devels "thanked" Mandriva.
Re:Que pasa? Nada. (Score:2, Interesting)
Sure Slackware may be slightly more difficult to install than some other distros, but when it's all said and done, Slackware is incredibly lean and stable.
My son recently got a new PC for for his birthday and came pre-installed with Vista. He told me he wanted to keep Vista installed so he could do some gaming.
A week or so later he was so fed up with the bloat, the pop-ups, and restrictions he said "dad, can you put Linux on this for me". Made me very proud indeed.