Slackware 12.2 Released 351
pilsner.urquell submitted a quote from the announcement saying "Well folks, it's that time to announce a new stable Slackware release again. So, without further ado, announcing Slackware version 12.2! Since we've moved to supporting the 2.6 kernel series exclusively (and fine-tuned the system to get the most out of it), we feel that Slackware 12.2 has many improvements over our last release (Slackware 12.1) and is a must-have upgrade for any Slackware user."
Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure both of you still using Slackware will be very pleased! ;)
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sure both of you still using Slackware will be very pleased! ;)
There's somebody else? ;)
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
Don't forget me! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Ha ha, yeah! Unh! Unh!
(with apologies to Will Smith and Lionel Ritchie.)
Re: (Score:2)
We can make it if we try, building castles in the sky; just the two of us, you and I.
Please tell me that I'm not the only one that first thought of Verne Troyer
Re: (Score:2)
Seconded
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Interesting)
You might be surprised how many people use this easy to re-configure distribution.
I came to slackware seeking a clean and simple distro (10 yrs ago now)! I was in the middle of building a custom diskless cluster for CFD and grew tired of Redhat's complex init scripts made even more so by the need to Guify everything.
My only complaint is that there is no (official) slackware 64bit build. If this does not change soon, I will be forced to move on....sadly.
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Informative)
I know it's not "official" (in that it is not overseen by Pat) but slamd64 runs quite nicely. I've been running it for almost a year now on a core2 system with almost the same ease as official slackware on older systems. Just in case anyone is looking for 64 bit slack.
Now if only I could get an install that works easily on my PS3.
Re: (Score:2)
Shhh! Dont tell anyone! I'll lose my street Cred if they find out I'm using slackware!
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, everyone around knows that your Slack kung-fu still can't beat my LFS [linuxfromscratch.org] karate, punk.
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Informative)
By using Slack, everyone around you will know that your kung-fu is the best kung-fu.
Using Srack gives not the kung-fu. Disciprine... come from within.
Re:Great work! (Score:4, Funny)
By using Slack, everyone around you will know that your kung-fu is the best kung-fu.
Using Srack gives not the kung-fu. Disciprine... come from within.
This one has grasped the Tao of Linux, pray that we do not grow to fear him in time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Judge me by my distro do you?
My Ubuntu on the desk and CentOS in the server rack don't tell you that I ran Slack for 10 years while you were still trying to figure out how to make the magic black screen go away ;-)
hrmph.
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
Which raises the question, out their what?
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Great work! (Score:4, Funny)
Accidentally what?
Re:Great work! (Score:5, Funny)
The whole one.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure I will be.
Re: (Score:2)
I dual boot Ubuntu and Windows at home, but my firewall still runs Slackware. (It's an old 233 Mhz HP PC!) The choice of Slackware wasn't anything zealous, it was simply the distro with which I was most familiar at the time. I love Ubuntu, but Slackware has a certain elegance that's hard to find. Considering I built the box around 6-7 years ago and it's still chugging away just fine, I'd imagine they're doing something right.
On a side note, is it just me or is Slackware one of the most source frie
Re: (Score:2)
What's still missing (Score:5, Insightful)
As a 10 year veteran of Slack, I really like that Patrick is still doing the work, but I don't even have to go to the page to know that PAM still isn't supported, and that there's not a package manager that can compete with yum/apt-get/ports.
Last year I switched to Ubuntu on the desktop and CentOS on the server. I look back at Slackware with a lot of fond memories, but managing even a medium sized installation of Slack machines was just too time consuming to continue.
Re:What's still missing (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd also like to note that we continue our Slackware subscription because we appreciate what Patrick and Slack has done for us.
Re:What's still missing (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What's still missing (Score:4, Funny)
Pat doesn't like PAM, which is why it isn't in Slackware.
And it's also why I'm still using Slackware. :)
The power of the simpleton (Score:2)
Right... despite PAM is a powerful system and concept for a lot of things, for people that 1) is just learning the OS and 2) really wants to have full control of a handy and simple OS, PAM is overkill, as a lot of other subsystems on most distros.
The last Slackware distro I used was 3.4 (in 1997/98) and the tgz packages, few boot scripts, etc. were a nice (and attainable) challenge for anybody interested in understanding the main user level OS components.
Now I use Ubuntu, and I will continue using it (speci
Re: (Score:2)
But has he seen Polythene Pam?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pat doesn't like PAM, which is why it isn't in Slackware.
What doesn't he like about it? I quite like it. It's especially great if you want to add different authentication mechanisms or use the normal ones in unusual ways. A couple of years ago I implemented smart card-based authentication for a handful of PAM-based distros, and I was really impressed with how flexible and powerful PAM was, and how consistently the right decisions had been made security-wise.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From the Slackware 9.1 ChangeLog as quoted [l0k1.free.fr] in the alt.os.linux.slackware FAQ:
Re:What's still missing (Score:4, Informative)
It's not. Around that same time was when PamSlam came out and Cartman boxes all over the net were able to be compromised ridiculously easily.
Things are better now, and PAM is terribly useful and gives more benefits than it's complexity takes away.
Re:What's still missing (Score:5, Insightful)
Does what's "supported" or not really matter? It's a fairly standard Linux system, to which you can add-remove anything you like.
That all depends on what you're looking for in your package manager. I certainly like Slackware's package manager more than any other, because you can very, very easily install any mixture of binary packages and code compiled from source that you want. No other system includes the (tiny) -dev headers necessary for compilation in their binary packages, nor do they reasonably easily allow you to ignore listed dependencies and handle it yourself with eg. a source package.
I also appreciate Slackware's init scripts... Just about every other Linux distro has at least 3 levels of indirection to their scripts, just making for needless hassle. On a similar note, never have I seen a note in an important config file on Slackware suggesting: "Do not edit this file. It will be automatically overwritten." But that's sadly common practice everywhere else.
I'm glad Slackware has pushed against Linux stupidity, and stayed away from the PAM mess. I just wish Patrick had been able to hold back the switch from OSS to the clunky mess that is ALSA as well. Oh well... Linux looks a little more like Windows every day. Luckily Slackware resists. But then there's always the BSDs... they all do just fine without PAM, ALSA, sysV, apt-get/yum, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
I am thankful I use Slackware every time I want to add something of my own to the system and I can do it without having to fight with dependencies and other stupid nonsense (like countless tiny -dev packages) to get it to compile and into the package system.
Windows and
The reason Pat doesn't like PAM (Score:5, Funny)
She left him and took the child processes with her.
Wow. Still chugging... (Score:4, Funny)
It's nice to know that some things just don't change. Niagara Falls keeps falling, the New England Atlantic is always just a bit too cold to really enjoy swimming in, and my first Linux distro keeps on going.
Kudos, Patrick! Long may you release! (And, since I just found out about 20 seconds ago that he's a month younger than me, I look forward to seeing Slack releases into my nursing home years. "Why, when I was your age, youngster, we used xf86cfg to set up X; none of this X.org junk! You kids have it so easy!")
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow. Still chugging... (Score:5, Funny)
Make a typo entering your monitor's scan rate? Too bad. Try again from the beginning, or edit the file with vi.
After procuring a new monitor, natch.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 LOL
I remember those days, and the warnings involved
"You *can* physically break your monitor if you set the values wrong"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow. Still chugging... (Score:4, Insightful)
xf86config is old-school now? I guess I'm getting old, when I started using *nix the standard practice was to run through xff86config as accurately as possible and then manually editing your config to make everything work properly (trying to run X immediately after running xf86config generally resulted in some pretty odd behaviour or if you weren't so lucky, broken hardware).
/Mikael
Truth in advertising: (Score:2)
Okay, the truth of the matter is that I've forgotten some of the XFree86 nomenclature; I, too, hand-edited the /etc/X/XF86Config (?) file with emacs the first time I used it, to set it up to run on my 16 MHz 386SX, 8 MB of RAM (I fully populated that MO(B|F)O) with my Hercules mono card (I had an amber monitor: neener. No greenscreen here, baby.), and my two 20 MB drives -- 40 MB of storage!
Man, did that machine rock.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes, the horrible memories of downloading, copying to floppies and installing from said floppies because the machine in question didn't have a CD-ROM drive (and no spare drives around). And on dial-up....
/Mikael
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Thank god there was a floppy option. Can you imagine downloading a 640MB CD image at 14.4?
Re: (Score:2)
Will it still run on '386 machines (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the plusses of this distro was that it was able to run on ANYTHING from the 80386 on up... with the move to the 2.6 kernel, is that still possible or do I need a Pentium as a minimum machine?
(yes, I have 25 80386 machines out in the wilderness (solar powered) of Canada doing remote sensing work all running Slackware)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Stuff like this is the textbook example of the ideal use of Slackware, imo.
Not in giant server farms, but in places where you need something solid that can run for 3 years and not hiccup.
Just remember to rotate your logs ;-)
Re:Will it still run on '386 machines (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why upgrade?
If they work and are on a private network why change the OS?
Re:Will it still run on '386 machines (Score:5, Funny)
Use a strong root password, DUH.
The Bears and Elk up in canada cant hold down shift, so using any punctuation in the password will protect the computers from the majority of the animals.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, you're saying that American bears and elk can hold down the shift key?
Still wouldn't keep out the raccoons or squirrels though, those suckers are clever. :-P
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't fool around with Slackware with anything less than 128M RAM and a Pentium Pro 200MHz CPU (and dual CPUs are better). YMMV.
hahaha you young whippersnapper. 128M RAM???! Geesh, I'm running a relatively fast (1m25s to boot to multiuser login prompt) customized Slackware with X & graphical browser on an old Compaq laptop with only 32MB of memory. I also run a couple of machines with ...wait for it... 8MB of memory... no X, but heck all I need is nethack
btw: my VAX in the basement runs an unmodified completely modern version of OpenBSD "out of the box" and it only has 8MB
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Because if I wear it anywhere else, it chafes" ;-)
This article should be tagged "nostalgia" (Score:5, Informative)
I started with Slackware, from my memories, Slackware is from a time when "distribution" had another meaning. The idea was: "here, I compiled the main stuff for you", and from that point you were alone, compiling almos everything (gcc, libc, making the ELF transition by hand)...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well, although I do use Slackware for what some could call nostalgia, I have to point out that you're wrong about all that: none of it is true anymore. By nostalgia I mean a system that is generic, doesn't get in my face, and is familiar to a user of older UNIX systems. That's the goal of Slackware, and Pat succeeds at providing that.
Furthermore, there are package sites like slacky.eu, Slackbuilds.org and others. Also there's slapt-get and swaret that deal with dependencies for packages downloaded from s
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You would be surprised how many large workstation, server installations use Slackware. A very big example could be weatherunderground.com
I am on OS X and I still use my knowledge from Slackware. If I had to use a x86/Linux, it would be either Slackware or Debian.
Some of us still want to use Linux in Linux way.
Slackware vs Ubuntu. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm a recent slack user (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I also have an Eee PC and wanted to install Slackware, but opted for SLAX instead. It is much more space-efficient, due to the fact that every installed package is actually a compressed blob. Quite brilliant, actually.
It Is Still Relevant Today (Score:5, Informative)
Slackware was my first experience with Linux many years ago...(1997/98ish?). Especially installing from floppy disks.
However, I now use Ubuntu & Mint linux on my pcs at the moment.
The way to look at the Slackware "distribution" is to see it as a bare bones, vanilla-type system.
Not having a "package" system is a *feature* of Slackware and it still uses tarball-type packages to this day.
Slackware is based on a different philosophy from today's distributions and I think it's refreshing to see this.
As far as I know there are no "corporate sponsors" funding Slackware's development - Patrick does it in his spare time.
One thing that most people on Slashdot seem to miss is that this is the original spirit of Linux and any software associated with it.
In fact I may install it on an old 450mhz PIII laptop I've got kicking about.
Good Luck Patrick you have my utmost respect and I hope Slackware continues for a very long time.
Queue the n00bs (Score:5, Insightful)
"Slackware sucks, it has no package manager."
"Slackware sucks, it takes so much time to get an uber elite desktop with avant and spinning cubes."
"Slackware sucks, it's so much harder to install than Ubuntu."
"Slackware sucks, you spend way more time on the CLI than other distros."
There are still some of us left that don't think the primary goal of every linux distro is to become a clone of the Windows desktop. There are less and less of us left that want to kick the hell out of anyone that thinks the command line should go away or be used as little as possible. Slackware is what it is - a robust linux system that tries to be as unix-like as possible.
If you want your hand held for you, and you don't understand what *nix truly is and can do and don't really care - if all you want is a simple drop-in replacement for Windows - go download Ubuntu. Each distribution achieves a different goal. THAT's the real beauty of linux, not its potential to become "grandma's operating system".
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Queue the n00bs (Score:5, Insightful)
I always felt that a decent package manager was one of the things that really seperated Linux from Windows. :)
I agree with the rest though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The suggestion that having your hand held is a bad thing is just stupid.
I wasn't trying to imply that having your hand held was a bad thing. What I meant was that if you want your hand held, then you shouldn't be looking towards Slackware. There are other distributions that achieve that goal. People that get on and start pissing and whining about how Slackware has a steeper learning curve as a desktop OS just don't understand the spirit of the distribution.
Because I don't have time to compile my OS from
Is there 64-bit support? (Score:3, Interesting)
What about 64-bit Slackware?
Re:Is there 64-bit support? (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.slamd64.com/ [slamd64.com]
Just give the maintainers a little while to catch up, but SlamD64 does include 32-bit support so you can install most normal 32-bit slackware packages if you need to.
Re:Is there 64-bit support? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
AFAIK Slackware itself is still only 32-bit, but there is a project called BluewWhite 64 (http://www.bluewhite64.com) which is an unofficial port to 64 bit. They should have a 12.2 of their own within a few weeks.
Why the negativity ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Slack? Ubuntu? (Score:4, Insightful)
Seems to be two camps in this discussion... The hardcore slack users who hate on the Ubuntu "noobs", and the Ubuntu users who claim Slack should only be viewed as a piece of nostalgia.
I have used both distributions quite a bit and enjoyed both. I started out with Slackware, and one things for sure, I learned a lot about navigating Linux systems. Eventually, I got sick of manually compiling/installing every package so I made the switch to Ubuntu. I was actually quite impressed with Ubuntu and its ease of use. I would say the best things about Ubuntu would be ease of use and installing packages using Synaptic. However, you don't really learn how the underlying system works. Recently, I've re-installed Slackware to get back to my roots. I think Slackware is much better as a server or as a simple desktop.
I think both distros have their own place. To the Slackware veterans, you can't deny that Ubuntu has made a huge impact on converting Windows users to Linux. Even if they may be noobs and flood forums with noobie questions, converting users to Linux can be only a good thing, right? Also, personally I have found Ubuntu forums to be some of the most helpful and friendly. Pat and Slackware are keeping it real as usual, enough said.
Distro that Just Works. (Score:3, Informative)
People complain about Slackware's usability all the time. What I always see neglected is the fact that Slackware, as a distro, Just Works far more often than any other distro I've played with.
Slackware will install and work on a wide variety of exotic hardware, both modern and obsolete. It can be easily installed on machines that don't boot from CD, or even have a CD drive.
I've never encountered a machine that wouldn't install and boot slackware, with a working command line and network support, just by using the scripts that come on the install discs, and following the instructions.
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Interesting)
The rugged individualists all left Slackware and went to Gentoo. After the fighting got out of hand, those that didn't move off to one of the Gentoo forks went to one of the BSDs.
The rest of us got sick of spending most of our waiting for our system software and applications to compile and moved Debian. Some of us got sick of Debian's lack of polish and went to Ubuntu. Probably a few went back to Slackware.
In the meantime, predictably so, a bunch of n00bs started using Ubuntu mostly because we told them it was a good idea. Now the Ubuntu forums are filled with n00b posts flaming the world because 'Ubuntu sucks' and 'it ate my computer', etc.
Personally, I'm getting sick of the whole mess. Slackware is looking cooler by the minute... ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Funny)
"Ubuntu ate my computer" is a great phrase. I've got to figure out how to work it into daily conversation ;-)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Ubuntu ate my computer" is a great phrase. I've got to figure out how to work it into daily conversation ;-)
Well, I successfully found a way to work "circus midgets ate my balls" into most of my daily conversations - so the Ubuntu line shouldn't be too difficult.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"Ubuntu ate my computer" is a great phrase. I've got to figure out how to work it into daily conversation ;-)
How about "Edubuntu ate my homework." ?
Re:Ha! (Score:4, Insightful)
In the meantime, predictably so, a bunch of n00bs started using Ubuntu mostly because we told them it was a good idea. Now the Ubuntu forums are filled with n00b posts flaming the world because 'Ubuntu sucks' and 'it ate my computer', etc.
Well yes, because the Linux zealots discredit or moderate down any part that states that Ubuntu isn't as user friendly as Mac OS X in any area. So when a person who wants to, or forced (via system crash and lost CD's or key) to get off Windows they read up and see oh Ubuntu is the second coming of Jesus. Install it and shortly after using the basic features (Grandma Level computing) they find they hit a wall where they need some more expert level to do things that in other OS's were either automatic or a right click away.
Re: (Score:2)
Such as? Can you give me a few examples in ubuntu 8.10 that require expert level of skill that an average computer user would want to do and would be able to do on windows or mac?
Re:Ha! (Score:5, Insightful)
One simple example would be : getting the hardware to work. Followed closely by getting the wifi to work.
Ubuntu is getting much more user-friendly with every incarnation, but it still has a rather long way to go before it will reach the ease-of-use of a recent Windows platform IMHO.
Seriously, I like Ubuntu and I have 2 portables running myself + have put it on my mom's computer since she wanted a localized OS. The personal ones are for me playing around with it a bit since I'm curious what's all the fuss about. The other one is in use by my toddler-girl who enjoys to play GCompris on it or watch some DVD-rips of Dora The explorer on it. My moms is being used solely for a bit of mailing (Thunderbird) and browsing (Firefox).
In the old days, those 3 computers (all dell portables btw) ran Windows2000 Professional. Setup was simple : put in Wind2k cd in the tray, startup, go through the setup, download the driver installations from Dell and run those too. At worst you had to fiddle around a bit with tcp settings. After that the system was up and running and I'd lost half a day at most per machine... (format + setup + setting up mail accounts etc takes a bit of time).
Getting Ubuntu running on them has been a hassle for all 3 of them.
* getting video running has been HELL : with only 1 out of 3 I managed to get the nvidia blob to run after reading days and days of forums, trying out every single trick they propose. The two others still run in 'software' mode, which is fine for firefox/thunderbird or GCompris (more or less), but has cost me several days trying anyway.
* wifi wasn't always (properlty) recognized : pcmcia went mostly fine, usb was hell. Finally got it working via ndiswrapper
* each time there is an upGRade something breaks and I'm back in the 'problem-chasing' game =(
As a side-note : people always complain about Windows Update pushing lots of bytes, but boy oh boy, same is true for ubuntu IMHO. Not that I find that a bad thing per-se, but then again, stop complaining about Windows.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was considering flaming you, then I remembered that Ubuntu did the same to me. I'm a fairly hardcore linux user (Software Engineer, posix threads, C and crypto, amatteur and professional Linux sysadmin) and *I* got pissed off with it.
Could not get any of the nVidia blobs playing nicely with my laptop, alsa sound needed rebuilding to detect the headphone jack, a bunch of other stuff. And then on upgrade it would undo all the work I'd done to get it going and I'd have to solve the same problems again.
I solv
Re: (Score:2)
Well one basic feature I am annoyed about is the ability to, oh I don't know, customize a screen saver in Ubuntu (not talking Kubuntu)? The number of posts I had to read up on how to do something like having it display pictures that I chose for the screensaver was laughable. The thing is from what I can tell this is a Gnome "Feature" to hide complexities.
PS - Yes I figured it out, yes I use Ubuntu and love it, but i'm not going to be installing it for friends or family until basic stuff like that is fixed
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My solution. Use ubuntu, ignore the forums. File bug reports and use man pages. WHy bother even reading the noob posts.
Re: (Score:2)
My solution. Use ubuntu, ignore the forums. File bug reports and use man pages.
Now if only Ubuntu would get a decent bug reporting system. They really should pick up Debian's.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is the lesson for all linux distros. When forums are full of "it ate my computer", figure out why. Don't be so quick to get pissy with the user.
I started with slackware in the late 90's and have been using various distros ever since. I use Ubuntu now. I still get pissed when I run updates in Ubuntu and have to spend another 30 mins fixing my vid driver.
All the silliness about binary drivers aside, we're talking about a VERY common video chipset here, and honestly, the vast majority of video cards i
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. Only I never thought of Gentoo as such a good idea, only messed around with LFS.
Re: (Score:2)
Now the Ubuntu forums are filled with n00b posts flaming the world because 'Ubuntu sucks' and 'it ate my computer
I can't understand you people. There are noobs everywhere, and I personally think it's a good thing that some of them start using Linux. And the idea of popularizing Linux to the average user is one of the main questions here in SlashDot.
What I think you really want is to feel smarter than the average user. "Bleh, you're using Ubuntu, it's too easy."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
First Linux I tried was Slackware. I downloaded a slew of 1.44 diskette images, 14 or 15 I think over a 14.4 modem connection on a 386sx25 with 4 meg of ram running win 3.1. My ISP had a usage limit except from midnight to 8 am. It took we over a week to download because I would start a disk downloading at midnight and maybe stay up to start the second disk and go to bed. Once it was all downloaded I used rawwrite to write all the images to disk, put in an extra 20 meg hard drive to avoid trashing my system
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
PenguiNet FTW!
Re: (Score:2)
Me too. Of course at the time, it was hard to learn since I've never been good at sanskrit...
Re:The Only Reason This Distro Exists (Score:5, Funny)
Not everyone from a windows background...just everyone left after all of us smart guys moved on.
pffft! (Score:2)
If my Dad can use Slackware, anybody can. The real fun is when my step-mom can't get XP to recognize her camera so my dad had to DL the pictures and copy them to a USB stick.
Folks who haven't tried Slackware since the mid '90s really have no busness commenting about the distro. It's come just as far as all the rest, but somehow managed to stay true to the idea of being stable and reliable that has been there from day one.
If you want to be a point-and-click drone and only need to do email, then Slack w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm of two minds when it comes to learning linux today.
See, I learned Slackware back in 1996 or 1997. After coming from Windows 3.1. On one hand, things now are a completely different world than they were then. The support available from websites (and tons of other people, because among the techies, it's mainstream) is huge. The software and driver support is SO. MUCH. BETTER.
But on the other hand, I installed from a 2x CD-ROM, which means I sat there and read the name and description of every package that
Re:The Only Reason This Distro Exists (Score:4, Insightful)
And thanks for the Ubuntu Fanboys, we have wikipedia saturated with Ubuntu, on articles where it does not belong etc. And Ubuntu has gone over "Linux" on them. Even the normal user ask "Where I can get Linux" and stupid Ubuntu fans yells back for that "I is just a kernel you idiot!".
In few years you dont have device drivers for Linux, but for Ubuntu. You dont have commercial software available than few commercial distributions and Ubuntu. And all the n00bs keeps talking that "You can have Ubuntu or Linux, those are two different Operating Systems, Ubuntu altought is much better because the browser and office applications are integrated to operating system itself".
So thanks a lot Ubuntu users what you have done to promote the Linux, but no thanks for negative attitude against Linux community, just being so annoing and blind Ubuntu fans...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not convinced that the normalization on a "standard" distro is a bad thing. Choice is freedom for some and confusion for others. I like the fact that Ubuntu provides a standard interface for hardware manufacturers to say "here are the working drivers", and they release a .deb for the hardware. I'd love to get the source code too, but that's not possible all the time, so I'll take binary. And it's possible to create packages for other OSes by using the files contained in the .deb package and recycling th