Slackware, Oldest Actively Maintained GNU/Linux Distribution, Turns 25 202
sombragris writes: Slackware, the oldest GNU/Linux distribution which is still actively maintained, turned 25 this week. The latest stable version, Slackware 14.2, was released two years ago, but the development version (-current) is updated on a fast pace. Today the development version offers kernel 4.14.55, gcc 8.1.1, glibc 2.27. mesa 18.1.4, xorg 1.20, and the Xfce and KDE desktop environments as default, with many more available as third-party packages. Other points of note are that Slackware is systemd-free, opting instead for a simple BSD-style init.
Since its first release ever, this has been a distro with a strong following due to its hallmarks of simplicity, speed, ease of maintenance and configuration. Happy birthday Slackware!
Since its first release ever, this has been a distro with a strong following due to its hallmarks of simplicity, speed, ease of maintenance and configuration. Happy birthday Slackware!
Is Slackware usable? (Score:3)
Re: Is Slackware usable? (Score:1)
For your first distribution I would not really recommend Slackware. It's better to use an easy distro first like Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, etc.
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes it is usable. Yes it is worth trying again. Yes it is for people who use Unix.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:5, Insightful)
https://distrowatch.com/dwres.... [distrowatch.com]
It seems to me that if you want to get into using Linux, use Ubuntu or Mint or something. If you want to get into Linux the hard way and really get your hands dirty then Slackware is up to the challenge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:5, Informative)
Slackware was my second distro but the first (RedHat) was only on the box for a couple days before my really geeky friend shamed me into using Slackware. Soooooooooo painful. Soooooooooo hard to use. I was soooooooooo lost. I'm so much better off for it. I've been using Linux since the 90s and haven't ever stopped. I've run Slackware on laptops, desktops and servers for a lot of that time. I'm much lazier now and much more employed, so I use something with a native package management system that handles dependencies and laziness. When my home racks are online though, they're Slackware because it works, has always worked and will always work without any BS.
Patrick and team have done a great job for a long time and they deserve a lot of thanks for their work.
Re: (Score:3)
Slackware was my second distro but the first (RedHat) was only on the box for a couple days before...
LOL, #metoo
My reason for bailing on Red Hat was different: I was on version 1.x of Red hat and the latest 2.x was out so I decided to upgrade. I downloaded all of the files, over a 14.4 modem no less. But, I couldn't upgrade because all of the packages were wrapped with a new RPM format... even the RPM utility itself. No way to use ANY of those packages without doing a fresh install... so instead, I went to Slackware and I am VERY glad that I did. Slackware kept the vision of being Unixy and of the user bei
Re: (Score:1)
Or if you're a masochist, you learn on Gentoo.
Confession: I learned on Gentoo... starting in 2005. I still maintain it was steep, but ... valuable.
Re: (Score:3)
As somebody who started with slackware, learned linux, and then switched to RedHat, I have to call bullshit on this one.
If you already knew UNIX, all there was to "learning linux" for the average user was learning how to compile a kernel; back then it was often necessary in order to get all your hardware working. New USB device? You might need to compile the kernel again. And that was exactly the same on every distro. And then when the kernel's module system was more mature, and they could just ship all the
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's such bullshit. If you want to learn Linux, you use LFS [linuxfromscratch.org]. Anything else is for posers and babies.
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is: LFS mean copy-paste-compile everyday, for hours. You need to repeat that cycle about 1000 times, maybe a few thousand times.
Even if that does teach you something: I suspect there are more effective ways to learn UNIX/Linux.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if your point is LFS isn't meant for a production system, sure, point taken (and to echo an AC sibling, if all you are doing is copy-and-paste, you are missing the point of using LFS, which is not to practice masochism).
But if the primary purpose of choosing a distro is to learn how the operating system works (not just where a particular distro places its configuration files), then Slackware does not occupy the distinguished spot; it's just grouped with all the other distros with package management sy
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. That is such an absolutist way to look at it; although, it makes a great point. The wording should be diffrerent on the original claim. It should say something more like:
Slackware will teach you more about being an admin for a Linux based system than the other distros will.
Ultimately, you are correct that LFS will teach you more about Linux and at a MUCH deeper level. It does not really invalidate the original message though.
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:4, Interesting)
Slackware was my first distribution, but mostly because I didn't have any other options at the time.
To answer your questions.
Is it usable yet? It was always usable. It isn't a Desktop OS, but for a server system it has been really good, because it has such a small foot print.
Is it worth trying again? I tired it out a few years ago, it is about the same. If you didn't like it then, you probably won't like it now.
Or, is it still only for super hardcore Unix people, only? Slackware (Linux) and FreeBSD (Unix) are rather similar. However OS X is Unix, while Android is Linux. That said if your are a Traditional Unix guy, Slackware probably feels most comfortable. But if you are trying for a Desktop system then Probably not.
Re: (Score:3)
I just wanted to say that for software developers, slackware was always a perfectly good desktop OS. It is mainly non-developers who will feel the dependency/configuration pains. Software developers have to manage that shit anyways.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it usable yet?
Come on, dude. Do you really think it would still be here after 25 years if it wasn't usable? It was perfectly usable back when you tried it. The fact that you found it "unusable" tells us more about you than slackware.
Slackware is simple, fast, stable, and has been used on production systems for a long, long time.
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Many Linuxes can run that long if required, so the potential uptime doesn't seem particularly special. I'd be concerned about running that long without significant patching from a security perspective, though. And I'd want to have some pretty good intrusion detection, file alteration monitoring, and process scanning to avoid the chances of compromise going undetected,
The lack of official support would be a complete show stopper in many environments, though, certainly many commercial ones.
Licensing officiall
Re: (Score:2)
It was my first introduction to Linux as well back in '97 or so. It was definitely a learning curve but I was young and eager.... I believe I may have gotten Enlightenment running for a brief time but mostly, I was interested in the server-side stuff so didn't really bother with a GUI.
Once Gentoo came out, I never looked back at Slackware and have long since ignored the milestone releases.
Slackware is a point of nostalgia to me and not much more.
Re: (Score:3)
Why? In Slackware I can do whatever I want, in the way I judge best, without worrying about idiocies like those caused by GNOME, cyclical dependencies in half-assed package managers or now recently bizarre things like systemd.
P.S: When I'm lazy or in a hurry I use Linux Mint
Re: (Score:2)
Slackware was my first distro too; I spent $5 on a lame magazine to get the bundled Slackware 3.0 CD. Everything in the magazine was mainstream stuff about windoze, but they did get a sale with that CD on the front.
(Note: Magazines were a popular form of information distribution before broadband internet; they were like a snapshot of a website, printed out on expensive paper)
It was great! I went open source and never looked back. I've run a few different linux distros over the years, and spent a few years o
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, the good ol' days. Slackware 3.0 was my first introduction to Linux, too, because, well, I didn't know any better. Got it up and running on a low-end Pentium back around '96. Got X11 installed on it and life was good. It didn't do everything I needed, but it did a lot. Even upgraded the kernel from v1.2.13 (I think) to 2.0.20 at some point, along with all the other stuff (gcc, glibc, etc.) needed to make that transition. Then 16 years later the system had basically become unusable for the modern w
Re: (Score:2)
It always was.
Give it a try. It might not be 100% easy to install (only 99% ;-) but it's very low maintenance. And for many people, believe me, this is a godsend.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is Slackware usable? (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux is not for you, as per the (spot on) GP. You don't want to learn things, and that's fine. Just go with Windows or Apple.
Nobody will ever turn Linux into "a perfect replacement for Windows" because that's not the goal, most people already knowledgeable in Linux see no point in dumbing it down for the masses, not only because like everything else in the world, "the masses" ruin it. Also if the goal was to copy Windows, then why not use Windows in the first place.
Oh, because you want it to be free, sure. Well it isn't free, it comes at the price of actually being interested in computers and wanting to learn at least basic concepts. If your time is worth anything, that'll turn out a lot more expensive than paying the MS-tax and buying an Apple device, so there's one more reason to get on with your life and run something you can use without having to understand anything about it.
IOW stop trying to be something that you aren't. The only way Linux is actually long-term usable for computer illiterates with no desire to learn (not judging, it's fine to be) is if someone else admins the box for them (e.g. my parents are "long term Linux users" without a faint clue about Linux, for about 7 years now. But they only manage because I took care to provide them with the means to do what they want to do). If you're completely out of options but have a bunch of money, you might hire someone to do that for you, if you really this badly want to use Linux (for whatever reason that would be)
Re: (Score:3)
I've been using Linux since 1997, on a 386. My first attempt was slackware, my second was redhat, and my 3rd wash mandrake (which finally got my 64k baud modem working :). I moved to Gentoo in the early 2000's and then to Ubuntu just because I was lazy. Still using it in one form or the other. My point is not to brag about all of my years on Linux, it's to mention that I spend less time maintaining and working on my Linux systems then I ever had with MS.
Often when using Windows I'd wake in the morning
Re: (Score:2)
As much as I agree with your summary that the Linux community is perfectly comfortable where they are and don't want to cater to "illiterates", there's a big difference between people who don't NEED to learn all the details of using a computer, and people who don't WANT to learn. That kind of condescending attitude among FOSS communities is the main reason why Windows remains dominant, and various forks of Linux/BSD haven't fared much better than the more widely recognized GNU/Linux/XWindows flavors.
I'm a
Re: (Score:2)
Do you also know how to change engine oil so you can get to work?
Yes, I in fact wanted to learn how to do that (and hence did) in order to not have to pay a garage to do it. This is literally analogous to what I wrote about Linux
Because if not, you don't want to learn things.
If I don't want to learn how to change my oil, I in fact don't want to learn how to change my oil. Way to point out the obvious, Sherlock.
Do you also know how to fillet a chicken? Because if not, you don't want to learn things.
No, I don't. This is why I pay other people to fillet the chicken for me, like you should pay MS or Apple to provide you with a computer-illiterate-friendly means to make your computer do what you use it to
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So what does mom do when she upgrades to the next stable release and finds herself confronted with an upstream change in a configuration file that was also touched locally (perhaps by you, or by the installer) and thus needs admin attention? This is the point where I, and probably you, do a 3-way merge, but what does your mom do? Oh, she doesn't have to because she doesn't keep her system up to date in the first place? Well too bad.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the classic Linux apologist response to excuse its lack of usability.
It's not. I don't even like Linux, despite arguing for it in this thread. For the last 7 years I've run most of my stuff on NetBSD. So don't call me a "Linux apologist", I loudly curse about it every day when having to use it at work.
When Windows doesn't work out of the box it's all whining about Microsoft and how crap Windows is but when Linux doesn't work out of the box it's just a case of blame the stupid user who doesn't want to learn.
If something doesn't work in Windows, I'm on my own and have to resort to guessing or trying random suggestions found on the www. That's at least what I am whining about.
If something doesn't work in Linux, it can be troubleshot in a systematic manner, on any level you need
Re: (Score:2)
Install a Linux of your choice. Install Chrome or Firefox. Install VLC.
Or install Windows, install Chrome, and install VLC.
Or pay someone to do one of the above.
Them's your choices.
Re: (Score:2)
$ cat /etc/slackware-version
Slackware 14.2
$ bin/firefox/firefox --version
Mozilla Firefox 61.0.1
vlc, software voipphone, usb, windows guests under qemu etc. everything works fine thanks you.
I also use 4 displays (monitors or screens) what else would I need?: /etc/X11/xorg.conf
$ cat
Section "ServerLayout"
# Removed Option "Xinerama" "0"
Identifier "Layout0"
Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 26
Screen 1 "Screen1" 1280 13
I like it. (Score:4, Insightful)
I considered moving to slackware during the height of the anti systemd ruckus, but went with Manjaro i3 instead. However, for a focus non-bloated Linux slack should a good choice, even if you have to keep a eye on your dependencies. ... I wouldn't want to install a full KDE setup on it though.
Either way, distros like slack are very much needed in the distro ecosystem IMHO.
Re: (Score:3)
Slackware to me is the Traditional GNU/Linux. It is as close to a Pure Unix without being Unix.
That said in 2018 is the need for the Traditional Unix as important as it was in the mid 1990's to late 1990's
However a non-bloat distribution is good for more embedded systems, or semi-embedded such as appliances, where you have a PC doing a few things and doing it well. Slackware which you can setup on low resources is still useful.
First linux (Score:3)
Installed from about 6 x 3.5" floppies onto a 386SX system with less than a meg of memory. Needless to say, no X and no GUI :-)
Re: (Score:3)
I installed on some ancient POS, probably 386. I remember 16 floppies for Slackware, and 32 for xwindows. Had to manually configure monitor settings (number of scan lines and timings) for the GUI. Good times.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh man, I think the kernel was 0.99pl13, on my 386sx 16mhz. 2 meg of ram and a bunch of swap. Had to use the floating point emulation in the kernel. Took days to compile a kernel. Connected to the net over dial-up with a psuedo SLIP called Term or something. IRC II, via console terminal. Minicom and Kermit, zmodem... Ahh, the good ol' days.
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of what a friend from the local BBS told me in the electronic message he sent requesting hardware installation assistance: "I got MEGABYTES! MEGABYTES! Beer too, please help install"
Yeah. magabytes: 2 of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Well Sonny, back then most of the OS only even saw the first 640K so I don't think having "less than 2MB" was really a problem.
It was also not really that unusual to have main storage that wasn't bootable, requiring to boot off a floppy drive. And that floppy drive was only even capable of 1.4M max; a lot of disks were half that. You wouldn't even be able to use 2M of RAM booting if you wanted too; booting isn't hard to do.
You could boot off a floppy, and have plenty of room to run an apache webserver. You
Slackware age exceeds number of users! (Score:1)
All 24 users gathered online to commiserate
Re: (Score:2)
It is impossible to be sure, because it's old enough it might be lying about its age.
Good old Slackware (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember back in the mid 90's I hosted images.slashdot.org on a Slackware box (Pent 90, IIRC) because Rob Malda's T-1 circuit was getting constrained. I was working for the Seattle ISP Wolfe.net and we had a whopping T-3 with 45Mb/s direct to Sprint.
Slashdot start off on Slackware.
This, of course, was back in the dial-up days. Nothing like trying to find a ring-no-answer in a 400 line hunt-group.
Re: (Score:1)
Slackware was the linux distribution I installed on a PC in the Wolfe.net office back in the day. 24 years ago, seems like a lifetime.
P.S. Wolfe started with a 10M connection to Net99.
P.P.S. It's still faster than my home connection today.
Re: (Score:3)
Doug?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know if you heard but Tiffany died last year.
Oh, those were the days. (Score:2)
Slackware wasn't my first attempt at Linux, that was SLS version 1.0 (kernel 0.95), downloaded from a BBS onto floppies. But Slackware was the second-longest distro I used, way back in the day. Today I use Ubuntu, but only on a low-power web-surfing machine.
Sys V init? (Score:1)
Good to see Slackware is still going, it was the first distro I installed. Nothing wrong with BSD style init, but I always thought Sys V style was better, and only a little more complicated. I've no idea what systemd is, as I stopped playing with computers long ago :)
Re: (Score:3)
Happy Birthday (Score:2)
23 years of Linux (Score:3)
Like many, I cut my teeth on Slackware in 1995. There was just something about it -- even then, Windows sucked, OS/2 was cool but lacked the "tinker" factor and unix was unix. I would have never thought back then that Linux would become what it is today.
Congrats Slackware, you've certainly helped many a generation of sysadmins and tinkerers along the way.
I haven't run Linux in over a decade (Score:2)
...But when I did, it was slackware. I moved onto FreeBSD and then MacOS X after that, and now I'm not sure I really need a desktop computer at all anymore.
Slackware was, counter-intuitively, the easiest Linux distro for me to use. I was already used to Unix systems from university, and slackware only gave you the stuff you asked for, not anything more than that. I always had trouble getting Redhat running, but Slackware did what I told it. I'm glad it's still around, just in case I ever decide I need a do-
Old Fogies (Score:2)
Wow, you want to bring out the three and four digit uids just post a story about Slackware! :-)
I still like it, though I haven't used it in the last couple of years.
Re: (Score:1)
25 years already? I'm definitely getting old.
Let's not forget (Score:2)
Congratulations, Patrick Volkerding. You have made a linux user out of me, and a lot of others. (I recall being surprised that you replied to my question back then when I was attempting to install it on *gasp* a 486DX. Many moons later, and after printing out a bunch of HOWTOs, I am now a command-line penguinista, with a healthy disdain for candy colored icons on an even more horrid desktop. I'm looking at you, Ubuntu.
As was mentioned above, ...if you install Slackware, you'll know Linux.
Development version works great (Score:2)
noneya@noneya:~$ cat
Slackware 14.2+
noneya@noneya:~$ uname -a
Linux noneya.business.com 4.14.55 #1 SMP Wed Jul 11 19:33:43 CDT 2018 x86_64 AMD A6-3620 APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux
And now that you can easily update it with slackpkg its even easy to maintain. I highly recommend
Re: (Score:2)
its development version works fine for production purposes
Well a slackware beta is generally more stable than other projects' LTS branch.
No matter how many other distros I have tried over the years I always end up back at slackware. I find it doesn't get in my way and has far fewer issues with the software I run on it. For what ever reason GIS software builds wonderfully on it without issue yet has all sorts of problems that need tweaks on other systems.
Re: (Score:2)
hehe
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, that's impressive, business.com must be worth a fortune!
Re: (Score:2)
We need distributions like Slackware (Score:2)
Recent releases from the "big boys" have gotten so bogged down with complexity that they're pretty much impossible to safely do updates to. You're often better off creating a partition for a brand new installation---especially if it's a major version update.
I hadn't used Slackware since the days when the `Linux Unleashed' book was on the shelves at the local chain bookstore but after I wasted wa-a-ay more time that it should have taken trying to make Tumbleweed and systemd run a working firewall script--wh
First Linux install on a 486 DX50 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
And now I feel old (Score:2)
Here is a toast for 25 more years! (Score:2)
My first free unix was FreeBSD in 1995, but it was not useful for my purposes, so I tried Slackware in 1996. I even bought "the book" (Slackware unleashed, i do not remember the version), mainly for the CD (In venezuela, BW was and still is scarce).
Sadly, slackware and linux were also not fit for purpose (my thesis), so I moved past of Slackware to the greener pastures of RedHat and Suse. Nonetheless, I also learned HP-UX, Solaris, and Even Sinix, so I think my *nix is quite Ok.
Nonetheless, I still have fon
Congrats Slack (Score:2)
My first experience with Linux was with Slackware in the mid 90s. I was in school, working after hours at a mom and pop dialup ISP in town, their equipment was a turn-key setup and the RADIUS server was a pre-installed Slackware box. One of the RAID controllers on it broke and I was the only one in the office who knew how to navigate at a bash command prompt. 19 year old kid on a conference call with engineers typing in Unix commands. Slackware didn't fail us!
2 things I don't like about Slackware (Score:2)
I mostly like Slackware and have used it for many years. But 2 things eventually drove me away:
Point 2 especially makes Slackware hard to take seriously (all the more in corporate environments
only 25 years old? (Score:1)
So.. (Score:2)
How many floppy disks does it take to install today?
Re: (Score:3)
How many floppy disks does it take to install today?
Well, since a ISO image [slackware.nl] of Slackware-current amounts to 2.8 GB, i'd say that a full install of Slackware-current would take about 2000 1.44 MB 3.5" floppies.
My first exposure to Slackware... (Score:2)
... was in college back in a computer science class' lab. I think it was in 1995/1996 for ANSI C programming.
SLS still works....if you don't mind upgrading it (Score:3, Informative)
Via a lot of compilation it's possible to update SLS 1.05 to the latest tools. I haven't the heart to delete /etc/motd. Big challenges were getting ELF going. getting libc6 going and cross compiling 64 bit from 32-bit. Now it's a 100% 64-bit system: /:softland:~$ cat /etc/motd
Softlanding Software (604) 592-0188, gentle touch downs from DOS bailouts. /:softland:~$ uname -a /:softland:~$ ld -v /:softland:~$ gcc -v ../configure --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --enable-languages=c,c++
Welcome to Linux SLS 1.05. Type "mesh" for a menu driven interface.
Fresh installations should use "syssetup" to link the X servers, etc.
Linux softland 4.16.14 #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Jun 10 02:52:51 EST 2018 x86_64 unknown
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.30
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.3.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with:
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.3.0 (GCC)
Why is this spam tolerated? (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously, why does Slashdot tolerate this spam? Trolls have decided to harass a user, creimer, and continue to post spam comments about him even though he apparently doesn't post here any longer. It contributes nothing of value, isn't really even trolling, and gets posted in multiple threads in story after story. Given that it often references people by name, this content is actually defamatory in nature. Surely Slashdot can do something more to combat this persistent spam. Moderation just isn't preventing it from being posted repeatedly.
Re: Why is this spam tolerated? (Score:2)
Trolls have decided to harass a user, creimer
They're just jilted lovers; see, what few realize is that our man Creimer gets more ass than Rocco Siffredi...
Re: (Score:2)
If you hadn't replied, I'd never have seen it, because it had been modded down. So well done.
Moderation is working fine (Score:2)
Yes stupid posts like this, and others are posted in every discussion, but they are quickly moderated down to -1, hence becoming hidden with default settings, and thus mostly harmless.
Slashdot has long operated on the policy that it only deletes posts in very limiting circumstances, like they a court order or valid take down request. Other than that all moderation happens in the open. Any user can see all the posts by setting their viewing thresholds to -1, allowing them to notice abuse in the moderation sy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
holy shit, you're real?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
lolwut? creimer is the IT equivalent of a port-o-potty pumper.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Linux has support for newer drivers for more hardware. BSD works or doesn't work. Sometimes you are better off with a buggy driver then not being able to use the hardware.
Re: (Score:3)
Cue systemd hating crowd blah blah slackware is the best, no "shitstemd", the unix way, tradition, "stupid package managers and who needs them", "it's like BSD but it's not BSD and I have no clue why I'm not running BSD if I admire it so much", etc....
Savvy?
I wouldn't want some monolithic daemon infecting my system even if it was GOOD, but the systemd virus sucks. It isn't good at a single aspect of what it has sucked in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Alliteracy is gradually gaining greater global gravity.
Re: (Score:2)
You've quite obviously never used the SysV answer to IPC. Don't be a dunce, look this shit up before posting since you don't work with IPC technologies. (d-bus is the modern IPC mechanism)
You don't get to have d-bus be some kind of criminal, it is in fact a required part of a modern *nix system, because IPC is a thing. And no, nobody is even willing to attempt use of semaphores anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Because they don't care about versions. In 1999 Slackware jumped from version 4.0 to version 7.0 for marketing reasons. The other big distros were putting out higher versions and the visuals made it look like Slackware was behind. I don't recall the exact statement but the general message was something like "if we bumped versions like other distros, we'd be at 12 (or something) by now." It was a weird move but there was some sense to it. Linux isn't new. People understand that distro versions and kern
Re: (Score:2)
This, and also because versions are realeased "when it's ready". There's no rush to release a great system. If you want cutting edge, you can run the development version (that, IMHO, it's more stable than most distros' stable releases) and you will get the latest and greatest in almost everything.
Re: (Score:2)
What are you talking about? Latest Ubuntu has gcc 4.8.5 [ubuntu.com]. Last release of Slackware has 5.3 [slackware.com] (-current has 8.1.1)
It often surprises me how much Ubuntu lags in package versions behind Slackware.
Re: (Score:2)
Slackware introduced Pulseaudio recently, and if I'm going to run Linux at all, it'll be Poettering-free. So far they've rejected systemd at least, but I don't think they can hold out much longer on that front, since all the major desktop environments have been co-opted by now.
Running Slackware without pulseaudio is supported. Slackware provides a basic series of packages which are pulseaudio-free and the instructions [slackware.com] to setup a pulseaudio-free system are fairly easy.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Slackware introduced Pulseaudio recently, and if I'm going to run Linux at all, it'll be Poettering-free.
Yes because religion trumps functionality always.
Re: (Score:1)
You're absolutely right, the advocacy of systemd et al. is almost religious in its fervor ("convert or die")
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed]
Slackware is LinuxQuestion's 2016 Desktop Distribution of the Year [linuxquestions.org]
Slackware is LinuxQuestion's 2017 Server Distribution of the Year [linuxquestions.org]
I think this speaks clearly about the distro's popularity.
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not. Slackware is one among many forums within the site. Equating linuxquestions.org with the whole Slackware community is misleading.