203
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by superkret@feddit.org to c/linux@lemmy.ml

Blog post alert

Let me start off by saying: If you just want to have a working system to do your thing with minimal effort, Slackware isn't for you (anymore).

Running Slackware today is like being gifted a Ford Model T by a weird, bearded museum curator, and then finding out that after some minor modifications and learning how to drive it, you can keep up with any modern car on the road. Only it has no ABS, AC, power steering, starter motor, crumple zones, airbags or seatbelts.

Most people who still run it (by any realistic estimate, fewer than 10000 people in the world now) have been running it since the 90's and follow the advice not to change a running system to the letter. So why should anyone who hasn't studied CompSci in Berkeley in the 90's try it today?

First of all, the most widely known criticism (it has no dependency resolution) is a bit of a misunderstanding. Slackware is different. The recommended installation method is a full installation, which means you install everything in the repository up front. That way, all dependencies are already resolved. And you have a system you can use equally well on a desktop or server. It uses 20GB but disk space is essentially free now.

What if you need something that isn't in the repo? Well, do whatever the fuck you want. Use Slackbuilds, which aren't officially supported but endorsed by Slackware's dev. Use Sbopkg, a helper script with dependency resolution very much like Arch's AUR helpers. Use the repos of sister distros like SalixOS that include dependency resolution. Install RPM packages. Install Flatpaks. Unpack tarballs wherever you want them. Go the old school way of compiling from source and administering your own system yourself. Slackware doesn't get in the way of whatever you want to do, cause there's nothing there to get in the way.

It's the most KISS distro that exists. It's the most stable one, too. Any distro-specific knowledge you acquire will stay valid for decades cause the distro hardly ever changes. It's also the closest to "Vanilla Linux" you can get. Cause there really isn't anything there except for patched, stable upstream software and a couple of bash scripts.

Just be mindful of the fact that Slackware is different (because the Linux ecosystem as a whole has moved on from its roots).
One example:
Up-to-date Slackware documentation isn't on Google, it's in text files written by the guy who maintained the distro for 31 years, which come preinstalled with your system. Or on linuxquestions.org, where the same guy posts, asks for input from users, and answers questions regularly.

It's still a competent system, if you have the time and inclination to make it work. And it's a blast from the past, where computing was about collaborating with like-minded freaks on a personal level. And I love that.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Charadon@lemmy.sdf.org 47 points 3 months ago

Regular Slackware user here.

The biggest reason I use Slackware personally is that it's the only distro I'd consider a "full system" out of the box. What that means, is that I install it, and I don't really install much outside of the repos.

For example, the kde set comes with pretty much every KDE app. I do mean all of them. With other distros, I either have to go hunting for what packages are named what in the repos and spend hours getting everything setup and installed. While on Slackware, I pick the partitions, install, and I have a full desktop with everything I could possibly need.

Some would say "Oh, but that would take a lot of disk space.", and funny thing about that, is with BTRFS compressio enabled. A full install of Slackware is only 4gb =P

[-] steeznson@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

Nice to hear from a current slackware user. Quite often these threads are populated by arch and gentoo users speculating or reminiscing about a time they used it once for a month while they were still in school.

[-] Charadon@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 3 months ago

You'll also be probably shocked to hear that i'm a Slackware user in their 20's =P

Been using Slackware going on 3 years now.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Feyd@programming.dev 9 points 3 months ago
[-] Charadon@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

KDE was an example, but a lot of other things come out of the box with Slackware. And of course, that package isn't a thing that comes out of the box.

[-] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 months ago

Damn, squeezing all of that down to 4gb is impressive!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] krimson@lemmy.world 33 points 3 months ago

Nostalgia. Slackware was my very first Linux distro!

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago

Mine too! I had no idea what to do, how to do it, when where, etc... took me a good 2 days to tank my first little server :)

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 8 points 3 months ago

I think I blew up my first Slack install in about 12 minutes while trying to get a video camera to work as a webcam. It took me 3 god damned days and more than a few re-installs but I did get it going...and then spent 30 minutes web chatting with a guy from Serbia. The video was the size of a postage stamp.

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 24 points 3 months ago

I run slack with no gui as my webserver.

...been running it since 2001, guilty as charged lmao

[-] limelight79@lemm.ee 22 points 3 months ago

"If you want to know how Linux works, ask a Slackware user."

I've mentioned this a lot lately, but I used Slackware from the late 90s (3.x days) until about 2009 on my desktop and laptop, and about 2017 on my server. I just got tired of dealing with dependencies and switched to Debian (all three run Debian now). I had the CD subscription and would automatically receive the latest version about twice a year.

Patrick Volkerding (if my memory is accurate) has my utmost respect, and I do feel a little bad about abandoning it, but I just didn't have the time to deal with it any more.

[-] Damage@feddit.it 29 points 3 months ago

“If you want to know how Linux works, ask a Slackware user.”

apparently Linux works like this:

./configure
missing x
download x.tar.gzip
tar -xf x.tar.gzip
cd x
./configure
missing y
download y

... something something...

make 
make install
[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Well, yes. That is how it works!

As someone who started with slack in '97 these modern distros function so "automagically" that I sometimes distrust them. They've hidden so much of the complexity of Linux and whatever Desktop Environment is running on it that most users have very little idea what's actually happening or how it works.

That's been GREAT for getting more people to use Linux but it's creating the same problem that Microsoft did with Windows. The old DOS users often knew quite a lot about their PC and how it worked because they had to but as the technical barriers went down so too did the knowledge of the users. You no longer had to juggle IRQs, Memory Maps, or DLLs because Windows just did it for you.

That's not a bash (lol) on Linux or users of modern distros either, I myself am on Linux Mint as I type this, because it was always going to work out like this. A lot of very smart people put a lot of their time into MAKING it work out like this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago

Wow, that brings back memories. Slackware 3.x was my into to Linux in the '90s.

[-] limelight79@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago

Pretty much. Oh but the updated dependency required for your new program breaks an old program you've been relying on for years!

[-] databender@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago

If you hate bloat you like Slackware. It doesn't assume anything about how you want to use your computer, so it's more painful for a lot of folks. Other distros will try to do things for you and will ultimately end up doing something someone doesn't want. With Slackware you learn a lot and you get a rock-solid system that will do whatever you like, but you have to be willing to manage it.

[-] matcha_addict@lemy.lol 12 points 3 months ago

But I thought slackware installs the entire repo by default. Is that not very much bloat?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] downhomechunk@midwest.social 16 points 3 months ago

I've used slackware more or less exclusively since the late 90s. It's been my daily driver since I deleted my windows XP partition some time in the early 00s. It's really all I know. Sure, I can find may way around a .deb based system when I have to. I'm also likely to apt install something, say yes to 50 dependencies, brick my system and have no idea what did it.

I love to tinker, and I love to learn. There's no shortage of either in Slackware, and that's why it's not for everyone. And I don't mean that in an "i use arch btw" way. I'm an intermediate user at best. I ask for help way more than I provide help. Lucky for me I've made some good friends in the Slackware community over the years.

[-] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Praise "Bob!" For we have Slack...ware! I actually haven't tried it yet because I'm a new user running fedora and Slackware still seems above my paygrade, but as an avowed SubGenius and linux user, it is my destiny to try. I have an old laptop to try it whenever it will bring me Slack, I'm saving this thread for information purposes, thank you. PRA'BOB

(For the uninitiated, the creator of Slackware is also a SubGenius and thus he created it in the name of "Bob.")

1000003261

[-] nyan@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 months ago

Not all distros need to appeal to the mainstream. Diversity is a good thing in and of itself. In biology, it makes ecologies more robust, and there's no reason it shouldn't do the same for a software ecology.

The day when there's no longer a place in Linux for Slackware, Gentoo, LFS, Alpine, and other independent non-mainstream distros is the day I move to BSD.

[-] Flamekebab@piefed.social 14 points 3 months ago

I did once try to get started with Slackware when I was a teenager. It was on a cover CD for Linux Format about twenty years ago. I never managed to get it running and gave up on Linux for a while as a result.

I'm a little perplexed as to what it exists for, to be honest.

[-] superkret@feddit.org 26 points 3 months ago

It doesn't exist for anything really. It still exists because some people still find it worthwhile to maintain it, and some people still find it worthwhile to run it.

[-] walthervonstolzing@lemmy.ml 17 points 3 months ago

I believe the original SUSE Linux started as a bunch of helper scripts for installing Slackware.

[-] superkret@feddit.org 21 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It actually started as the German translation of Slackware. Slackware started as a bunch of helper scripts for installing Softlanding Linux, the first real Linux distro.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 months ago

I've run Linux as my primary OS since the 90s and I've never understood slackware. It's the OG "I run it so I can brag about it" distro.

[-] superkret@feddit.org 8 points 3 months ago

I think it's a way to get to know and learn Linux from the ground up while you install it, configure it to your taste, and fix all the little issues that pop up, a bit like Linux From Scratch. But when you're done, you have a working system you know well and that won't ever surprise you.

[-] pimeys@lemmy.nauk.io 9 points 3 months ago

Working system until you need to upgrade something. I feel like the BSD systems are really what you want if a system like Slackware is what interests you. They have a tightly integrated core system with the kernel, and a ports tree to compile software from source with automatic dependency compilation. A lot of ports can be found as pre-compiled binaries.

All this with simple old school unix tools such as tar, cvs and make. All config is text files, everything meticulously documented in man pages. Very easy to upgrade.

[-] superkret@feddit.org 6 points 3 months ago

I'd actually love BSD and have tried it out in the past. But my only computing device is a convertible laptop, and BSD didn't support energy management, battery monitoring, decent WiFi speeds, the touch screen or the tablet pen on it. And the fingerprint reader threw errors that kept filling up the screen, even on top of the installer TUI, until I disabled it in BIOS.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Damage@feddit.it 6 points 3 months ago

I remember liking how it didn't mess with the packaged software (no patches, so everything was as the author intended), same as Arch, and how clean it was... for a few hours.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 months ago

Its KISS to the point of being too simple

[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 12 points 3 months ago

"This is actually the same as the menu option"

Umm so why are there two options?

[-] superkret@feddit.org 8 points 3 months ago

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[-] Charadon@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 3 months ago

Legacy Support for old Automation Scripts (Script expecting to press e rather than m)

[-] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 11 points 3 months ago

So you're saying it's essentially BSD but wastes more of my time. Got it.

[-] tnarg42@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

I mean, I think it started as a BSD fork with a Linux kernel jammed in so... you're not far off.

[-] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 months ago

That’s good Slackware, don’t you waste that Slackware.

When they dropped reiser the lug broke up mostly along Debian or gentoo lines. It was hard to switch to Debian. You just can’t freely disconnect and connect things like in Slackware. You can’t just rpm2tgz some package and see if it works.

You can’t top the level of troubleshooting knowledge gained from using that distro.

About the only thing a Slackware user can’t tell you is how the system got installed. He just hit enter a bunch of times.

[-] matcha_addict@lemy.lol 11 points 3 months ago

Is my summary here correct?

  • slackware installs all software in its repos by default.
  • there's no package management or dependency resolution. If you want to delete something, or install something, you do that on your own
[-] superkret@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago

No. It has a package manager that installs, removes and upgrades packages.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RattlerSix@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

I used nothing but Slack for about 15 years. Other distros gave me.problems, hell, I compiled Gentoo from source but was never even successful at installing some of the newbie distros like Ubuntu, but Slack was always simple and rock solid. I wasn't the best at resolving dependencies, I'd just build and install anything it said I needed. I think I've had more than one version of Python or Perl installed at a time, but it never mattered. Every few years I'd wipe everything and reinstall.

[-] digdilem@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 months ago

Nice write up, and there's lots of choice so although Slackware was the first distro I ever ran, back in the 90s, it probably still has a place.

I'm interested in your take on security, without updates. Do you consider Slackware is secure?

[-] superkret@feddit.org 15 points 3 months ago

Slackware gets security updates backported to its package versions, like Debian. If you run Slackware Current, it's actually just as active as Arch or Debian Sid. But for the software you install from outside of the repo, keeping it updated and secure is on you. I just use Flatpaks cause I'm a lazy Slacker.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] callcc@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

I've been using various GNU/Linux distro over the course of the last 20 years. When I started out, packages could never be too fresh and cutting edge. Nowadays I'm an admin and I administer way too many VMs. I dream of a system that I never need to update. While I know that's almost impossible if you want to be secure now might finally be the time I give slackware a try. I'm also old enough to be more curious about learning less but more in depth.

[-] yetAnotherUser@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 months ago

I don't think you answered the question on the title. Why should most people not use Slackware?

[-] DichotoDeezNutz@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

UnRAID uses Slackware under the hood, I've had lots of trouble trying to use the shell and install packages and init scripts. I wish it was Debian based instead so my knowledge would transfer.

[-] SeikoAlpinist@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 months ago

Every Linux user should try Slackware at some point.

[-] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 10 points 3 months ago

I did Linux From Scratch once. I got it to the point it was booting a kennel that supported everything I needed, had a working init (sysv), a helper script that "installed" packages (symlinked stuff to integrate them into the system) and kept "recipes" for whatever I compiled.

If I had kept going and compiled everything I needed and kept maintaining that I'm guessing it would have been pretty close to the Slackware experience, right?

It was very cool to know I can do all that and I learned a lot but if I had kept going I feel like it would have become limiting rather than empowering.

Like, it's cool to go camping and catch your food, and cook it, and sleep outdoors and to know you can survive in the wild, but I wouldn't want to have to do that every day.

[-] Mwa@thelemmy.club 4 points 3 months ago

Ngl i would try running the popular distros or a distro based on the popular distro

[-] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

Yeah no, I've used Slackware back in the day... there is no getting back the whole weekends lost chasing dependencies and build dep reqs.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
203 points (95.5% liked)

Linux

48214 readers
1261 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS