Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Slackware 14.2 Beta Released, Now Uses PulseAudio

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Rallos Zek View Post
    Slackware has the best package manager of any Linux or *BSD system I have ever used.
    Exactly. With Slackware I never experienced things like "Package A needs library B needs library C which is too new" - you can easily run into dependency hells on other distributions, so I prefer to keep track of my dependencies by myself.

    There are forks of Slackware which use the same principles but with dependency resolution, so it's not a big deal either.

    Also, I like that packages on Slackware are just built with a simple text file with all commands in it. No messing around with debian control files or obscure build systems. You get stuff, build stuff, use stuff. The KISS principle works very well on Slackware.

    The system is very minimal and not bloated. It uses a kernel without any custom patches. No messing around with stuff most people don't really need. Packages are not split into their -dev counterparts. Remember that junk Ubuntu is doing with splitting one package into 8 little ones? Not on Slackware, nobody needs to save 50MB of harddisk space these days. If you install a package, you get the whole deal.
    Last edited by schmatzler; 01-16-2016, 07:47 AM.

    Comment


    • #22
      In the beginning slackware was created as a tool to get the job done. And that is why it is still around after 24 years. It is a tool that just gets the job done. It takes me 20 min to install and be able to develop. In 20 minutes I am able to work on 90 percent of all the open source projects out there. It is a tool created as a tool.
      That said i have been running pulseaudio for several years in slackware this is nothing new to us slacker. There is a major program that requires pulseaudio.
      And with out that in the tool set it may cause issues.
      pulse audio has become stable pretty much after 6.8 or around there. And it finally made it in to the elite distro.
      I would think that an honor from the people that run the Linux kernel and use Slackware bundle builds.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by unixfan2001 View Post

        Whether you like it or find it insulting, the fact of the matter is that this is exactly the task of every good designer.
        To assume that the user doesn't know what they're doing.
        Actually slackware is very well documented and understands this. It expexts you to read the the ReadMe. That is why on some of my projects I put a DoNotReadMe because they always will read it then read the readme. So what you is say correct and slackware backs that up with full documentation on every install. README.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by SystemCrasher View Post
          ...so you have packaging management crap offloaded to human being. IMHO it is a very questionable idea. We all know humans are most unreliable part of any system. Not to mention I prefer to waste machines time on routine tasks like package management. But it seems slackware users are fine with wasting time on routine technical crap. Whatever, but systemd saves me a plenty of time and does it job better than venerable sysv init and bugged scripts never bothering self to check for errors, timeouts, return codes and other "useless crap". Which turns system management into a suboptimal experience, actually.
          Not going to get into the systemd stuff. If it was a tool need by a slacker "learn what a Slacker is" it will be in the tool belt. As a person that uses pbuilder and builds in debian and slackware. there is not one package manager out there that does dependencies. Not one. There is a script that reads your debian info and works with other programs to accomplish one task. The developer and builder sitting down writing it out. As for boot up time why do you reboot so much and my slackware 14.2 beta boots much faster then my ubuntu 15.04 or my debian 7.9 and my Kubuntu 14.04 lts. do not go there about boot times. Everything is a tool to me. And I build in the environment the team leader has set up. when I am on my projects it is Slackware.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Rallos Zek View Post
            Are you really that obtuse? Slackware has the best package manager of any Linux or *BSD system I have ever used. Unlike apt and rpm based systems I don't have to fight the package manager to keep my system the way I like it.
            your hands grow out of your ass if you have to fight real package manager

            Comment


            • #26
              "Is there any reason tu use Slackware nowadays? "

              I work at a global fortune 100 company and we use linux. IT deploys RedHat and it is a huge source of problems at our company. We have also tried Ubuntu, Debian, ArchLinux, Suse (which our customers use), For all the claims of how great all these "newer" distributions are - when put to a hard test of 24/7 heavy service and frequent software installations and upgrades, none of the "package management" tools hold up. At some point the package management tools can't figure out what to do and then its double trouble because of extra layers of package management software in-between the applications and the OS. We still end up having to compile code from source at some point. In addition, the extra layers of package management really just increase troubleshooting time by several magnitudes. The distribution where we don't have these problems is Slackware. The reason for this is simple - Slackware is a full distribution and there are no extra layers of software between the applications and the OS just to make things "easy" for people who prefer not to get technical. The basic difference is that Slackware is, without a doubt, the most stable distribution out on the market today regardless of whether you know that or not. Stability means something in a commercial production business environment.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Drakeo View Post

                Actually slackware is very well documented and understands this. It expexts you to read the the ReadMe. That is why on some of my projects I put a DoNotReadMe because they always will read it then read the readme. So what you is say correct and slackware backs that up with full documentation on every install. README.
                That's not how userfacing design is supposed to work. Shipping with dozens of ReadMes doesn't acknowledge the user's shortcomings, it assumes the user is a geek.
                Good design doesn't require any ReadMe files. It provides an interface that is intuitive enough for even the most inept user to immediately grasp it.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by unixfan2001 View Post
                  Good design doesn't require any ReadMe files. It provides an interface that is intuitive enough for even the most inept user to immediately grasp it.
                  Not everything has to have fancy GUI's to just work. One example is youtube-dl. A simple command line program to download YouTube videos. You enter the command followed by the URL, done.

                  You can also use a package manager to install a GUI that is doing the same thing, but you have to press buttons in this GUI and it will take much longer to do the same task.

                  If you can't understand that not the whole world has one usecase (which is a dumbed down GUI) good luck in the IT world, futurewise. I prefer to be open-minded to different aspects of technology. Also, a good README can spare yourself a lot of time that you otherwise would spend hunting for help on forums or chats.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by schmatzler View Post

                    Not everything has to have fancy GUI's to just work. One example is youtube-dl. A simple command line program to download YouTube videos. You enter the command followed by the URL, done.

                    You can also use a package manager to install a GUI that is doing the same thing, but you have to press buttons in this GUI and it will take much longer to do the same task.

                    If you can't understand that not the whole world has one usecase (which is a dumbed down GUI) good luck in the IT world, futurewise. I prefer to be open-minded to different aspects of technology. Also, a good README can spare yourself a lot of time that you otherwise would spend hunting for help on forums or chats.
                    I didn't talk about GUIs. I talked about user interfaces. You can have non-graphical user interfaces too. The best way to build them isn't pointing users towards a couple of READMEs though. User problems should be solved graciously, without forcing the user to drop out of the experience.

                    And thanks. I think I'll have a plenty bright future in the industry. In fact, I'm less than a year away from my next promotion.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by unixfan2001 View Post
                      That's not how userfacing design is supposed to work.
                      Oh, if you dare to think you're UI/UX expert, I've got rather interesting challenge for you. Dare to design UI for ffmpeg and ALL ITS FEATUERS? Seriously, sometimes you WANT swiss army knife of media processing and various ppl could actually NEED most of these options.

                      In this place I'm getting to think command line interface is a viable option. Furhermore, commandline interface is easy to automate, you can stack various programs and so on. Unix way is all about it. Sure, some things are better in GUI. But some thinsg are better in consoles. These worlds do not exclude each other. Its more fun to get best of both worlds :P.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X