top | item 29928343

Slackware Linux 15.0 RC3

95 points| akoster | 4 years ago |slackware.com

43 comments

order
[+] anshul|4 years ago|reply
Thank you Patrick Volkerding. Slackware was my first real distro. Almost exactly 20 years ago, I was a kid who spent a week downloading a slackware iso. I sat and read through everything in the slackware installation and that taught me so much! Your philosophy of simplicity and purity in software and systems design has left a deep imprint on me. Thank you so much.
[+] daitangio|4 years ago|reply
Me too :) I was one of the young student in 1995 downloading Linux in plenty of 1.44M floppy disks (7 for GCC, I remember). Nice to Know Slackware is still here with us in 2022!
[+] Koshkin|4 years ago|reply
> Patched to fix crash without systemd.

This is only a beginning, I’m afraid… The last bastion of the glorious BSDness in the Linux world, I applaud you! And I wish good luck.

[+] Teknoman117|4 years ago|reply
There's also Gentoo (my distro of choice) and Alpine which use OpenRC rather than systemd.
[+] mrlonglong|4 years ago|reply
It doesn't use systemd.
[+] trevithick|4 years ago|reply
Congrats Patrick and Slackware.

I started with Slackware 9.0, which I think was the last release to fit on a single CD-ROM. Like others I learned a lot about Linux, I wrote lots of simple shell scripts and did a lot of ./configure; make; make install.

Slackware lets you do things your way.

[+] lordgroff|4 years ago|reply
My first Linux distribution, circa 97 I believe? Oh the fun of setting monitor with the warning that if I screw the timings I might fry it...

I quickly decamped off to Debian as soon as apt came into the picture because "install everything or do your own dependencies" was not palatable, but I'm amazed there's still this very independent distribution out there. I never expected it to last so long.

[+] mrlonglong|4 years ago|reply
Excellent, that's another distribution that doesn't use systemd.
[+] tarkin2|4 years ago|reply
Rather than being systemd hate, the diversity is good for the ecosystem.
[+] glandium|4 years ago|reply
Slackware was my first distro too. Painstakingly downloaded 40 disk images onto floppies at university, brought them to a friend's house to test on his PC, and it turned out the very last disk ended up corrupted. It was the last of the X11 set, so that first install couldn't run X11. Fortunately, there was Doom on svgalib.
[+] vmlinuz|4 years ago|reply
While technically my first Linux was a generic boot/root floppy pair in late 1995, my first distro was Slackware in 1996. I've used Red Hat, SuSE, OSX, Solaris, Unixware and (rarely) Windows since then - but last night I updated my home PC to Slack 15RC3...
[+] d1str0|4 years ago|reply
Gosh, its been ages since I’ve used Slackware. I remember doing a distro shootout back in high school and coming across Slax Kill Bill edition thinking it was the weirdest choice of Live CD.

(Slax is now based on debian I think, used to be based on Slackware)

[+] swamp_cypress|4 years ago|reply
From the Slackbook (http://www.slackbook.org/html/book.html#PACKAGE-MANAGEMENT): "The truth about pkgtool is not that it doesn't exist, but that it doesn't do any dependency checking."

So, how onerous is package management in Slackware if there is no dependency checking?

[+] melissalobos|4 years ago|reply
> So, how onerous is package management in Slackware if there is no dependency checking?

I can't say that I have used Slackware ever, so I don't know. But I have used a Linux distro where every package was statically linked by default. In that case they didn't use any dependency management since every package was just a tarball of some fully statically linked executables or libraries. The only real dependency was the Linux kernel.

[+] kdtsh|4 years ago|reply
Patrick has already done this for us :-) The standard practice for Slackware is to install the entire distribution - roughly 12GB. If you don’t do this then your mileage may vary, and you may find yourself wasting time doing your own dependency management. For additional packages from SlackBuilds.org, there are various third-party package manager, some of which can handle dependency resolution in the usual way (e.g. sbotools, slapt-get).

It is very, very rarely onerous, since 98% of the time you already have the libraries/other dependencies installed. The other 2% of the time you might be stuffing around with community-built SlackBuild scripts or writing your own, but I have never had any major dependency-related issues before myself.

(I have been daily driving Slackware64-current on my personal laptop for a year or so.)

[+] ajosh|4 years ago|reply
Back when I ran slackware, it was pretty easy. You installed packages from the disk sets and the packages had the files they needed. It kept track of which packages wrote out which file in some text file so on removing a package it would know if removing the file was safe.

If I found software that didn't have a package, I would compile it. When I got more advanced, I'd create slack packages for the software. Since I'd compiled it on my system, dependencies were already met. I don't remember for sure, but I believe that the tools to build autoconf software were something in the core package set.

[+] Koshkin|4 years ago|reply
Slackware’s built-in set of packages is pretty small by today’s standards, and the preferred way to install Slackware has always been to include everything that comes on the distribution media. That alone would go a long way in making sure that you will not get unresolved dependencies when you try to install a third-party package.

On the other hand, I found that, often, not having to install all the dependencies, and not having the installation of a package fail because of some missing little optional dependency, is a blessing in disguise.

A couple of things that make installing software and keeping it up to date a breeze are slackpkg (built-in) and sbopkg (third-party).

[+] Celebros|4 years ago|reply
Fond memories of being in high school and wiping the family computer trying to install Slackware. Fall ‘96 so probably 3.1 or something.

Very cool it’s still around.

[+] throw7|4 years ago|reply
Slackware was the first linux distro I tried back when you would write it to 3.5" disks for installing. I remember it fondly, but soon after is when I then tried red hat and rpm; I was pretty much sold at that point. Slackware has the better name though. ;)
[+] tarkin2|4 years ago|reply
Slackware was the first linux distribution I used, and it taught me everything I know about Linux; and, thanks to how low-level it is, I'd say it's taught me a lot. I think it was the last linux system I enjoyed using, too, the last system I felt like I had control over.
[+] bdcravens|4 years ago|reply
I remember the stack of disks, each with different categories of apps. (around 1998 or 1999) Good times. Though I did later pick up a RedHat set at First Friday in Dallas later, and using the CD drive was a nice change :-)
[+] hulitu|4 years ago|reply
RPMs is what drove me avay from RedHat. Got tired of circular dependencies. Never looked back.
[+] m0ngr31|4 years ago|reply
I used to use Slackware back in maybe 2003-2005. It was great. Eventually migrated to Ubuntu but I always appreciated that it got me hooked on Linux.

Now that I think about it I think Unraid uses Slackware, so I guess I'm still running it.

[+] sshine|4 years ago|reply
Red Hat was my first Linux (1997), and I had it for three years.

But Slackware was the first Linux I installed myself (2001).

And it was my entrypoint into using the command-line for everything.

This was back when I knew what was inside my Linux installation.

[+] pjmlp|4 years ago|reply
After Xenix and DG/UX, only available at the campus, getting Slackware 2.0 as cover CD on the Linux Unleashed first edition was the workaround of having a UNIX at home given that NT POSIX wasn't going to cut it.

I had to copy the files into the disk and do an installation from hard disk to hard disk via boot floppy as my SATA-IDE CD-ROM wasn't reckognised by it at the time.

Nice to see it still going on.

[+] Fnoord|4 years ago|reply
SATA-IDE CD-ROM? SATA is from 2000 and onward, and Slackware 2.0 is from 1993. I had a Plextor SCSI CD writer (bought in ~1998), it worked very well on Linux.

Slackware was the distribution I used for quite some time, and which got me into the BSDs, as well as into Debian (I grew fond of the package management, but the release cycle was still slow).

Systemd isn't my cup of tea, but I have a feeling that people who never grew accustomed to its predecessors like it more. Baggage I guess.

[+] jaxn|4 years ago|reply
Slackware was my first too. I think it was version 3.5 with a bunch of floppies.

Now that so much of my work is in containers, it might be time to go back to slack for the main OS.