ver 12, opinions - Slackware

This is a discussion on ver 12, opinions - Slackware ; PTM: I don't like the installation system. - Text based approach is OK - Separated FDISK is OK - The a, x, AP... gategories are NOT OK ! Somebody should make new gategories and sort the packets there. Now everything ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: ver 12, opinions

  1. ver 12, opinions

    PTM: I don't like the installation system.
    - Text based approach is OK
    - Separated FDISK is OK
    - The a, x, AP... gategories are NOT OK !

    Somebody should make new gategories and sort the packets there.
    Now everything is in a big mess.

    Own gategories for base_system, X-system, multimedia, network, office,
    graphics, programming, programs, localisation.
    The non-X and X apps could reside in the same gategory, if the X-files
    were marked with 'X'.

    'programs' could include HAM, Localisation, Modem, CD/DVD burners, Tape
    backup..
    The Libraries part is a nuisance. The installation program should check,
    which are needed and load no more than that.

    Installation script has marked all possible fonts to be downloaded. I
    klicked off some foreign ones trying to comprehend which is important.
    Now X don't start, because the fixed font is missing.
    It should be so, that only one or two important font is selected and the
    specials are behind 'LOCALIZE'. Even a 'REQUIRED' tag would help here.

    The gategories system in Slackware makes it possible to build a tight
    environment, _if only you have enough time to select the packages_.
    The system there is now worked fine, when I installed my very first
    Linux system ver 1.0 years ago. Now the system is a historic relic.

    Please, do not misunderstand me. I'm still going to stay with Slackware
    and I HATE those GUI-installators, which don't give you any possibility
    to select anything.

  2. Re: ver 12, opinions

    PTM wrote:

    > The Libraries part is a nuisance. The installation program should
    > check, which are needed and load no more than that.


    This would be rather difficult don't you think, as they have to all be
    there for those who wish to install everything. It is also an advantage
    to have all the available libraries installed if one should later need
    to install extra software, wouldn't you agree?
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."




  3. Re: ver 12, opinions

    On 2008-02-07, PTM wrote:
    > PTM: I don't like the installation system.
    > - Text based approach is OK
    > - Separated FDISK is OK
    > - The a, x, AP... gategories are NOT OK !
    >
    > Somebody should make new gategories and sort the packets there.
    > Now everything is in a big mess.
    >
    > Own gategories for base_system, X-system, multimedia, network, office,
    > graphics, programming, programs, localisation.
    > The non-X and X apps could reside in the same gategory, if the X-files
    > were marked with 'X'.


    It's all a matter of perception and use. I see no reason for a seperate
    catagory for multimedia, office and graphics. Putting the x and non x in
    the same catagory seems foolish to me.

    >
    > 'programs' could include HAM, Localisation, Modem, CD/DVD burners, Tape
    > backup..


    Again, perception and use...I haven't used tape backup in ages and I can't
    imagine a pressing need for HAM programs to the majority of users

    > The Libraries part is a nuisance. The installation program should check,
    > which are needed and load no more than that.


    As someone pointed out, install them all. It makes life easier down the
    road.

    > Installation script has marked all possible fonts to be downloaded. I
    > klicked off some foreign ones trying to comprehend which is important.
    > Now X don't start, because the fixed font is missing.
    > It should be so, that only one or two important font is selected and the
    > specials are behind 'LOCALIZE'. Even a 'REQUIRED' tag would help here.


    The font files are small, install them all.

    > The gategories system in Slackware makes it possible to build a tight
    > environment, _if only you have enough time to select the packages_.


    How long can it take to select packages...minutes, hours, days

    > Please, do not misunderstand me. I'm still going to stay with Slackware
    > and I HATE those GUI-installators, which don't give you any possibility
    > to select anything.


    You're just venting then...fine.

    ken

  4. Re: ver 12, opinions

    PTM (ptmusta@utu.fi) writes:
    > PTM: I don't like the installation system.
    > - Text based approach is OK
    > - Separated FDISK is OK
    > - The a, x, AP... gategories are NOT OK !
    >
    > Somebody should make new gategories and sort the packets there.
    > Now everything is in a big mess.
    >

    On the other hand, there was legitimacy to the arrangment in the early
    days, and whether or not it's a good thing now, at least it's familiar.
    Mess around and you will have the old timers wondering where things are.

    I don't run the latest hardware, yet I've never had a problem installing
    everything. Well that 486 in 2000 with a 240meg hard drive that made me
    realize that if I was going to switch to Linux I'd better get a real system.
    But that real system had a 2gig hard drive, and I had lots of extra room
    to install Slack 7, which is what I had at hand. When I was given this
    1GHz Pentium a few years later, there was even more space remaining on
    the 20gig hard drive after I installed SLack 8 or 9 (I can't remember which).
    When I splurged on a 160gig hard drive in 2005 there was absolutely no concern
    about space, I even have 3 versions of Slackware installed even if I'm only
    using one, and most of the drive is unused.

    It's far easier to install everything, and given the hardware most people
    are running, anything that could be saved by a partial install will be
    insignificant.

    The rare exception is someone running limited hardware, and even that
    is relative. Anyone wanting a cheap system is surely able to find one
    that is decent enough so they don't need to use that 486 with the 240meg
    hard drive. SOmeone doing a very specific limited install surely has
    gotten to the point where they can handle the details of the limited
    install.

    Michael


  5. Re: ver 12, opinions

    PTM :
    > PTM: I don't like the installation system.
    > - Text based approach is OK
    > - Separated FDISK is OK
    > - The a, x, AP... gategories are NOT OK !
    >
    > Somebody should make new gategories and sort the packets there.
    > Now everything is in a big mess.


    Go for it. The source is freely available.

    > Installation script has marked all possible fonts to be downloaded. I
    > klicked off some foreign ones trying to comprehend which is important.
    > Now X don't start, because the fixed font is missing.


    So are you asking someone else to do this because you can't comprehend
    how it works?

    --
    I'd walk a mile for a Camel, two for a hump.

    www.websterscafe.com

  6. Re: ver 12, opinions


    >> Please, do not misunderstand me. I'm still going to stay with Slackware
    >> and I HATE those GUI-installators, which don't give you any possibility
    >> to select anything.

    >
    > You're just venting then...fine.


    PTM: You understood me well
    Venting or feedback. Sometimes it gives people ideas.
    In my work I'm accustomed to listen customers venting, shouting and
    praying. Part of my work is to separate that kind of feedback and try to
    make small changes to the system.

    It is easy to install all, and normally I had done it. In this case my
    customer has a PC with 4GB and 160GB HDs and can't use this 160 for the
    system. 4GB is a bit tight for the system and her programs, so I had to
    go through the packages. I could have used Zenwalk or Slax, but I
    thought this would be a possibility to check ver 12.

    (And no thank you, I didn't ask for help this time. This ver 12 is new
    to me and takes some time to get accustomed, even if I made mistakes
    with the fonts)

  7. Re: ver 12, opinions

    On 2008-02-07, PTM wrote:
    >
    > The Libraries part is a nuisance. The installation program should check,
    > which are needed and load no more than that.


    If you want a dependency checker, why not use a distro that has
    dependency checking?

    > The categories system in Slackware makes it possible to build a tight
    > environment, _if only you have enough time to select the packages_.


    Of course. So does every distro.

    > The system there is now worked fine, when I installed my very first
    > Linux system ver 1.0 years ago. Now the system is a historic relic.


    I disagree. If I want a system with no X, it's easy to do. Lumping in
    X programs with non-X programs would complicate that immensely.

    I think the categories make a lot of sense, especially in comparison to
    some other distros. RedHat clones have "Development" but lump in huge
    GNOME and KDE IDEs with gcc. Debian has about 2 billion categories.
    Slackware is perfect: development really means what I need to write code
    (or compile someone else's code), and that's it.

    > Please, do not misunderstand me. I'm still going to stay with Slackware
    > and I HATE those GUI-installators, which don't give you any possibility
    > to select anything.


    Of course they do. They're just difficult to navigate.

    This isn't really a GUI vs. non-GUI installer question. As I mentioned,
    RedHat and clones do offer package selection, much at the same
    granularity as the Slackware installer, i.e., you can select a group of
    packages, then pick individual packages within that group. You are
    asking mainly about the organisation of the package groups, but you
    haven't put forth a convincing argument that Slackware's package groups
    are any less effective than some other grouping.

    --keith


    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  8. Re: ver 12, opinions

    On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, PTM wrote:
    [...]
    > In this case my
    > customer has a PC with 4GB and 160GB HDs and can't use this 160 for the
    > system. 4GB is a bit tight for the system and her programs, so I had to go
    > through the packages. I could have used Zenwalk or Slax, but I thought this
    > would be a possibility to check ver 12.
    >


    IIRC, the traditional work around for that situation:

    Using normal installation procedures, partition hdb[2..n] and
    mount hdb[2..n] as /home, /opt, /usr, /tmp, /var, ...
    This helps in implementing a minimal root partition.

    The downsides of that are the hastle of calculating appropriate
    partition sizes and subsequent space waste and/or repartitioning
    hastles if not correct on the first go.

    Alternatively (or in combination), avoid those objections, by
    sharing large partition(s) using mount -o bind options:

    Using normal installation procedue, partition and assign hda1 to
    /boot, hda2 to /, hdb1 to swap, and hdb2 to /mnt/hdb2; installation
    will mount this all up under /mnt/. Then, before continuing, switch
    to the second console, cd /mnt && mkdir hdb2/{home,opt,tmp,var}. Then,
    for a in home opt tmp var ; do mount -o bind $a hdb2/$a /mnt/$a ; done.
    Then switch back to your first console and continue normal install.
    Then BEFORE first reboot :*) fix up /mnt/etc/fstab, appending:
    /mnt/hdb2/home /home bind bind 0 0
    /mnt/hdb2/opt /opt bind bind 0 0
    /mnt/hdb2/tmp /tmp bind bind 0 0
    /mnt/hdb2/var /var bind bind 0 0

    Season to taste and serve hot :*)

    >
    > (And no thank you, I didn't ask for help this time.

    [...]

    Well this is AOLS and you're going to get some "help" anyway,
    like it or not :*)


    --
    William Hunt, Portland Oregon USA

  9. Re: ver 12, opinions

    William Hunt wrote:
    > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, PTM wrote:
    > [...]
    >> In this case my customer has a PC with 4GB and 160GB HDs and can't use
    >> this 160 for the system.
    >>

    > IIRC, the traditional work around for that situation:
    >> (And no thank you, I didn't ask for help this time.

    > [...]
    >
    > Well this is AOLS and you're going to get some "help" anyway,
    > like it or not :*)


    PTM: Thank you !
    I do like 'help'. Particularly so, because somebody else might see this
    too and find a solution for his problem. And you wrote a nice help !

    I was not very clear with this '160' HD. The problem was, that she had
    this '160' loaded with her data from an older PC, and we were building a
    system disk of an old 4G HD. There was no backups of the data and she
    wanted to play it safe by leaving the HD untouched.

    The fine thing in Linux is that if you have an old HD, which has been
    used as /home, you can use it as is. After installation you just
    'adduser' with the old username and continue your work.
    This is also the reason, why I have a habit to build a /home/bin
    directory to my own systems for the programs I have built myself. It is
    easier to make full copy of my work, when everything important can be
    copied to another HD with just one command: 'cp -au /home /backup'.

    (BTW, English is not my native language)

+ Reply to Thread