slackware dying? yeah . . . right... - Slackware

This is a discussion on slackware dying? yeah . . . right... - Slackware ; Hi there, Distrowatch today has NetSecL, Ultima Linux, easys and Absolute Linux slackware derivative new releases on the front page today. Grant. -- For linux system scripts, linux-kernel configs and dmesg, ipv4 geoip and firewall tools: http://bugsplatter.id.au/ Google Groups is ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

  1. slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    Hi there,

    Distrowatch today has NetSecL, Ultima Linux, easys and Absolute Linux
    slackware derivative new releases on the front page today.

    Grant.
    --
    For linux system scripts, linux-kernel configs and dmesg, ipv4 geoip
    and firewall tools: http://bugsplatter.id.au/

    Google Groups is evil? See: http://improve-usenet.org/

  2. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On 2008-10-01, Grant wrote:

    > Distrowatch today has NetSecL, Ultima Linux, easys and Absolute Linux
    > slackware derivative new releases on the front page today.


    And a permanent spot here:

    http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major

    although with slightly muted praise :-)

    Andrew

    --
    echo 'http://www.andrews-corner.org' | \
    sed -e 's/^.\{10\}/usenet/' -e 's/...$/com/' \
    -e 's/s-.\{6\}/@gmail/'

  3. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On 2008-10-01, Grant wrote:

    > Distrowatch today has NetSecL, Ultima Linux, easys and Absolute Linux
    > slackware derivative new releases on the front page today.


    Yeah, it's painful to see. Slackware naysayers are too stupid to
    even understand KISS. Talk about lowering the bar.

    nb

  4. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    notbob wrote:
    >



    > Slackware naysayers are too stupid to even understand KISS. Talk
    > about lowering the bar.




    BL.
    - --
    Brad Littlejohn | Email: tyketto@sbcglobal.net
    Unix Systems Administrator, | tyketto@ozemail.com.au
    Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
    PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFI5GhyyBkZmuMZ8L8RApamAKDuEI70BmE2bjjDJfv7rH 4mGTqcZQCbBePQ
    y02Fml8NGWpU3qdcduNWASk=
    =W8M3
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  5. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:

    > notbob wrote:


    Who is an asshole in my killfile.

    (under more names than that one, probably)

    >
    >> Slackware naysayers are too stupid to even understand KISS. Talk
    >> about lowering the bar.

    >
    >


    And there you see why: To call all of Slackware's critics
    'stupid', when many of them are clearly more intelligent,
    educated, and computer-literate than you and most of your
    Slackware buddies, is something that only a punk would do.

    If that's the kind of juvenile, offensive, and ignorant garbage
    you think should be 'immortalized' as a "mondquote", then you are
    simply making Slackware users look like a bunch of punks.

    Sid


  6. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:19:52 +0000, notbob wrote:

    > On 2008-10-01, Grant wrote:
    >
    >> Distrowatch today has NetSecL, Ultima Linux, easys and Absolute Linux
    >> slackware derivative new releases on the front page today.

    >
    > Yeah, it's painful to see. Slackware naysayers are too stupid to even
    > understand KISS. Talk about lowering the bar.


    Why is it painful? There are people out there who are using Slackware as
    the platform to create new tools and distros. That doesn't make them
    naysayers. NetSecL is a distro with a whole bunch of security and
    forensics tools added, Ultima is a bleeding-edge distro with a different
    package management system, Absolute is a lightweight desktop system that
    is a little more newbie friendly.

    Grant's point is that Slackware deserves extra kudos for making it easy
    for other people to build on it.

  7. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:45:41 -0700, Sidney Lambe wrote:

    > If that's the kind of juvenile, offensive, and ignorant garbage you
    > think should be 'immortalized' as a "mondquote", then you are simply
    > making Slackware users look like a bunch of punks.


    One might even refer to them, (Slackwe users), as 'Bozo's, oh I just
    remembered someone already did!

    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."

  8. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:45:41 -0700, Sidney Lambe wrote:



    I think I'll turn the noise down a bit...

    *plonk*

  9. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On 2008-10-02, Mark Madsen wrote:

    > Why is it painful? There are people out there who are using Slackware as
    > the platform to create new tools and distros.


    Mark, I think you may have misinterpreted my meaning. Maybe I misstated it.
    I think Slack spin-offs rock and wish all success to them and hope others
    follow.

    nb

  10. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    Responding to Mark Madsen:

    > On Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:19:52 +0000, notbob wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-10-01, Grant wrote:
    >>
    >>> Distrowatch today has NetSecL, Ultima Linux, easys and Absolute Linux
    >>> slackware derivative new releases on the front page today.

    >>
    >> Yeah, it's painful to see. Slackware naysayers are too stupid to even
    >> understand KISS. Talk about lowering the bar.

    >
    > Why is it painful? There are people out there who are using Slackware
    > as the platform to create new tools and distros. That doesn't make them
    > naysayers. NetSecL is a distro with a whole bunch of security and
    > forensics tools added, Ultima is a bleeding-edge distro with a different
    > package management system, Absolute is a lightweight desktop system that
    > is a little more newbie friendly.
    >
    > Grant's point is that Slackware deserves extra kudos for making it easy
    > for other people to build on it.



    Seconded. How many other distros have so many derivatives?

    Somebody somewhere is doing something right if its that easy to re-build
    the whole thing into so many different shapes.

    Evolution theory (observed)...

    Linux -> Slackware -> derivative distros -> other stuff.

    Thats my theory and I'm sticking to it.

    --
    *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
    *===( http://www.badphorm.co.uk/
    *===( http://www.zenwalk.org/

  11. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On 2008-10-02, Mike wrote:
    >
    > Evolution theory (observed)...
    >
    > Linux -> Slackware -> derivative distros -> other stuff.
    >
    > Thats my theory and I'm sticking to it.



    Well, evolution usually has more branches. So maybe


    -> rpm or deb based
    /
    linux->Slackware--> BSD startup style --> pkgtool-based
    \
    -> SysV startup style --> rpm-based
    | \
    | -> deb-based
    \
    -> source-based (eg Gentoo)

    I don't even know if true RPM or deb distros with a BSD startup style
    exist, but given the sheer number of existing distros I assume they
    must.

    I think the interesting thing about the above tree is that it basically
    shows practically every major difference between adminning a distribution.
    Obviously this is a simplification, but the basic information admins
    need to know is "how do I install stuff?" and "how do I start up stuff?"
    (The other major component missing from my tree is "how do I configure
    stuff?", but I've found that often, though not always, goes with the
    package manager. And I ran out of patience to add these branches.)

    --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


  12. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:45:41 -0700, Sidney Lambe wrote:

    > If that's the kind of juvenile, offensive, and ignorant garbage
    > you think should be 'immortalized' as a "mondquote", then you are
    > simply making Slackware users look like a bunch of punks.


    **** off, Alan Connor. Or is it Tom Newton? Calling yourself "Sidney
    Lambe" doesn't change who you are, asswipe.

    Aren't you supposed to be in an institution? Take your medicine.


    --
    "Sidney Lambe" ("Tom Newton") - the latest nymshift of "Alan Connor".
    Read more about the netkook Alan Connor here:
    http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/fga.shtml
    Email him: calhobbit@gmail.com or simpleman.s43@gmail.com

  13. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    In article <48e4c2c6$0$2927$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>,
    Two Ravens wrote:

    > One might even refer to them, (Slackwe users), as 'Bozo's,



    Or a pack of wild dogs! (With Dan C. as the alpha dog!)

    Al

  14. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    ANC wrote:

    > Or a pack of wild dogs! (With Dan C. as the alpha dog!)


    Indeed one could, such an action might even have the same effect
    that labeling some, subscribed to this newsgroup, as 'Bozo's'
    did.
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."

  15. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    Responding to Keith Keller:

    > On 2008-10-02, Mike wrote:
    >>
    >> Evolution theory (observed)...
    >>
    >> Linux -> Slackware -> derivative distros -> other stuff.
    >>
    >> Thats my theory and I'm sticking to it.

    >
    >
    > Well, evolution usually has more branches. So maybe
    >
    >
    > -> rpm or deb based
    > /
    > linux->Slackware--> BSD startup style --> pkgtool-based
    > \
    > -> SysV startup style --> rpm-based
    > | \
    > | -> deb-based
    > \
    > -> source-based (eg Gentoo)
    >
    > I don't even know if true RPM or deb distros with a BSD startup style
    > exist, but given the sheer number of existing distros I assume they
    > must.
    >
    > I think the interesting thing about the above tree is that it basically
    > shows practically every major difference between adminning a
    > distribution. Obviously this is a simplification, but the basic
    > information admins need to know is "how do I install stuff?" and "how do
    > I start up stuff?" (The other major component missing from my tree is
    > "how do I configure stuff?", but I've found that often, though not
    > always, goes with the package manager. And I ran out of patience to add
    > these branches.)
    >
    > --keith



    Interesting, but notice how Slackware is the single thread that goes
    right through and past the other variations, and remains, while others
    end up in evolutionary cul-de-sacs. In another millenia there will only
    be Slackware's children.

    Follow the way, the light, the code.

    --
    *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
    *===( http://www.badphorm.co.uk/
    *===( http://www.zenwalk.org/

  16. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    Mike wrote:

    > Interesting, but notice how Slackware is the single thread that goes
    > right through and past the other variations, ...


    The diagram was simplified for editorial impact. If you want to see
    what the evolution of Linux distributions really looks like, see
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi.../8/8c/Gldt.svg

    > end up in evolutionary cul-de-sacs. In another millenia there will
    > only be Slackware's children.


    I don't expect that to be true at all ...

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

    Network and Systems analyst Concordia University
    Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  17. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    Responding to Sylvain Robitaille:

    >> In another millenia there will only be Slackware's children.

    >
    > I don't expect that to be true at all ...


    Blas-PHEMER!

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R_hlMK7tCks

    --
    *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
    *===( http://www.badphorm.co.uk/
    *===( http://www.zenwalk.org/

  18. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, Mike wrote:

    > Responding to Sylvain Robitaille:
    >
    >>> In another millenia there will only be Slackware's children.

    >>
    >> I don't expect that to be true at all ...

    >
    > Blas-PHEMER!
    >

    But it all supposes that all future distributions will follow
    what already exists.

    Innovation stalls that way. Every so often, it makes sense
    to go back to the beginning, and start from scratch. Instead
    of incremental changes, which likely are given without much
    thought, you may have a big leap forward because you aren't
    encumbered by all that came later, or even the assumptions.

    Michael


  19. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    Responding to Michael Black:

    > On Fri, 3 Oct 2008, Mike wrote:
    >
    >> Responding to Sylvain Robitaille:
    >>
    >>>> In another millenia there will only be Slackware's children.
    >>>
    >>> I don't expect that to be true at all ...

    >>
    >> Blas-PHEMER!
    >>

    > But it all supposes that all future distributions will follow what
    > already exists.
    >
    > Innovation stalls that way. Every so often, it makes sense to go back
    > to the beginning, and start from scratch. Instead of incremental
    > changes, which likely are given without much thought, you may have a big
    > leap forward because you aren't encumbered by all that came later, or
    > even the assumptions.
    >
    > Michael


    Er, yeah. I was just flag waving for the fun of it, and the idea here was
    to have a giggle at the vid really.

    --
    *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
    *===( http://www.badphorm.co.uk/
    *===( http://www.zenwalk.org/

  20. Re: slackware dying? yeah . . . right...

    On 2008-10-03, Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
    >
    > The diagram was simplified for editorial impact. If you want to see
    > what the evolution of Linux distributions really looks like, see
    > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi.../8/8c/Gldt.svg


    That's not really an evolutionary tree, that's a family tree. But
    obviously Debian did not spring into being like Athena eating her way
    out of Zeus' head. Distros borrow ideas freely from each other, which
    is what makes a true phylogenetic tree.

    You'll also notice that, for the most part, I was completely 100%
    utterly correct (more or less) about the main branches of the linux
    evolutionary tree: the largest families are Slackware, Debian, and
    RedHat. The Gentoo branch is young, so may or may not develop.

    --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


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast