Most stable and tested distribution?
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: passive mode ftp high ports driving me nuts
Next: equivalent of f.circleup or CirculateUp for fvwm2
From: John Hasler on 6 Jan 2010 19:01 "Sidney" writes: > [John Hasler is] an employee of Debian... Darren Salt writes: > That's an interesting assertion, given that Debian has no employees... And thus is just what one should expect from "Sidney". -- John Hasler jhasler(a)newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
From: Keith Keller on 6 Jan 2010 19:12 On 2010-01-06, Darren Salt <news(a)youmustbejoking.demon.cu.invalid> wrote: > I demand that Sidney Lambe may or may not have written... > > [snip; about John Hasler] >> And an employee of Debian... > > That's an interesting assertion, given that Debian has no employees... ''Sid'' never allows fact to get in the way of stating what he wants you to think he wants you to believe! --keith, also not an employee of Debian -- kkeller-usenet(a)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
From: Balwinder S Dheeman on 6 Jan 2010 19:22 On 01/07/2010 05:24 AM, Sylvain Robitaille wrote: [snip: all the marketing stuff] > Try Slackware. You'll wonder why you didn't try it sooner. I started using Linux with Slackware in 1994, explored and tested many a popular and, or even some odd distributions including Slackware -- IMHO, every distribution including Slackware, Fedora, Arch and Pentoo sucks, but Debian sucks quite a little ;) -- Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709 Anu'z Linux(a)HOME (Unix Shoppe) Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192 Chandigarh, UT, 160062, India Plan9, T2, Arch/Debian/FreeBSD/XP Home: http://werc.homelinux.net/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/
From: Dan C on 6 Jan 2010 22:04 On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:17:25 -0600, Robert Heller wrote: > At Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:35:21 +0000 (UTC) Giorgos Tzampanakis > <gt67(a)hw.ac.uk> wrote: > > >> "john(a)wexfordpress.com" <john(a)wexfordpress.com> wrote in >> news:c0a16364-6b73-44f1-a0cf-0c68ac9dd5d2 >> @g31g2000vbr.googlegroups.com: >> >> > There are no automatic updates. You are always in control. >> >> What exactly does that mean? Do I need to check each package for new >> versions or simply to run a program (like apt-get in debian/ubuntu) >> that will do it for me? If so, this is akin to automatic updating. > > Slackware basically has no package management (or a really simple-minded > one). There is not anything like apt-get or yum at all. You need to > check each package *manually* for updates and you also need to > *manually* deal with dependencies (basically you rebuild from source and > re-install). Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, you can only > do an install. That's some pretty seriously *WRONG* information (FUD?) that you're spewing out there. You do *NOT* have to "check each package manually", and as for dependencies, you do not *have* to "rebuild from source and re- install" (although you certainly can if you want to). Please don't spread misinformation about a subject which you clearly know nothing about. The package manager in Slackware can install/remove/update any package you point it to. It just does not utilize a "central repository" auto- clickety-updatey method. You get/make the package, and then use the manager to install it. There are several package repositories around, and there are at least two third-party addons which provide the automatic update/upgrade functions. These are "slapt-get" and "slackpkg". Most "serious" Slackers would not use them, but many folks do, with mostly good results. The best source for non-distro-included packages is http://slackbuilds.org which provides a link to source code for the package in question, and the "Slackbuild" script which automates the compiling and packaging, to produce a Slackware package ready to be installed by the package manager. It really isn't anywhere near as difficult as this long description may sound. As for *security* related updates, it is trivial to subscribe to the official Slackware mailing list, where the Slackware maintainer will announce newly available packages available for download in response to discovered security issues. He is quite good about doing that. Then you just go download the package from a Slackware mirror, and update that package on your system. Very easy. In my opinion, and experience, anyone who has used Slackware for any reasonable length of time would never consider using another distro again. It's that good. -- "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". "Bother!" said Pooh, as he wiped the vomit from his chin. Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
From: Dan C on 6 Jan 2010 22:05
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:01:03 +0000, Giorgos Tzampanakis wrote: > Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote in > news:zpCdnSeyKblYfNnWnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet: > >> Slackware basically has no package management (or a really >> simple-minded one). There is not anything like apt-get or yum at all. >> You need to check each package *manually* for updates and you also need >> to *manually* deal with dependencies (basically you rebuild from source >> and re-install). Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, you can >> only do an install. > > This sounds like a lot of duplicated effort between Slackware users. A > central software update channel would be much better, even if it was for > the software less likely to break the system (anything except hardware > drivers, X, desktop environments, the kernel etc.) > > It certainly doesn't sound enticing, to me at least. Please ignore the false information in the post you just replied to, and read my response to the same post. -- "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". "Bother!" said Pooh, as he wiped the vomit from his chin. Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |