Slackware 14.2 released
slackware.com
slackware.com
I also remember in 1999, while installing servers with it, that you had to be careful to lot boot it on an open internet connection without first securing it. The number of running network server daemons the distros of the day started with is sort of mind-boggling now, and since inetd made it as simple as writing a shell script, there wasn't necessarily a lot of thought put into security. This, of course, wasn't a problem limited to Slackware.
For Slackware heads, why should I look at Slackware?
Slackware Linux. One of the oldest and truest Linux distributions, ever.
Not much is done for you, but nothing is hidden from you. As such, it takes work, but it rewards the user with the feeling of knowing the full system.
Speaking of patching, Slackware tries to stay as close as possible to the upstream developer's version of a package, with minimal patching. Patches are usually security related, and sometimes a package is patched to fix a bug found in testing, but there are no exotic tweaks like what you get with Ubuntu and other "flashy" distros.
Package management is as simple as it gets; there is no dependency resolution so the user is responsible for making sure they have everything they need for a particular package. Personally I prefer this approach, it reduces bloat and puts me in control of my system. That said, it's not for everyone, and there are some third-party package managers that enhance the existing system with dependency resolution and a pretty interface. You can also build from source just about any package you want to, as Slackware includes a complete dev toolchain for the most popular languages, and you can easily install support for less popular ones.
There is no systemd, which to me is a blessing as it makes for much easier and more familiar management.
Obviously I'm a fan, but there are some downsides I'm willing to admit. It's not flashy; the various desktops that come with it (KDE, Xfce, Fluxbox, Blackbox, WindowMaker, fvwm, twm) are bone-stock with no customization like you get with other OSes. This means a ton of tweaking on the user's part if you don't care for the default themes.
GNOME support is nil. Pat dropped GNOME in the mid-2000s when he got frustrated with building it, and while there are third-party solutions, none of them work 100% in my testing.
Unless you run -current, the stable version tends to get left behind. It's been nearly three years since 14.1 was released, and it was clearly showing its age, though some would consider that a good thing (I certainly do, especially for servers, which is what I use Slackware for on two systems).
There is no systemd, and for many people that makes it a non-starter.
-----
I say, give it a whirl. You may be pleasantly surprised! Then again, you may run screaming back to your bells-and-whistles eye candy OS. But at least you can say you tried it. :-)
Posting this from my Thinkpad X220 running Slackware 14.1. Just check config files (*.new suffix) when a package is updated to a newer version. Debian/CentOS backport patches to packages so that the configs don't change during a release.
Quite happy with what I've had from Slackware for the past couple of years and I have subscribed. The distribution does not pretend to cater for all needs but can support many use cases.
Remember that there is now a live iso image to try before you install.
The last straw was the fanboys at the linuxquestions forum. It was cultish and creeped me out.
Slackware doesn't do "security theatre" updates. Whenever there's both a credible risk and a reasonable fix, you'll see an update, and it'll be quicker than distros that are multiple steps downstream from Debian.
I realize that sounds like someone talking about a bad marriage, and I suppose we can generalize usefully on relationships of whatever type.
I think we must end up with longer-lasting bad feelings about anything we used to value.
The packages are pretty much up to date but the distro itself feels dusty.
If you want to learn Ubuntu, get Ubuntu. If you want to learn CentOS, get CentOS. If you want to learn linux, get Slack.
- former Slackware and Gentoo user
A Linux distro is a Linux distro, of course, so differences are subtle and particular. Any distro can be manipulated as much as anyone wants as long as they know how and they can deal with the implications of their changes.
Arch has more scaffolding -- dependency resolution, etc. -- which is all very nice but presents its own Arch-specific learning curve and tends to get in the way if you want to do something that the "Arch Way" does not encompass.
Slack users can build and install the very latest source from upstream if they wish, or they can choose not to.
Dependencies obviously exist in Slackware. They are how Linux is structured. But, for some strange reasons, perhaps, Slackware packages seem to have fewer of them.
To the people in this thread that claim Slackware is outdated and has no security updates: what are you on about? Neither is true.
I feel that it gives the impression that nothing is happening; at least to those not inclined to seek out Slackware related forums or mailing lists.
Simplicity, reliability and everything is still very unixy.
I've tinkered a little with Arch before and liked that bare bone terminal experience, meditations on man pages and wikis, but it turned out that I didn't learned anything from that, except for how to do google search.
I want OS to force me do some dirty work with my bare hands and to thoughtfully grasp the *nix way, while be opened for tuning and flexible modding without enforcing me to do things in one strict manner, and it seems that Slackware is a way to go. I also like that, as I heard, it's is very well documented, old-fashioned and more BSD-like than any other linux distro. What can you guys say about that?
I know that as a newbie I'll suffer a lot, but as long as it's a good pain - I'm ready to live with that c: