On 2005-08-20, Michael Bueker <news.10.mbueker@spamgourmet.com> wrote:

> A quick note on Debian: Debian is for people who think they're good
> enough to be a Slacker, but still need to have someone (apt-get) to hold
> their hands and can't deal with vanilla versions. 'Nuff said
>
> ~Mik
>

That brought a chuckle to and otherwise boring weekend.

ken

Chiefy yazdi:
> 20 Aug 2005 15:21 UTC, kitt typed:
> > Hi - been thinking about changing linux distro. I had a look a the
> > slackware site, but it seems very 'bare bones' compared to suse, gentoo,
> > fedora core etc. Is this OS just for pros? or can it be used by beginner
> > home users like me?
>
> Slackware is great. Looks a bit rough round the edges but it's very well
> put together. No more difficult than any of the other distros.
>
first time i installed SlackWare i had no knowlage of english language
but i did install it and configure it. (3.5)
> --
> Email: News <news@highspeed.flyer.co.uk>
>
> The network is down because: Those damn raccoons!

Steve'o yazdi:
> kitt wrote:
>
> > Hi - been thinking about changing linux distro. I had a look a the
> > slackware site, but it seems very 'bare bones' compared to suse, gentoo,
> > fedora core etc. Is this OS just for pros? or can it be used by beginner
> > home users like me?
> >
> > thnaks
>
> Kitt, go for it! In some respects Slackware does things differently to
> other distros, so for that alone you might want to try it just to see what
> its about.
>
> Personally I found using Suse 7.0 tricky, too many packages, too many sub
> packages, so many dependencies and bugs, I found it difficult to learn how
> to use and very difficult to add my own stuff / change things.
>
> Then I tried Slackware 8.1, after giving up on Suse, it was a breath of
> fresh air. It worked, and I could change things quite easily. It was a
> steep learning curve as I had no idea what I was doing, but it was
> Slackware which got me hooked on Linux and OSS.
>

SlackWare got something rigth a text editor is the best config tool you
can think of. yes that is very nix way, too
> Is it right for you, well, theres only one way your going to find that
> out

On 2005-08-20, kitt <kitt@home.net> wrote:

> fedora core etc. Is this OS just for pros? or can it be used by beginner
> home users like me?

Slackware is for beginners who want to become pros.

nb

No_One wrote:

> Slackware only requires that you use some of those gray cells between your
> ears...it requires you to think and read. It's as simple as that.
>

This is true. But it stops short. Slack ALSO requires a lot of time to
learn, which means spending a lot of time reading technical 'man' pages,
spending time asking questions on help-sites and waiting for answers, and
then taking the time to read, understand, and apply them.... which often
results in having to take more time in fixing what you break or getting
things done virtually via trial and error since you will often get 3
different replies to a single question with some of them containing the
wrong info.

It's not a question of brains, intellect, or education. It's just a question
of time.

Try this analogy. Assume you live in the Southern or Western part of the
USA, say Texas (where they speak 'Texan!'!). Think of Linux as a new
language. Think of Linspire or Xandros as British English. Think of Mepis,
Kanotix, Ubuntu as French or Spanish. Think of Gentoo as Russian. Think of
Linux-From-Scratch as Japanese. Think of Slackware as Klingon.

Al C.

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 17:42:59 +0200, Michael Bueker wrote:

> For the quick I-want-this-running-without-thinking-about-it, SuSE and
> Mandriva are probably better.

That's an ammusing statement. "Without thinking about it" may be correct
but, IME, "quick" and "running" are debatable.
The first two years I used Linux, it was Mandrake, then RedHat, then SuSE,
then back to RedHat and on to Fedora and so on. They all had quirks that
drove me nuts. I'd get tired of dealing and trying to fix and I'd switch.
Then, I tried my hand at Gentoo. God what a waste of time. I only have one
computer and can't afford to wait a week or longer, petting and
hand-holding while I'm building the OS.
I finally gathered enough nerve to give Slackware 9.1 a try and instantly
wanted to cause great bodily harm to all those who told me "it's not
something a beginner should try".

> A quick note on Debian: Debian is for people who think they're good
> enough to be a Slacker, but still need to have someone (apt-get) to hold
> their hands and can't deal with vanilla versions. 'Nuff said
>
> ~Mik

Hmm. Mod-Quote perhaps?

kitt (kitt@home.net) writes:
> Hi - been thinking about changing linux distro. I had a look a the
> slackware site, but it seems very 'bare bones' compared to suse, gentoo,
> fedora core etc. Is this OS just for pros? or can it be used by beginner
> home users like me?
>
> thnaks

I got my CDROM of Slackware with "Slackware for Dummies" back in 2001.
I'd put on Debian, and discovered it didn't include Pine which I
was used to. I wasn't at that point up to figuring out how to install
something new. The Dummies book came along at the local bookstore
with a torn cover so it was clearance priced. I grabbed it and thus moved
to Slackware.

I've had computers since 1979, so I guess I'm hardly a beginner.
On the other hand, except for that brief Debian install, and some
basic use of the shell at my ISP, I had no direct experience with
Unix before I installed that Slackware.

I can't say I had any problems with that first install except for
issues related to the very limited computer I put it on.

Michael

kitt wrote:

snipped. Slackware does not wipe your arse for you. Personally I prefer
to wipe my own arse. You need to learn how to wipe your own arse first
though, but being forced to do it for yourself will teach you quicker
than anything else. You'll smell funny if you don't learn how to do it,
and you'll be rewarded with a lifetime of independance when you do.

Seriously, I've known people that have been using fluffy distributions
for years, and after switching to slackware still can't make the
services start that they want on bootup because there is no
menu/config/control app that will do it for them. This is after months
on slack, because a fluffy distro box got hacked (had about 20 open
ports iirc).

Handover Phist wrote:
> Chiefy blithely blithered
>
>>20 Aug 2005 15:21 UTC, kitt typed:
>>
>>>Hi - been thinking about changing linux distro. I had a look a the
>>>slackware site, but it seems very 'bare bones' compared to suse, gentoo,
>>>fedora core etc. Is this OS just for pros? or can it be used by beginner
>>>home users like me?
>>
>>Slackware is great. Looks a bit rough round the edges but it's very well
>>put together. No more difficult than any of the other distros.
>
>
> function rant() {
>
> I dont know where you're buying your CDs from but go somewhere else.
> "Rough around the edges"? I dont even know what that means. Slackware
> has never gone haywire on me for no particular reason. It hasn't changed
> much in the years I've been using it, so I'm pretty much finished with
> the learning curve. Almost everything compiles on it properly the first
> time and if it doesn't, I didn't need it in the first place. Compared to
> the other OS on my computer (it didn't even come with a compiler!) it's
> so smooth around the edges it's practically a perpetual motion machine,
> just roll it down the street. I've seen pool balls with edges so rough
> in comparison I could use them to sand my deck with. Slack, in a
> nutshell, rocks.
>
> }
>
> rant
>
An aquantiance of mine only ever used Red Hat just before the change to
freoda and enterprise. I had to have a go with Red Hat I must have been
FM (FUxxingMad) well I had a little problem making the thing boot. He
said Wipe the disk and start again. RH wanted a boot partition before
the 1242 mark so red the help and had a little hack arround and had it
up and running without having to re install. grrr now time to add some
software FFS no make and related compile tools and kernal source, added
some source and devlompent tools and I was away. but every step forward
I took there was another Red Hat GotchYa and the resulting two steps back.

A format and back to Mandrake grrr even worce than the red hat so I
start thinking well I was palying arround with Slackware 4ish arround
1994 and I had some funn. So I downloaded Slack 10.0 (on modem) whoo Hoo
just Like I rembered, fast & simple Non of the customised repackaged
software ok so I had to configure some stuff so what

Well Put on SLack ware 10.1 as soon as I had time to download did it at
work. Now I am looking at ditching windows (there will be one window
boxen for the USB scanner till it gets replaced)

All I have got to do now is set up the BTT tuner card find some capture
software and set up burning.
I have had Burning going before so no problem. I know the BTT card will
work but all of the distros that I have used have set it up for ntsc not
pal. It is just time and a little reading and that will work.

--
http://cooze.co.nz home of the RecyclerMan aka Robert Cooze

/ __/ / / / / /__ / / ___/ / __/ / / / |/ / /__ /
/ / / /_/ / / /_/ / _-' / __/ / / / /_/ / / /| / _-'
___\ ____/ ____/ /___/ /____/ /_/ ___\ ____/ /_/ /_/ |_/ /___/

notbob wrote:
> On 2005-08-20, kitt <kitt@home.net> wrote:
>
>
>>fedora core etc. Is this OS just for pros? or can it be used by beginner
>>home users like me?
>
>
> Slackware is for beginners who want to become pros.
>
> nb
If you can get to grips with Slackware most other distros should not be
too much of a problem (I am not a pro just a enthusiest). One further
comment KDE, Gnome or any xwindow manager is not Linux, 3 boxes in my
house do not have any x stuff installed at all one is Slacware one is
IPcop the other is e-smith one other box has xorg installed with KDE or
customised fuxbox running but most of the time it is talked to by ssh,
http, samba or FTP.

there is a lot of stuuf on the disks to help the documentation that
comes with slackware is good but generic the lurning is no worce than
dos 6.xx with windows3.11 but It does make sence windows 3.11 don't

--
http://cooze.co.nz home of the RecyclerMan aka Robert Cooze

/ __/ / / / / /__ / / ___/ / __/ / / / |/ / /__ /
/ / / /_/ / / /_/ / _-' / __/ / / / /_/ / / /| / _-'
___\ ____/ ____/ /___/ /____/ /_/ ___\ ____/ /_/ /_/ |_/ /___/