Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Apr 2006 12:02 UTC, submitted by SilentBob4
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu MadPenguin takes a look at Flight 5 of Ubuntu Dapper, and concludes: "All in all, Ubuntu 6.06 is gearing up to be quite an impressive release. Granted, I saw some bugs during my stay on the distribution, but can I really complain? It's not a full release, so it deserves some breathing room. Considering some of the horribly authored software I've looked at over the years, I feel that Ubuntu in pre-release form is more stable than other distros when they reach final release status. It's not quite in the league of Slackware and Red Hat/Fedora in that respect yet, but it's surely getting there in a hurry."
Thread beginning with comment 115546
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not better than Slackware?
by VenomousGecko on Mon 17th Apr 2006 14:13 UTC in reply to "Not better than Slackware?"
VenomousGecko
Member since:
2005-07-06

Just because Slackware is "ancient" does not mean that it is in anyway inferior. There is something to be said about its longevity and its relavance in the market after all these years and all the changes to the free software movement. The reason people like Slackware is because the system is set up not to get in your way. You have the build system out of the box for compiling applications. You have "vanilla" builds of packages which tend to have less modifications (if not 0) than the original software from the author. This means that there are no surprises when linking to that app when compiling another app (ie apache, php, mysql, etc). I am no expert as to why this makes it better but my exprience running Slackware servers vs others is that they tend to be very quick, stable and dependable. This is not saying there isn't a place for Ubuntu/Kubuntu but lets not disparage Slackware.

Reply Parent Score: 5

anonymous_coward Member since:
2005-11-15

Just because Slackware is "ancient" does not mean that it is in anyway inferior

From the security point of view it's inferior.

You have the build system out of the box for compiling applications.

And in other distributions you can't compile software? You just need to tick during installation all development related apps. After installation you can always install *-devel (RPM based distros) or *-dev (Debian based distros) packages.

You have "vanilla" builds of packages which tend to have less modifications (if not 0) than the original software from the author.

IMHO it's a problem. Do you want to use buggy applications? I'm a Fedora Extras developer and if I have a chance I always backport important fixes from CVS/SVN. Of course I always contact with upstream developers first to make shure that I won't screw the job up ;)

Maintaining a big pile of patches isn't an easy task - that's why we try to push our fixes upstream.

I am no expert as to why this makes it better but my exprience running Slackware servers vs others is that they tend to be very quick, stable and dependable.

What a pity that they are not so secure like other distributions. No Stack Smashing Protector, no Position Independent Executables, no FORTIFY_SOURCE, no MAC like SELinux, etc. For instance, this is all available in Fedora by default → http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/Features

Let's take a look at PHP in Slackware. I was shocked when I noticed that libphp4.so (php-4.4.2-i486-3.tgz) and libphp5.so (php-5.1.2-i486-2.tgz) contain text relocations [1]!

[y4kk0@X tmp]$ eu-readelf -d libphp4.so | grep TEXTREL
TEXTREL
[y4kk0@X tmp]$ eu-readelf -d libphp5.so | grep TEXTREL
TEXTREL
[y4kk0@X tmp]$

WTF [2]? PHP in FC5 is compiled properly:

[y4kk0@X tmp]$ eu-readelf -d /usr/lib/httpd/modules/libphp5.so | grep TEXTREL
[y4kk0@X tmp]$

From the security and performance point of view PHP in Slackware is useless.

PS Sorry that I talked so much about Fedora. It's a thread about Ubuntu, but I don't know this distribution quite well :/

[1] More about textrels here:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/33992
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/34037
[2] WTF -- Were They Thinking™ ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 1