Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Aug 2005 09:39 UTC
Slackware, Slax Patrick Volkerding, Slackware's maintainer, announced that Slackware 10.2 is going into beta: "I think it's time to consider this to be mostly frozen and concentrate on beta testing in preparation for the Slackware 10.2 release, so there won't be too many more upgrades and additions."
Thread beginning with comment 13097
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.

Member since:

You don't need to compile the 2.6 kernel on your own if you don't want to, the included 2.6 kernel in /extra is good and not difficult too install.

I agree with Patrick that the 2.4.31 kernel should be the default, since the 2.6 series are still not thoroughly tested and have given me unpleasant surprises. Apart from ACPI and udev support, the 2.4 series still perform well and are rock solid. It would be nice if you could choose for a 2.6 kernel in the installer, though.

What me saddens more is the removal of gnome. I can see why patrick doesn't want to do the effort of building gnome on his own, but I don't understand why he doesn't include freerock gnome (built using GSB) or something. Dropline is out of the question because it replaces too much slackware packages, but freerock seems OK to me.

Apart from that, slack 10.2 is looking nice.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Member since:

The 2.6 series kernels are "not thoroughly tested"? Did you just wake up from a hibernation?

As for Gnome, why would PV include Freerock when a user can just download the ISO and install it themselves? I use FRG and love it.

Reply Parent Score: 0

slamens Member since:
2005-08-03

(note: I am the anonymous poster you were replying to)

The 2.6 series kernels are "not thoroughly tested"? Did you just wake up from a hibernation?
I'm not saying 2.6 is bad, but there were various non-trivial changes made to the kernel since 2.6.0 was released, which should have been tested better (in a forked tree) before they went into 2.6.x. Especially 2.6.8 and 2.6.9 had their issues because of that.
Maybe this situation has changed with the new versioning scheme. In any case, the 2.4 kernels have been tested and debugged for a much longer time.

Also, I remember that 2.4.13 was the first 2.4 kernel that was the default kernel of a slackware release. It's not uncommon that patrick waits until a new kernel has proven to be really stable over time.

As for Gnome, why would PV include Freerock when a user can just download the ISO and install it themselves? I use FRG and love it.
Without a gnome distribution included in slackware, no one can create package of gnome-dependent programs for slackware. Say I want to build and distribute a package of program X, should I build it under freerock gnome, dropline gnome or gware?
Also, if a gnome build would be included in slackware, more people would use it and bugs would be reported faster.

Reply Parent Score: 1

ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

They aren't. They're still changing a lot in 2.6. Every kernel is apt to add features. It's simply not stable. It may be rock solid, but it's not stable.
Too many people depend on Slackware being a rock.

Reply Parent Score: 1