A look at Slackware 10.0
The Slackware installer, for example, has changed very little over the years. Though the lack of a graphical installer may intimidate new users, the text-based menu installer still serves well and is quite simple to use if one will only take the time to read the text. This writer installed Slackware 10, using the "install everything" option, on a Toshiba Satellite 1415-S105 notebook in about twenty minutes. That includes disk partitioning, network setup and reboot. Slackware's installer may lack bells and whistles, but it serves just fine on almost any hardware.
Slackware also continues to use the BSD-style init scripts, though slightly streamlined in this release, as opposed to the SYSV style init scripts that are used by most other Linux distributions. Whether this is an annoyance or feature largely depends on the personal preference of the user.
The latest Slackware release is based on the stock 2.4.26 Linux kernel, with an optional 2.6.7 kernel for users who wish to run the 2.6 series. Apparently, the 2.6 kernel series hasn't quite yet lived up to Volkerding's standards for a default kernel. Nor has Slackware jumped to the Apache 2.0.x series yet; it still ships with Apache 1.3.31. Slackware also still includes lprng and LILO, which have been replaced by CUPS and GRUB in most distributions -- though Slackware also now includes CUPS alongside lprng.
Slackware still includes a wide array of window managers and desktop
environments, and tends to stay on or close to the cutting edge there. KDE
3.2.3 is included, as is GNOME 2.6.1, XFce 4.0.5, Blackbox, Fluxbox, and
many others. While most popular distributions tend to brand the window
managers and desktop environments -- Red Hat's "Bluecurve" and Mandrake's
"Galaxy" themes come to mind -- Slackware ships them more or less as-is. In
fact, all packages shipped with Slackware "follows the setup and
installation instructions from its author(s) as closely as
possible
". This writer tends to prefer the "generic" version of
packages, so Slackware is his favored choice in this area.
Though not part of the default install, there are a few new package tools for Slackware 10. There's now a "slackpkg" tool to help with upgrading an older release of Slackware, and "slacktrack" to help building Slackware packages. Users who wish to try these new tools will find them in /extras, on the third Slackware disk.
Speaking of disks, it's also worth noting that Slackware is still fairly lightweight in terms of disks required for installation. Only the first disk is necessary for a basic install with KDE, while the second disk will be necessary for users wishing to use GNOME. Users who wish to use the ZipSlack distribution will need to grab disk four. Users interested in trying Slackware before it's available in stores or to subscribers can find ISOs through BitTorrent or through one of the unofficial mirrors.
The only complaint this writer has about Slackware 10 is the lack of a simple sound configuration utility. Configuring sound on the Toshiba laptop with Slackware was a bit more challenging than with other distributions, which usually find and enable the sound card without any user intervention. Other than that, however, installing and configuring Slackware was a pleasure.
In all, Slackware is a solid distribution that's easy to set up and
run. For users who are already running Slackware-based systems, the upgrade
is well worth it. Users who have never tried Slackware might find that it's
well worth the time to test out.
| Index entries for this article | |
|---|---|
| GuestArticles | Brockmeier, Joe |
Posted Jun 28, 2004 16:05 UTC (Mon)
by rfunk (subscriber, #4054)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Jun 28, 2004 16:59 UTC (Mon)
by otavio (guest, #337)
[Link] (1 responses)
Now, upgrade a slack installation *should* be easy. Try it and see yourself ;-)
Posted Jun 28, 2004 20:26 UTC (Mon)
by DaveK (subscriber, #2531)
[Link]
Posted Jun 28, 2004 20:51 UTC (Mon)
by dowdle (subscriber, #659)
[Link]
Posted Jun 28, 2004 16:13 UTC (Mon)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link] (3 responses)
There are a couple things that I would like to see added to Slackware that would make it more friendly for my daily grind: Evolution and OpenOffice. However, these are large packages and I understand why Patrick hasn't added them. Abiword and Gnumeric are included, and they do the job, and are a lot smaller. But if you've ever tried to compile Evolution for Slackware, you too might understand why I wish it was packaged into the default install... :-) Anyway, it's a very nice, solid release and I would be planning on installing it in short order if I hadn't already been keeping my machines updated with the -current tree via rsync. Good job, Patrick. Thanks for the 10+ years of fantastic work.
Posted Jun 28, 2004 18:43 UTC (Mon)
by raytd (guest, #4823)
[Link] (2 responses)
I recommend Dropline Gnome for a GTK/GNOME based desktop on Slackware. It includes Evolution, Abiword, Gnumeric, and a ton of other stuff you may (or may not) want. I don't know if there is a build for 10 yet, but they are usually really on the ball.
Posted Jun 28, 2004 20:31 UTC (Mon)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Sep 14, 2004 1:16 UTC (Tue)
by hollywoodb (guest, #24701)
[Link]
Slackware provides for Gnome packages, and in my experience they are much more stable than Dropline packaging. They also save you the trouble of having to keep Slackware & Dropline updated, as they are updated for security fixes and such in their standard Slackware packaging form.
Slackcare.com is a great site, which offers slackware packages for evolution & its dependencies.
Cheers.
Posted Jun 28, 2004 17:47 UTC (Mon)
by donio (guest, #94)
[Link] (5 responses)
Does Slackware still use a single rc file?
Posted Jun 28, 2004 18:14 UTC (Mon)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link] (3 responses)
No, there is a directory (/etc/rc.d) which contains a collection of rc scripts. This list is from my desktop machine: rc.0@ The rc.S script runs at startup, then rc.M runs when the system goes multiuser. rc.6 runs at restart, and rc.0 runs at shutdown. rc.4 runs when going into [xgk]dm mode. rc.K runs when going into single-user mode. All the various daemon-specific rc files are run by one or more of the preceding files at the appropriate times, or they can be run independently as, for example, '/etc/rc.d/rc.httpd start', etc. It's a very nice, clean system if you ask me.
Posted Jun 28, 2004 19:10 UTC (Mon)
by mattdm (subscriber, #18)
[Link] (2 responses)
In fact, doesn't sound that different from the SysV style. :)
Posted Jun 28, 2004 19:27 UTC (Mon)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link]
Posted Jul 1, 2004 4:46 UTC (Thu)
by set (guest, #4788)
[Link]
Posted Jul 1, 2004 12:14 UTC (Thu)
by Dom2 (guest, #458)
[Link]
There's a good paper by the author of NetBSD's rc.d system. It shows why the design choices were made and why he thinks it's better than the SYSV style startup scripts. -Dom
Posted Jun 28, 2004 20:31 UTC (Mon)
by DaveK (subscriber, #2531)
[Link] (11 responses)
Posted Jun 28, 2004 20:55 UTC (Mon)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link] (1 responses)
I am not aware of any others that have done so. Patrick definitely listened to his users on this subject (oh, that all developers would be so kind...!):
Posted Jun 29, 2004 6:52 UTC (Tue)
by allesfresser (guest, #216)
[Link]
Posted Jun 28, 2004 21:47 UTC (Mon)
by utidjian (guest, #444)
[Link]
-DU-...etc...
Posted Jun 29, 2004 5:48 UTC (Tue)
by evgeny (subscriber, #774)
[Link] (6 responses)
Posted Jun 29, 2004 7:50 UTC (Tue)
by Duncan (guest, #6647)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Jun 29, 2004 8:04 UTC (Tue)
by evgeny (subscriber, #774)
[Link] (4 responses)
As well as _what_? To the best of my knowledge (which, admittedly, somewhat dated), Slackware doesn't have any kind of dependencies in the init stuff. Did it appear in 10.0?
Posted Jun 29, 2004 8:51 UTC (Tue)
by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501)
[Link]
http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/refspecs/LSB_1.3.0/gLSB/gLSB/initscrcomconv.html Is there any distro outside UnitedLinux that implements this?
Posted Jul 1, 2004 4:54 UTC (Thu)
by set (guest, #4788)
[Link]
Posted Jul 1, 2004 8:18 UTC (Thu)
by Duncan (guest, #6647)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jul 1, 2004 8:30 UTC (Thu)
by evgeny (subscriber, #774)
[Link]
>> As well as _what_? > You didn't read the comment threads to well, did you? I was referring to So why didn't you reply to _that_ thread?! If you're referring to _another_ thread, make this clear. Don't assume everyone else has as perverted logic in understanding what you're talking about. Your comment was off topic both of the current thread and the original article (which focused on Slackware, not current *BSD).
Posted Jun 29, 2004 8:41 UTC (Tue)
by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501)
[Link]
I figured slackware stayed originally with XFree due to its conservative nature, but later on they realised that real dfevelopment happens in Xorg .
Posted Jun 28, 2004 20:34 UTC (Mon)
by JoeF (guest, #4486)
[Link] (5 responses)
I hope it continues to support lprng. Given the problems with configuring CUPS as outlined by Eric Raymond, I prefer the easy configuration of lprng...
Posted Jun 29, 2004 5:57 UTC (Tue)
by evgeny (subscriber, #774)
[Link] (4 responses)
Come on, you can't be serious. Putting aside the question of validity of Eric's rants in general and in this specific case, do you really say that setting up a typical (not ~$1k laser w/ postscript) printer is easier with lpr** than cups?!
Posted Jun 29, 2004 6:43 UTC (Tue)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (2 responses)
way back when (~10 years ago under SLS) when I needed to get a printer setup the printing howto suggested apsfilter and I tried it ant it 'just worked', since then I have dealt with a LOT of different printer types and with the exception of winprinters I have had no problems, I graduated from single user/single printer systems to larger setups and each step was a straightforward one (including connecting to the >10k printer/copier/fax machines in the office) I haven't put _that_ much time into trying to get CUPS working, but I have put in more time then my origional lpr setup took and when I got stuck with no clue as to what was wrong I just punted and went back to lpr
Posted Jun 29, 2004 7:06 UTC (Tue)
by evgeny (subscriber, #774)
[Link]
Well, our experiences are similar - I, too, started with SLS but before coming accross apsfilter I setup a couple of lpd filters by hand. And I do remember it took not one and not two hours of reading the printing howto and tinkering with the scripts/permissions/... until it worked as expected. And believe me, if you spend an hour with cups docs you'll be able to do much more than with lpr...
Posted Jul 8, 2004 21:38 UTC (Thu)
by dunne (guest, #22552)
[Link]
Amen to that. Would it be that difficult for CUPS to provide
Posted Jul 8, 2004 13:02 UTC (Thu)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link]
And it wouldn't let you do manual configuration until *after* it had run this automatic scan. It got ditched damn fast! Cheers,
Posted Jul 10, 2004 5:06 UTC (Sat)
by Neoslak (guest, #22946)
[Link] (1 responses)
I've been using Slackware since version 3.0 as well and I've tried 'em all and I keep coming back to Slack! Never left, actually. Chuck
Posted Jul 19, 2004 3:08 UTC (Mon)
by lhawkwing (guest, #23138)
[Link]
I've been using Slackware since version 3.0 as well and I've tried 'em all and I keep coming back to Slack! Never left, actually. I first loaded Slackware in March 1994. And since then I have tried other distros but have always gotten in using the thing and saying... bah, I can do this easier/quicker/better in good ole Slackware. Longest I've gone without slackware was about six days. And on the seventh day he looked at Slackware and saw that it was good, and he rested. (sorry couldn't help it.) Only indecision I ever face with slackware is KDE or Gnome. I like different aspects of each. :)
Logan
Posted Jul 11, 2004 11:13 UTC (Sun)
by nurhussein (guest, #16226)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jul 12, 2004 22:41 UTC (Mon)
by alisonken1 (guest, #11742)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Aug 23, 2004 1:35 UTC (Mon)
by wrhamblen (guest, #24192)
[Link]
Posted Sep 11, 2004 2:02 UTC (Sat)
by aph (guest, #24640)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Oct 11, 2004 20:29 UTC (Mon)
by rick (guest, #25337)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Oct 19, 2004 21:28 UTC (Tue)
by aph (guest, #24640)
[Link]
I started with Slackware back in 1995, switched to Red Hat 3.03 because Upgrading?
of RPM's dependency support, and (after a diversion with Mandrake)
switched to Debian to avoid dependency hell and to get easy upgrades.
Yet much of the Slackware philosophy appeals to me, at least for certain
types of machine. So I'd be interested in an account of how easy it is
to install new packages (which depend on other packages) after
installing, and how easy it is to upgrade from one Slackware installation
to another.
If you look in release announce you will see some new tools in contrib directory to help on this.Upgrading?
Upgrading Slackware distributions is easy.Upgrading?
ihave migrated several systems over time from 8.1->9.0->9.1 and then via current to 10.0.
I use the swaret tool which appeared in the /extras directory, but now seems to have gone away again, which includes a system of dependencies.
Alternatively, one can download the various packages and invoke upgradepkg from the standard slackware package tools.
Most new slackware packages are also careful not to clobber configuration files and instead deposit a .new file slongside. the install script then discards the .new files if the md5sums match, leaving the administrator to reconcile any differences.
Just to clarify, dependency hell doesn't really exist anymore. It was Regarding "Dependency Hell"
first cured when Red Hat introduced Red Hat Network and the up2date
application which was a trial / subscription service. Then people created
apt for rpm and yum.
These days, with Fedora Core, yum and up2date are basically
interchangable. Setting up a yum repository takes about a minute if you
already have a web accessible directory with the desired packages in it.
Of course RHEL customers are using the up2date system with RHN.
Much of dependency hell was caused by bad packagers but not all.
I'll start this comment by saying that I've been a faithful Slackware user since '95 (started out with v3.0), and I continue to appreciate its clean, simple design and emphasis on functionality. Many other distributions try to make the experience of installing as friendly and soft-padded as possible (aka Windows-esque); Slackware does no such thing. This is not to say that installing Slackware is difficult, because it's not, if you know some basic information. And once you get it installed and tuned (again, not difficult but it helps to have some basic tribal traditions in your brain before starting...) it will run like a champ for as long as you care to keep power flowing. But don't expect any Wizards or Gurus or whatever you want to call the handholding you get from Redhat, SuSE or Mandrake.A look at Slackware 10.0
A look at Slackware 10.0
I've tried Dropline Gnome before (most recently around about the end of April) and it seems to be pretty nice, but it kind of messed up my ability to keep current with Patrick's development changes, since it has its own shadow package and also installed pam, which is one of the things Patrick has a definite allergy to (and I tend to agree with him.) It just wasn't worth it for me to keep the goodies that Dropline offers over basic system infrastructure functionality. Of course, as always, your mileage may vary.
A look at Slackware 10.0
just a note....A look at Slackware 10.0
The funny thing is that (most of?) the BSDs don't use the old single-rc"BSD-style" init scripts,
setup anymore. I believe NetBSD started the trend, they switched to a
fairly nice REQUIRE/PROVIDE dependency based rc system in 1.5 and
apparently FreeBSD has adopted that system too. I am not sure about
OpenBSD.
>Does Slackware still use a single rc file?"BSD-style" init scripts,
rc.4*
rc.6*
rc.K*
rc.M*
rc.S*
rc.acpid*
rc.alsa*
rc.atalk
rc.bind
rc.cups*
rc.dnsmasq
rc.gpm-sample*
rc.hotplug*
rc.httpd*
rc.inet1*
rc.inet1.conf
rc.inet2*
rc.inetd*
rc.ip_forward
rc.local*
rc.lprng
rc.modules*
rc.mysqld*
rc.nfsd*
rc.portmap*
rc.samba
rc.sendmail
rc.serial*
rc.sshd*
rc.syslog*
rc.sysvinit*
rc.udev*
It's a very nice, clean system if you ask me.
"BSD-style" init scripts,
I can't comment on the difference with the SysV style, as I've not had enough experience with it, but I *can* say that the Slackware scripts are (to me) a lot more readable than say, RedHat scripts. The reason I say that is because there are no utility functions to trace through, no extra stuff at all. Each script is straightforward shell script. Anyway, I like it. :-)
"BSD-style" init scripts,
Well, it does appear to use a sysV init daemon, but then so does"BSD-style" init scripts,
gentoo, without being traditional sysV init systems. eg. it doesnt
have a series of directories, like /etc/rc0.d /etc/rc3.d filled with
symlinks to the scripts in /etc/init.d with names like K05foo and
S90bar, indicating the order of a set of scripts to be run when
leaving and entering a new runlevel. Rather, it uses a bunch of
/etc/*.conf files to determine the behaviour of the helper scripts,
and a large script for each runlevel that calls the helper
subsystem scripts. Which is similar to the old BSD system, but
their scripts and conf files were all just in /etc/, and there is
not really an idea of general runlevels, but more like security levels.
"BSD-style" init scripts,
Slackware 10 includes XOrg's X11-6.7 for its X Window System, i was wondering if it was the first major distribution to ship it in a major release?
A look at Slackware 10.0
A look at Slackware 10.0
Sun May 30 01:06:39 PDT 2004
x/: Switched to X11R6.7.0 from X.Org. Thanks to those who sent comments to
slackware.com. Seems the community has spoken, because the opinions were
more than 4 to 1 in favor of using the X.Org release as the default version
of X. I think I've heard just about every side to this issue now, and it was
only after careful consideration and testing that this decision was made.
It's primarily (as is usual around here) a technical decision. Nearly
everyone else is going with X.Org and it seems to me that sticking with
XFree86 it spite of this would be asking for compatibility trouble (indeed,
we saw some issues between X.Org and XFree86 4.4.0 until a few things in
XFree86 were patched). I also noticed that the ATI Radeon binary drivers
designed for XFree86 4.3.0 do not work with XFree86 4.4.0, but do work with
the X.Org release. Something I'm *not* in favor of is dragging around two
nearly identical projects, so XFree86 4.4.0 has been moved to the
/pub/slackware/unsupported/ directory on the FTP site.
I'd like to take this moment to thank the XFree86 Project for all the truly
amazing work they've done all these years, and to wish the project the best
of luck. Slackware owes the XFree86 Project a debt of gratitude and will
always include the XFree86 acknowledgement, even if we are no longer
shipping XFree86.
Well, so much for my awareness then... ;-) thanks amigos!
A look at Slackware 10.0
Fedora Core 2 ships with X.org-6.7.0 by default.A look at Slackware 10.0
At least for amd64, Gentoo defaults to XOrg.A look at Slackware 10.0
I'm using Gentoo for AMD64 as well, and yes, it defaults to xorg. Distribs switched to xorg (gentoo)
However, the first /release/ based on it will be 2004.2, which will come
out shortly. (Gentoo's release system is 0-based quarterly, so 2004.2
comes out in the third quarter of 2004.)
Of course, once Gentoo is actually installed, the liveCD release snapshot
versions mean little, as the distribution is designed and intended to be
upgraded more or less constantly, rather than in version fits and starts,
as with most other distribs, so /release/ /snapshots/ doesn't mean much
other than it's what the installer of a specific stage/liveCD release
installs by default, based on the snapshot of the distribution for that
arch when it was taken, if the user chooses to install it.
Also, AMD64 was the first Gentoo arch to default to xorg, with Sparc and
some of the other minor archs following fairly quickly. x86-32, however,
hasn't yet switched, and probably won't until after 2004.2, so for the
2004.3 quarterly snapshot release. The reason is because the standard
font dir location changes, and they don't want to go stable with xorg, and
catch people unaware. However, there's little additional work going into
X(un)Free86 in Gentoo, and pretty much everyone not sticking to strictly
stable on x86-32 has already migrated or is in the process of doing so,
AFAIK from the user and devel lists.
..
BTW & FWIW, Gentoo uses a requires/depends type init setup as well.
Duncan
> BTW & FWIW, Gentoo uses a requires/depends type init setup as well.Distribs switched to xorg (gentoo)
As well as LSB 1.3Distribs switched to xorg (gentoo)
Probably a reference to Net/FreeBSD's init system, which is similar,Distribs switched to xorg (gentoo)
but not the same.
>> BTW & FWIW, Gentoo uses a requires/depends Requires/depends init scripts vs "BSD-style" vs "Sys-V style"
>> type init setup as well.
> As well as _what_?
You didn't read the comment threads to well, did you? I was referring to
the thread entitled '"BSD-style" init scripts,', started by "Donio". The
comment was made (the truth of which I don't know, as I prefer
contributing where improvements to my code get likewise contributed, thus,
Linux, not BSD) that even most BSDs no longer use "BSD-style" init
scripts, but rather requires/depends type scripts.
I was simply stating that rather than the traditional Sys-V style init
scripts most distribs use, Gentoo also uses requires/depends style init
scripts.
Just as the Gentoo ports system came from the BSDs, so, I believe, did the
requires/depends, tho I'm not sure of it.
Duncan
>>> BTW & FWIW, Gentoo uses a requires/dependsRequires/depends init scripts vs "BSD-style" vs "Sys-V style"
>>> type init setup as well.
> the thread entitled '"BSD-style" init scripts,', started by "Donio".
Actually slackware was among the last distibutions to stay with XFree . For a while it was listed at http://xfree.org/distros/ .A look at Slackware 10.0
lackware also still includes lprng and LILO, which have been replaced by CUPS and GRUB in most distributions
A look at Slackware 10.0
> Given the problems with configuring CUPS as outlined by Eric Raymond, I prefer the easy configuration of lprng...A look at Slackware 10.0
iseing apsfilter, yes I wouldA look at Slackware 10.0
> way back when (~10 years ago under SLS) when I needed to get a printer setup the printing howto suggested apsfilter and I tried it ant it 'just worked',A look at Slackware 10.0
> I haven't put _that_ much time into trying to get CUPS working,A look at Slackware 10.0
> but I have put in more time then my origional lpr setup took and
> when I got stuck with no clue as to what was wrong I just punted
> and went back to lpr
backwards compatibility? The old lpd system is pretty simple,
after all. It would be nice if one could install a new CUPS-using
distribution, hand it an old working lpd configuration, and have
it "just work" (Hey, maybe it can already, I don't know, I'm just
asking).
When I first tried to use cups it did all sorts of nasty things to my setup. Including scanning for network printers when I said "No you do NOT have permission to scan the network"!!!A look at Slackware 10.0
Wol
No sound config? As root just type 'alsaconf'. It was there all the time!A look at Slackware 10.0
As for OpenOffice... just download the binary package from OpenOffice.org and install it. It has its own installer and everything... just ./install.
Cheers -A look at Slackware 10.0
Though the lack of a graphical installer may intimidate new users, the text-based menu installer still serves well and is quite simple to use if one will only take the time to read the text.
A look at Slackware 10.0
I am rather curious as to *why* a text-based menu installer looks intimidating. Is there something psychologically disturbing about textmode? Because the menu is clearly menu-driven just like any other menu, in graphics mode or otherwise. I just don't get this stigma over textmode.
A look at Slackware 10.0
Think "Gee, it doesn't have all of these cute bells/whistles/<your favorite extra eye candy here> that all of the other people have - it must be ANCIENT and NOT CONTEMPORARY ENOUGH FOR ME."
The only thing slightly intimidating about installing Slackware is that you have to partition your hard drive using either fdisk or cfdisk. There is not a "disk druid" or "disk drax" to do the partitioning for you. Apart from that it is pretty easy. I've used Slackware since release 1.2 and have been thoroughly imprinted on it, like a baby duck seeing its mama when it comes out of the egg.A look at Slackware 10.0
Hi there people,Is there something like 'net install' ?
I've been recently thinking about installing slack on my notebook, but i'm too lazy to download and burn all of the isos.
Is there something like net install mini-cd - like in debian for example ?
( The net install mini cd contains only base system + couple of utils and everything else should be downloaded from the Internet after base install. )
I wonder whether there is something like this in slack; i've done some searching but didn't find anything - it appears to me that the only way how to install slack is to download all install cds?
Thanks.
There is SLAX which is 1 182Mb download. Burn to a CD and it'll boot a Is there something like 'net install' ?
slackware with KDE-3.3. You can also install it to a hard drive and have a
very basic Slack.
Anything else you might want you can get from mirrors if its part of
Slackware, from http://linuxpackages.net if its not and/or you can roll
your own from a tarball and create a slackpack with checinstall, and/or
convert an rpm with rpm2tgz or a deb with alien. I my needs are simple but
things compile well on Slack as everythings where its supposed to be and
if it ain't stable it ain't in there.
I've been using Slack since 8.0. before that I was an install junkie
running a stable Mdk and trying anything else that came down the pike on
spare partitions. At one time I had three linii plus windows available at
boot.
Slackware with crossover office to run office 2k when I bring something
home from work is all I need these days and I just keep a spare slack on
another partition for crash and burn operations like kernel compiles when
I'm bored.
yeah, I know about slax, but that's not what I wantedIs there something like 'net install' ?
It seems that the first slackware cd is fully sufficient and will work great for me
cheers