>
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, David Mandel wrote:
>
> > All the major Linux distributions are quality distributions.
> > I don't think one can really rank them from worst to best without
> > considering your particular applications. One distribution is
> > better for some users and another one is for other users.
> >
> To pick some nits . . .
>
> > Slackware or Soft Landing (SLS) for historians
> > SLS was the first Linux distribution I used.
> > As far as I know, it was the first distribution
> > and hasn't been updated in years.
>
> Actually, there were some earlier distros. MCC, & one out of Texas A&M. --
> IIRC, it was called TAMU. The problem with these early distributions was
> that once created, no one maintained them. IIRC, the same happened to SLS,
> which is why Patrick Volkerding released Slackware.
There was also one called Ygdrasil (sp?). I still have my CD of that one.
Pretty early version. Kernel was about .96 or so.
> The reason *any* distribution had a following was that Linus was (& AFAIK
> still) only interested in the kernel. There's an interview with Matt Welsh
> where he describes trying to get Linux to work before these distributions were
> available having nothing more than a list of files & their directories.
> In those days, only giants used Linux.
Or the criminally insane...
> > Slackware came out after SLS, and was a great
> > improvement. It was basic, but it was a quality
> > distribution. Unfortunately, it fell behind
> > Redhat, Caldera, SuSE, and the others; and I
> > stopped using it. Slackware is still around
> > and is regularly updated. Since I no longer
> > use it, I don't know how the current version
> > compares to other major distributions.
> >
> A correspondent of mine in California swears by it -- especially now that
> it supports rpms. It's a case of ``I know exactly how this distribution
> works down to the machine code, & I see no reason to change." Having growled
> at what Red Hat picked & choosed to include in their distribution, I find
> it hard to argue with him.
I like Slackware alot. I am seriously considering moving back to it.
Slackware 7 has the same install as it always has had, but it works. It seems
to be the most "power user" oriented. Now that it supports a current version
of GLibC, it is a temptation. (Especially since it is one I used for many
years.)
>
> [snip]
> >
> > Finally, I commonly mix and match things between distributions.
>
> I have to agree with this. Remember, one of the strengths of Linux is
> ability to decide that the person who put the distribution together
> was on drugs, & to make it right. (For individual definitions of
> what is ``right".) Doing so teaches the student not only much about
> Linux, but UNIX in general.
I tend to compile most of the things I use from source. It saves me the
trouble of figuring out what Redhat did with the source RPMs it extracted.
