I hear a lot of noise about swaret being or not being included in the new 10.0
release. Obviously, it is Patrick Volkerding's (PV) choice and I doubt he
will be influenced by anything said in this group as I'm told he does not
monitor it.

Still, we have an obligation to debate the issue.... and maybe even to write
PV personally.

The issue is simple. What is best for Slackware? I'll leave the techie
arguments to those who like them. Dependency checking or no dependency
checking debates can go on until the moon turns blue.

All of us want Slack to be continued. That means that someone (i.e. we) have
to pay for it. I believe that PV would never "sell out" by including "bad
stuff" in Slack in order to compete. However, he (and we) need to consider
something (not agree on it... just consider it.): Is Slack more marketable
with a designated 'full-bore' pkg manager or not?

Why is "marketable" important to you? Simple. People have choices. Everytime
someone chooses a Deb or a Fedora or a Gentoo over Slackware means less
possible revenue for PV. Maybe PV would "do" Slack even if there were only
two users on the planet. I don't know. But I assume he has a family to feed
like the rest of us. Thus it is in our best interest if he does what is in
his best interest... to put in modules and packages that will appeal to those
who use his product... and who will pay for it.

I strongly believe that a Slackware with a "designated" dep-checking package
manager like a swaret is a stronger product than one without it.

I'm a typical example. I would not continue to use Slackware if there were not
a swaret. I would go to Deb 'testing." This should not be hard to understand.
Lots of business types like me "want it all." We want the efficiency and
compactness of Slack with ease of administration. Slack WITH a swaret does
that. Without it, it doesn't... compared to other distros. Swaret is GOOD for
Slackware. No one is forced to use it... but because it is there it adds
value to the product... value that I'm happy to pay $40 each release for. And
I believe that it is my forty bucks, along with the others who make an annual
financial commitment to Slack is what has kept the distro going.

I know many of you think that Slack is a "public service" or a "charity" of
some kind, but as I understand it, Slackware is a for-profit corporate
entity... and it needs to make money to pay the people who make Slackware for
us.

So I hope that PV has enough "business sense" to see that a Slack with a
dependency-checking PM makes it a better product, one that is more marketable
and more competitive. It costs PV nothing to include a swaret or a slapt-get
utility as his "weapon of choice" and it makes the product a better one.

Now if these PMs were crap, of course I'd say to PV "fergetaboutit." But these
are good pieces of software, they work well for most users, and to not
include them because of some kind of 'ego' problem with the developer is not
doing any of us any good.

I know to a fair segment of the Slack (and Linux) community, making money is
an anathema... that working on Linux should be a labor of love. However, the
reality of the situation is that without an income to PV, Slack would be
turned over to a "community of developers" and we'd see updates about as
frequently as Deb stable ..... like never... or we'd see daily bug-ridden
releases like Fedora. We need PV to continue his work... and I think Slack
needs a dep-check PM to keep it from being rated about as high as whatever is
number 100 on distrowatch.com. Because if that happens, PV will go on to
other endeavors and Gentoo will be the distro of choice for those who
graduate from Mandrake or SuSE.

Follow the money.


Alan N. Canton, President
Adams-Blake Company, Inc
Fair Oaks, CA
http://www.jaya123.com

A-B C. wrote:

> I'm a typical example. I would not continue to use Slackware if there
> were not a swaret. I would go to Deb 'testing." This should not be
> hard to understand. Lots of business types like me "want it all." We
> want the efficiency and compactness of Slack with ease of
> administration.

You better try and see if you can actually install it first Al.
'Testing'/'Sarge' comes on 12, (thirteen in the UK) CD's, and if you
remember you had some trouble installing Slackware on your new machine.
Still it will only cost you the price of burning the disks to find
out... and the time of course. You may find it easier to try it out on
your previous machine, older hardware.
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."

A-B C. <atakeoutcanton@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
['hail swaret' sniped]

Unfortunaly it needs much more than swaret can do, if you want
dependency checking that _really_ works. The whole .tgz's have to be
replaced with a new format and the pkgtools have to be rewritten. Swaret
uses ldd and MANIFEST.gz to search for some missing libraries, nothing
more. And sometime the "suggestions" are far from sane. Example? I
installed it a few hours ago for a quick test. It told me i have to
install netscape and reinstall mozilla and mozilla-plugins. But the only
reason mozilla is acctualy installed, is for being the backend for my
wife's epiphany browser.

I guess Slackware would *loose* a lot of "customers", if the
distribution change its direction that way. I don't want dependencies. I
don't want handholding. I wouldn't buy my cd-set any longer. And be sure
that many others would cancel their subscription too.

Oh, oh. This will never end... All right, but you've started it.

If we wnated to convert the debate to money issue. Do you think you can
get more from home users or companies? Esp. when there is a choice to pay
or to pay not?

Who is in charge of those companies' computers: common users or (less or
more) computer literate admins? Are those more likely to choose comfort or
control? (That is a tricky question since human kind tends to be lazy
often times. )


Well, those questins might not be too important, nut even from a marketing
point of view I would say it's better to keep doing what one is really
good at instead of trying to imitate other's that have been doing
something else and some of them got good at that.

In other words: Being more Deb like will probably not win a lot of Deb
users for Slackware, but can actually turn away some of its current users.


I did convert from Deb to Slack and I really do not think there would be a
thing to envy about automated package management. (Btw. even if they made
me have all the servers with Debian on them, they never made me run
apt-get on them as I would never run anything smart and automated on
production system.)

A-B C. wrote :

> I hear a lot of noise about swaret being or not being included in the
> new 10.0 release.

Isn't it just GP thats making the noise as he usually do?
>
> Still, we have an obligation to debate the issue.... and maybe even to
> write PV personally.
>
Don't include me. I never used swaret and never will so I don't give a
damn if its included or not.

> The issue is simple. What is best for Slackware?
>
I'm pretty sure Patrick knows this, its his baby and what he do for
Slackware is the right thing for Slackware.

Or else it wouldn't be Slackware anymore.
>
> I strongly believe that a Slackware with a "designated" dep-checking
> package manager like a swaret is a stronger product than one without it.
>
I've tried the dependencies checking hell in RedHat, that why I'm
running Slackware today.

> So I hope that PV has enough "business sense" to see that a Slack with
> a dependency-checking PM makes it a better product, one that is more
> marketable and more competitive

Patrick seems to make a living out of Slackware the way it is. I don't
think he has any ambitions to become a new Bill Gates.
--
Thomas O.

This area is designed to become quite warm during normal operation.

A-B C. <atakeoutcanton@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
> I hear a lot of noise about swaret being or not being included in the new 10.0
> release. Obviously, it is Patrick Volkerding's (PV) choice and I doubt he

What noise? Isn't is in extra already?

> The issue is simple. What is best for Slackware? I'll leave the techie

Uh, what Pat thinks is best?

> arguments to those who like them. Dependency checking or no dependency
> checking debates can go on until the moon turns blue.
>
> All of us want Slack to be continued. That means that someone (i.e. we) have
> to pay for it. I believe that PV would never "sell out" by including "bad
> stuff" in Slack in order to compete. However, he (and we) need to consider
> something (not agree on it... just consider it.): Is Slack more marketable
> with a designated 'full-bore' pkg manager or not?
>
> Why is "marketable" important to you? Simple. People have choices. Everytime
> someone chooses a Deb or a Fedora or a Gentoo over Slackware means less
> possible revenue for PV. Maybe PV would "do" Slack even if there were only

Ah, I see you are another one of them - you related to GP by any chance?

> So I hope that PV has enough "business sense" to see that a Slack with a
> dependency-checking PM makes it a better product, one that is more marketable
> and more competitive. It costs PV nothing to include a swaret or a slapt-get
> utility as his "weapon of choice" and it makes the product a better one.

Yes, unless Pat does this Slackware will fail. I've been hearing that one
for a long time now.... You could also argue that there is no way
Slackware could ever be sucessful unless it changes it's name to something
that sounds more serious.

> I know to a fair segment of the Slack (and Linux) community, making money is
> an anathema... that working on Linux should be a labor of love. However, the

Where did you come up with that bullshit? Sounds like MS FUD. I'm pretty
sure Slackware is the only distro out there that has always been in the
black.

> reality of the situation is that without an income to PV, Slack would be
> turned over to a "community of developers" and we'd see updates about as

No it wouldn't. It would be something else - no longer Slackware.

> frequently as Deb stable ..... like never... or we'd see daily bug-ridden
> releases like Fedora. We need PV to continue his work... and I think Slack
> needs a dep-check PM to keep it from being rated about as high as whatever is
> number 100 on distrowatch.com. Because if that happens, PV will go on to
> other endeavors and Gentoo will be the distro of choice for those who
> graduate from Mandrake or SuSE.

Like I said, you really need to get together with GP.

- Kurt

Kai Brust wrote:


> Unfortunaly it needs much more than swaret can do, if you want
> dependency checking that _really_ works. The whole .tgz's have to be
> replaced with a new format and the pkgtools have to be rewritten.
>
> I guess Slackware would *loose* a lot of "customers", if the
> distribution change its direction that way.

I was not advocating a drastic change. I was only advocating that PV simply
recommend (by inclusion) whatever PM (besides pkgtool) that he feels is the
best. That way, new users have an option. We can use a "swaret" manager that
has some (now I'm told limited) dep-checking.... or use the current
pkgtool.... or compile from source (with checkinstall).

Otherwise here is what will happen. As soon as 10 comes out there will be a
bunch of reviews. And the reviews will hammer Slack 10 for not having a
Deb-like or the Gentoo-like PM. And newbies looking to switch from the
commercial distros or the o.s. buggy ones (won't mention any names) will say
"Wow, this Slackware sure looks awesome... but Geez, Louise, I don't want to
have to get a Ph.D in quantum physics in order to upgrade Firefox from .8
to .9."

And this is what prompted me to write this thread. This morning I used swaret
to upgrade Firefox to the new version. I wrote one line on the CLI and got a
flawless install. (And I'll bet that somewhere there is a GUI front-end that
would have not required me to even go to root and use the terminal screen.) I
was so pleased I promptly sent Jim Simmons of Linuxpackages a $50 donatation
via PayPal.... and would send swaret one as well if they had a donation-link
on their site to do so.

This (easy upgrades) is what users want. Indeed, they (we, I) want "it all."
They want the solid and stable performance of Linux, the latest packages
(unlike Deb stable), and they want ease of admin. Slack without a Swaret does
two out of three. With a swaret-like module it's three out of three... and
people have choices... and they will choose Gentoo over Slack... and there
will be less revenue for Slack... and eventually NO Slack.

I know about egos, principles, and all the other ingredients that make up the
the open source "cake". But like it or not, the world runs via a set of
economic rules known as capitalism or "semi-socialism" and so far there has
been no successful alternative economic system that provides the goods and
services to the greatest number. Obviously, it's far from perfect, but all
the others just don't scale.

PV needs to make a living and if he does, we get Slackware 10,11,12, etc. If
people go to Gentoo or whatever, PV gets no income..... and Slack becomes a
fond memory.



ANC

A-B C. <atakeoutcanton@adams-blaketakeout.com> says...

>All of us want Slack to be continued. That means that someone (i.e. we) have
>to pay for it. I believe that PV would never "sell out" by including "bad
>stuff" in Slack in order to compete. However, he (and we) need to consider
>something (not agree on it... just consider it.): Is Slack more marketable
>with a designated 'full-bore' pkg manager or not?

Less.

Slackware dominates a small segment of the market - a market where the
only thing that comes close to being competition is Linux From Scratch.

The rest of the market is much larger but also has many distributions
fighting over it.

A designated package manager tends to move Slackware out of its market.

Allowing Slackware users to download and choose any package manager
they choose while keeping compiling from source the preferred method
keeps Slackware in its market.

>I'm a typical example.

Actually, you are a typical non-slackware Linux user. You are very
much an atypical Slackware user. Most users who want what you want
choose a distribution that gives them what they want. You choose to
use a distribution that doesn't give you what you want and then to
ask that it become what it is not.

>I would not continue to use Slackware if there were not a swaret.

Yet you do use slackware, so the philosophy of letting each user
choose what package manager to use is working in your case.

>Lots of business types like me "want it all." We want the efficiency and
>compactness of Slack with ease of administration.

As many here have told you, Slackware isn't your best choice if you
want ease of administration, and you can get efficiency and compactness
out of other distributions by installing a subset.

>Swaret is GOOD for Slackware.

Swaret being available for those who wish to download and use it is good
for slackware. Swaret as a (in your words) "designated 'full-bore' pkg
manager" would be bad for Slackware.

>I know many of you think that Slack is a "public service" or a "charity" of
>some kind, but as I understand it, Slackware is a for-profit corporate
>entity... and it needs to make money to pay the people who make Slackware for
>us.

....and the way to do that is to stay true to the Slackware Philosophy
- a philosophy that you reject.

>So I hope that PV has enough "business sense" to see that a Slack with a
>dependency-checking PM makes it a better product, one that is more marketable
>and more competitive.

When you dominate a niche market, it does not make business sense to
abandon it and try to compete in another market.

>It costs PV nothing to include a swaret or a slapt-get utility as
>his "weapon of choice" and it makes the product a better one.

Better in the opinion of someone who rejects the Slackware Philosophy.
Abandoning that philosophy would be far from costless.

>Follow the money.

I suggest that *you* follow the money. Slackware keeps on for year
after year, making a good living for PV, while distributions that
follow your advice go belly up.

--
Guy Macon, Electronics Engineer & Project Manager for hire.
Remember Doc Brown from the _Back to the Future_ movies? Do you
have an "impossible" engineering project that only someone like
Doc Brown can solve? My resume is at http://www.guymacon.com/

A-B C. <atakeoutcanton@adams-blaketakeout.com> says...

>I was not advocating a drastic change. I was only advocating that PV simply
>recommend (by inclusion) whatever PM (besides pkgtool) that he feels is the
>best.

He already did that. He recommends (by inclusion) pkgtool and GCC.
You just don't like his recommendation.

>Otherwise here is what will happen. As soon as 10 comes out there will be a
>bunch of reviews. And the reviews will hammer Slack 10 for not having a
>Deb-like or the Gentoo-like PM.

You are assuming that the reviewers are like you - people who reject
the Slackware Philosophy. A quick serach of past reviews wil, show
you that this assumption is false.

>And newbies looking to switch

....should stay away from Slackware.

>will say "Wow, this Slackware sure looks awesome... but Geez, Louise,
>I don't want to have to get a Ph.D in quantum physics in order to
>upgrade Firefox from .8 to .9."

Good! That means that they will avoid Slackware and instead choose a
distribution suited for newbies who don't want to learn.

>This (easy upgrades) is what users want.

Not Sklackware users who (unlike you) agree with the Slackware
Philosophy. We value control over ease-of-use.

>and they will choose Gentoo over Slack... and there
>will be less revenue for Slack... and eventually NO Slack.

Death of Slackawarer predicted! Film at 11!

Slackware will be here (and will be following the Slackware Philosophy)
long after those other distributions are gone, just as it has outlived
so many of them already.


--
Guy Macon, Electronics Engineer & Project Manager for hire.
Remember Doc Brown from the _Back to the Future_ movies? Do you
have an "impossible" engineering project that only someone like
Doc Brown can solve? My resume is at http://www.guymacon.com/

Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote:

> Better in the opinion of someone who rejects the Slackware Philosophy.
> Abandoning that philosophy would be far from costless.
>

Where is this so-called Slackware Philosophy written ....as you seem to
interpret it? Where do you get your ideas from?

It seems to me that the only person qualified to create a Slackware Philosophy
is the founder/creator of Slackware. And here is what he wrote (from
slackware.com):

---
The Slackware Philosophy

Since its first release in April of 1993, the Slackware Linux Project has
aimed at producing the most "UNIX-like" Linux distribution out there.
Slackware complies with the published Linux standards, such as the Linux File
System Standard. We have always considered simplicity and stability
paramount, and as a result Slackware has become one of the most popular,
stable, and friendly distributions available.
---

To me the words "simplicity" means that it will be simple to use. And what
does "friendly" mean? To me it means "easy to use."

So kindly explain to me Mr. Macon how I, and those who think the way I do (ie.
who disagree with you) are "non-typical [Slacksare] Linux users... because we
want a distro that is stable and easy to maintain?

The Man's words are right there. How do you interpret them to mean that
Slackware should require a Ph.D in quantum physics in order to use and
maintain it.

A dep-checking package manager compliments Slackware. It does not detract from
it. Read The Man's words.

ANC