Re: Most stable and tested distribution?



On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:01:03 +0000, Giorgos Tzampanakis wrote:

Robert Heller <heller@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:zpCdnSeyKblYfNnWnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

Slackware basically has no package management (or a really
simple-minded one). There is not anything like apt-get or yum at all.
You need to check each package *manually* for updates and you also need
to *manually* deal with dependencies (basically you rebuild from source
and re-install). Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, you can
only do an install.

This sounds like a lot of duplicated effort between Slackware users. A
central software update channel would be much better, even if it was for
the software less likely to break the system (anything except hardware
drivers, X, desktop environments, the kernel etc.)

It certainly doesn't sound enticing, to me at least.

Please ignore the false information in the post you just replied to, and
read my response to the same post.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he wiped the vomit from his chin.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Most stable and tested distribution?
    ... yum at all. ... You need to check each package *manually* for ... Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, ... A central software update channel would be much better, ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: Most stable and tested distribution?
    ... debian/ubuntu) that will do it for me? ... Slackware basically has no package management (or a really ... There is not anything like apt-get or yum at all. ... Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, you can ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)