slackware 11.1

[Vergil83]

For some reason he keeps saying his servers don't work well with the 2.6, yet I've been running a file server with Debian Etch for months on a fairly old, desktop-class hardware (as opposed to server-class hardware) with no problems yet.

That does sound odd to me.

He could try not forcing the the install of 2.6 if upgrading(if I recall correctly, Etch will allow the 2.4 kernel if it has already been installed). But then he would have to keep updates for 2 kernel versions.

[carlosponti]

I want to mention that while slack had a 2.6 kernel it DID NOT WORK from install. i have installed later slackware acouple of times and when you install the 2.6 kernel its not fully installed because the kernel modules are not installed. you have to go in POST install and install kernel files that were not installed to begin with. Cant exactly call that kernel an option then can you.

[bryansmith]

Do you think it makes more sense to use a 2.6 kernel for the installer when the distro still includes both?

Absolutely. There is much better support for hardware in the 2.6 series - if enterprise distributions are built around a 2.6 series, like bidi said, I think Patrick can jump on the bandwagon.

If he's trying to sell Slackware, he needs to look beyond (what bidi has pointed out) 'what works with his servers'. If Slackware is built to work with everything, as you say, why has he neglected to default to a kernel with much better hardware support?

It's not as if he is neglecting 2.6 altogether but putting such an emphasis on 2.4 is ludicrous.

[benjamin20]

plus 2.6 has support for al these new cpu things coming out in the last few years. widespread suport for 64bit and milticore proccessors. also a lot of general user hardware is suported by 2.6 by defaut but needs patches for 2.4. and patching the kernel everytime you want some new hardware to work is no fun.

not to mention slackwares software installation systems seem like they havent changed since 1995. other distros have auto updating and package management(albeit not always the best working(yum)) and ones such as gentoo have evything installed on the computer go through the package management system. slackware seems to be still just download package yourself and install it.

[carlosponti]

they have package managers such as slapt-get and swaret but i never understood why there wasnt one included by default. wouldnt it be nice if gslapt(gui front end to slapt-get) could be installed by default.

[benjamin20]

thats kind of the problem, slackware doesnt try to keep up, they actualy keep putting down the ideas other distros are embracing.