suSE or Slackware.. that is the question...

[mak2k]

Alright, I'm gonna switch linux distro soon and i'm REALLY debating between Slackware and SuSE... which one is better? I don't have much knowledge about both so i can't really choose.

I know slackware has slapt-get which is a nice feature but SuSE also has Yast2date (well their update thingy). SuSE takes up 5 cds (which means more disk space and MUCH more time to install) where as slack has 2 cds.

That's about what i know... anything else that makes either distro unique?

[carbon-12]

Well...

Slackware is:

-much faster than SUSE
-more up2date(YAST is really old)
-more 1337(impress the ladies ;) )

I say go with slackware. I used SUSE 9.0 for a month or so but just ended up going back to slackware.


BTW swaret is way better than slapt-get (www.swaret.org)

[JusKickNit]

I say Slack also, course I hate rpm based distro's. You did not say how much linux experiance you have. Slack dosn't really set it up for you like Suse would. Has far as the five cd's go, you don't have to install them all. Another about Suse it they are a little to commercial for me. Stick with swaret and Slack, and linuxpackages.net to repos. list. You'll think your in heaven.:D

[Fryguy8]

I personally don't like slack only because i'm a sucker for GOOD package management that is automated (I spent my time sorting around with dependencies and hand compiling code, I want a system that just works now).

Suse and slackware are VERY different though. Suse is much more automated than slackware.

[Hussain]

My opinion :

Suse is much much much faster than Slack
Suse with 5 cds does'nt mean more disk space .. you need only 3 ! 3 cds not 2 means you won't need to surve the internet searching for packages !

Yast is old but still good :)

but .... if you want to hack into linux .. Slackware is best xxxxx ..
The More problems you encounter with slack = the more knowldge you get ;)

[aNoob]

Did Suse,RH,Mandrake.Cool ones.But went to Slack.
Suse is faster than Slack only if Suse is running on dual processor + 5 tera RAM and Slack on 386 ;)

Seriously, depends also which WM or DE you are using, not only the distro. Also checck which daemons are running in background.

But!Definitely Slack + Dropline Gnome is the fastest one that ever ran on my actual machine.No offence intended.

[hard candy]

take a look at this post (http://justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122565)

It seems the cultural life of Slackware is much more edifying than Suse's. Which would you rather hang with? the Church of the Subgenius or efficient, tightlipped businessmen? I think your choice of software should be based on your emotional needs- since when you get down to it opening a file in Slackware or in Suse gets you pretty much the same result (some of the windrow dressing is different).
That's it- We'll start a movement for people choosing their software based on their emotional makeup. The heck with efficiency, speed, utility, etc.
If WinXp gives you a warm, fuzzy feeling and Redhat leaves you emotionally detached- then go for WinXP.
I used to choose software based on its age- if it was new, I wanted it. Then I went with price- if it was free, I wanted it. Later was the frills- if it had fancy plugins, addons, etc I had to have it. Now I choose based on whether software fills an emotional void- if I install it and I feel better, then I keep it (sort of like significant others). One time I found a repository of Debian packages, I had an
overwhelming sense of peace and serenity (I was going to say orgasm, but that leads to sex, and I didn't want say I had to have software to have sex, only the hardware :) ).
Now that I think of it, really most of us are doing that now, basing our choice of distros on our emotional responses. Sometimes we install stuff because it came free with a magazine, or in the mail, or we clicked on a link. But I believe we keep software because it gives us good feelings.
Again kind of like a spouse, if it keeps doing what it's supposed to and we still have feelings for it, then we keep it/her/him. Otherwise, it's uninstall time! (of course even if you uninstall it, you may have to keep paying license fees/alimony depending on the contract ).
So I guess it boils down to choosing the right distro/spouse or getting a pet.

[mak2k]

well my level of nix expertise is not that bad. I know the configure, make, make install dance and i can do lots of stuff. When it comes to configure, i'm still having a bit of probs (like samba.. but know i know how to do it! ;) ) For the rest, i don't really know.

How much config does it need though? My hardware is decently recent (SBLive value 5.1, gf2 32 ddr, p4 2 ghz, 256 ram) so will it autodectect or it will crap on me and i'Ll have to setup everything myself?

[AndrewLubinus89]

Hard Candy that is just freaky......

[SunOfTux]

Well, whether you decide between SuSE or Slack depends on several things:

a) Your level of Linux experience (Slack)

b) Whether or not you like all the "bells and whistles" (SuSE)

c) How much do you like "hacking your box" (tweaking).

If you like to tinker with your OS, I would definitely stay away from SuSE. It seems like it might be ideal in a corporate setting, but it is easier to "break" than Slack due to its comlexity.

SuSE has a professional sleek look, and more packages than you can shake a stick at, but your system can get really screwed up if you go nuts (like me) and install one too many packages (dependency conflicts, etc.).

I personally find the RPM package management system extremely frustrating and annoying ("dependency hell"), but it probably works well with people who want to "set it and forget it" and don't install too many packages.

I use Slack 9.1, and I love it. I haven't been able to break it yet (I have had to re-install SuSE 9.0 Pro one too many times).

It has all the packages I need on the 2 CD's, and I don't have too drive myself nuts trying to decide which of 5 different versions of Tetris I'd like to install.

Sorry for the long post.

Regards,
SunOfTux

[techwise]

I would (and I do) use Slackware. I run it on 2 notebooks and a home built desktop.

I have tried SuSE 7.2 7.3 and 9.0. Honestly, I had more trouble with them than it was worth. Not to mention they are promoters of proprietary software.

If you want all the plug n play stuff a distro has to offer along with as much preconfigured stuff you could possibly want, then use Mandrake. Of the commercially available distros, it is the best at being non techie friendly. With little trouble, I used firewire drives, scanners, net printers, my iPod, Zip disk, usb keys, usb vid cam, 3daccelerated card, played Quake (natively) and more on my Mandrake box. SuSE just plain couldnt do all that so easily.

Anyhow, now Im slackware on all my workstations.

good luck

[blackbelt_jones]

Hmmmmm. Interesting choice; to me it seems like a choice between two extremes. Personally, I hate 'em both, One has no automatic package management, the other is automated to a ridiculous extent, and runs on my old box with the speed of escargot. To be fair, I'm sure I could get more out of Slack if I knew more, but here's the catch: I don't.

Currently, I'm running Fedora, but I think I'm gonna go back to Red Hat 9, and stick with it until the next stable Debian is released (if ever). Not that anybody asked.:)

[mak2k]

hehehe.. well i'm currently running mandrake 9.2 and i'm starting to be fed up. I can't even run updates anymore since there are so many dependencies problems (probably 'cause i've installed so many librairies to make some programs work).

Is configuring Slack THAT complex?

[AndrewLubinus89]

No, slackware isn't that hard to configure. I am a new linux user who started with RH9 and moved to mdk then slackware. Slackware worked mostly out of the boxes and the scripts tend to be more logically organized and simpler than RH. Imho...

[Arjay]

I wouldn't say Slackware is that hard to configure either, it just takes that little bit more effort, for example, looking through books, asking on forums to try and understand it is you want to do, the things that the graphical tools would hide from you.

A statement describing Slackware on Distrowatch would best describe what Slackware is like, i've highlighted the bit i thought was a good point.

Slackware Linux, created by Patrick Volkerding in 1992, is the oldest surviving Linux distribution. It offers no bells and whistles, sticking with a text-based installer and no graphical configuration tools. Where other distributions tried hard to develop easy-to-use front ends for many common utilities, Because of this, Slackware offers no hand-holding and everything is still done through configuration files. Slackware is only recommended to those novice users who intend to spend some time on learning about Linux.

Nevertheless, Slackware has a magic appeal to many users. It is extremely stable and secure - very suitable for server deployment. Experienced Linux administrators find that the distribution is less buggy as it uses most packages in their pristine forms and without too many in-house enhancements which have a potential to introduce new bugs. Releases are infrequent (about once a year), although up-to-date packages are always available for download after the official release. Slackware is a fine distribution for those who are interested in deeper knowledge of Linux internals.

Perhaps the best characteristic of this distribution I have heard is this: If you need help with your Linux box, find a Slackware user. He is more likely to fix the problem than a user familiar with any other distribution.

Hope this helps..

Cheers :-)

http://www.distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major

[owlish]

Slack for power users, suse for newbies...

Originally posted by hard candy
I used to choose software based on its age- if it was new, I wanted it. Then I went with price- if it was free, I wanted it. Later was the frills- if it had fancy plugins, addons, etc I had to have it. Now I choose based on whether software fills an emotional void- if I install it and I feel better, then I keep it
But you do feel better when a software meets one of those critirias (age, price, frills or combination of those)
For me its the frills that gives me inner peace.. that means out with sylpheed and say hello to evolution!

[JsPr]

Well, I don't consider me to be a newbie and I use SuSE...
I want it to be simple but powerful. I don't want to have to do a lot of tweaking to get "standard" things to work. I have to admit that I haven't used Slackware. I might try it later but I feel that it's possible to tweak SuSE if I want to and have the option to be lazy.
Remember that this is IMHO. :-)

[blackbelt_jones]

This may be obvious to some people, but it took me a while to figure out that if I install all the development tools when I install the distro-- in my case, Red Hat, but I think it's true for any distro-- you get a lot less dependency problem. I used to think that the developmment tools had something to do with people who were developing new somftware applications-- and m,aybe they do, but they have a lot to do with installing packages,.

[owlish]

It helps but rpms are still a lot of trouble. Infact I never recommend an rpm based distro to anyone. I'hd rather have them hd installing mepis or knoppix then mandrake, fedora or suse.

[blackbelt_jones]

Well, I haven't had any trouble at all since I started the practice (still running fedora) but I don't do a lot of installing. I tried Knoppix but I thought it was kinda buggy on the harddrive. I hear they're coming out with a new version with a 2.6 Kernel, and I'm sure I'll want to try it.

If I had my druthers, I'd be running Debian Woody. Nothing is easier than all the software you could possibly need on six disks all indexed under apt... but the 2.2.20 kernel doesn't support ALSA so my soundcard isn't supported, and so far my attempts to upgrade the kernel have come to naught.

Would it be possible for me to index my 7 disks of Woody software under a different Debian-based distribution? Perhaps Knoppix, or Xandros?