Slackware Documentation Project
Submitted by vtel57 on Wednesday 30th of April 2014 04:28:35 PM
Filed under
A while back, Eric Hameleers (Alien Bob), Niki Kovacs, and others in conversation at LinuxQuestions.org tossed around the idea of creating a wiki for Slackware similar to the excellent one the Arch Linux community maintains. The dream became a reality. 
Visit, learn, participate...
http://docs.slackware.com/
Regards,
V. T. Eric Layton (Nocturnal Slacker, vtel57)
Tampa, Florida, USA
http://vtel57.com
»
-
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- 88292 reads
PDF version
More in Tux Machines
- Highlights
- Front Page
- Latest Headlines
- Archive
- Recent comments
- All-Time Popular Stories
- Hot Topics
- New Members
today's howtos
| Red Hat Hires a Blind Software Engineer to Improve Accessibility on Linux Desktop
Accessibility on a Linux desktop is not one of the strongest points to highlight. However, GNOME, one of the best desktop environments, has managed to do better comparatively (I think).
In a blog post by Christian Fredrik Schaller (Director for Desktop/Graphics, Red Hat), he mentions that they are making serious efforts to improve accessibility.
Starting with Red Hat hiring Lukas Tyrychtr, who is a blind software engineer to lead the effort in improving Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and Fedora Workstation in terms of accessibility.
|
Today in Techrights
| Android Leftovers |
.svg_.png)
Content (where original) is available under CC-BY-SA, copyrighted by original author/s.
Subjectivity Rules
A lot of it is personal preference, Dr. Roy, as you probably know. My first foray into GNU/Linux was in 2006 with Ubuntu 6.06 Dapper Drake. From there, I tried boat loads of distributions over the next few weeks. I settled on Slackware because I liked its simplicity, stability, and attitude. A close second to Slackware for me would be pure Debian (not derivatives); for similar reasons, particularly the stability.
Were I running a server in a commercial or private implementation, I would have to run it with Slackware as the first option or Debian as the second. There actually are commercial distributions like RedHat, but you can get CentOS for free and the only difference is basically the documentation and support. With RH, you get to talk to someone when you have an issue. With CentOS, you'll have to do a bit of research on your own.
As far as Arch goes, mostly what scares people away from that distribution is the fact that it doesn't really have an installer, per se. The entire installation process is a series of command line commands and script/file edits. It's not that difficult, but if one isn't comfortable outside of the GUI realm, it can be scary. And while Arch is pretty stable as far as it goes, it's vulnerable to breakage occasionally because it is a rolling-release distribution that stays very near the bleeding edge when it comes to the apps in its repos.
Gentoo? HA! Won't even go there. That much-loved (by its hardcore adherents) distribution is primarily for those who enjoy self-flagellation and other fun masochistic hobbies.
No, seriously... I respect Gentoo Linux people. I've tried it. It's not my cup o', but when done right, it can be a very stable and efficient operating system.
As the title of this post says, it's really just a personal choice. Folks do their homework (hopefully) and decide upon a distribution that works best for them in their circumstances. That's the wonderful thing about GNU/Linux and Open Source... FREEDOM OF CHOICE!
There you have it...
~Eric
Choice
A lot of it is personal preference, Dr. Roy, as you probably know. My first foray into GNU/Linux was in 2006 with Ubuntu 6.06 Dapper Drake. From there, I tried boat loads of distributions over the next few weeks. I settled on Slackware because I liked its simplicity, stability, and attitude. A close second to Slackware for me would be pure Debian (not derivatives); for similar reasons, particularly the stability.
I use Debian more and more, but not as my main distro. I like the simplicity of E18 for some things, whereas KDE is still the most functional (where resources permit). For me, Ubuntu started in 2004, but I had used other distros before it (Red Hat was my first). SUSE was a favourite before the Microsoft-Novell deal.
Were I running a server in a commercial or private implementation, I would have to run it with Slackware as the first option or Debian as the second. There actually are commercial distributions like RedHat, but you can get CentOS for free and the only difference is basically the documentation and support. With RH, you get to talk to someone when you have an issue. With CentOS, you'll have to do a bit of research on your own.
CentOS powers Techrights and Tux Machines. I can cope with it fine, but it takes some learning if you come from a DEB world and must also adapt to third-party repos. The upgrades to CentOS 6 made things easier. CentOS 5 was getting long in the tooth.
As far as Arch goes, mostly what scares people away from that distribution is the fact that it doesn't really have an installer, per se. The entire installation process is a series of command line commands and script/file edits. It's not that difficult, but if one isn't comfortable outside of the GUI realm, it can be scary. And while Arch is pretty stable as far as it goes, it's vulnerable to breakage occasionally because it is a rolling-release distribution that stays very near the bleeding edge when it comes to the apps in its repos.
Arch is used by many people I know, but I just don't see the big advantage of it. I know the pros and cons and the latter outweighs the former. I want a simple binary distro with good, reliable, extensive repos.
Gentoo? HA! Won't even go there. That much-loved (by its hardcore adherents) distribution is primarily for those who enjoy self-flagellation and other fun masochistic hobbies.
No, seriously... I respect Gentoo Linux people. I've tried it. It's not my cup o', but when done right, it can be a very stable and efficient operating system.
Gentoo is for ricers, some say...
As the title of this post says, it's really just a personal choice. Folks do their homework (hopefully) and decide upon a distribution that works best for them in their circumstances. That's the wonderful thing about GNU/Linux and Open Source... FREEDOM OF CHOICE!
Which is spun as a negative by the proprietary software proponents.
Linux Is Linux Is Linux...
People often ask me what are the major differences between distributions of Linux. I tell them that Linux is Linux is Linux... meaning, the distributions are all GNU/Linux at their heart. The major differences between the distributions mostly have to do with methods of package management; along with some other minor differences like init methods, daemon handling, etc.
To learn Linux, I found it was best try as many distributions as I could manage. At one time, I had machines in my shop or home that had 20+ operating systems installed on them at any given time. If you learn the package management and the other minor things from each distro, you begin to get a feel and a competence when dealing with any of them. Familiarization with the command line is a plus.
I remember a mentor of mine, Bruno Knaapen of Amsterdam - Senior All Things Linux Admin at Scot's Newsletter Forums, once told me that if I wanted to surf the net and read emails, run Ubuntu. If I wanted to learn Linux, run Slackware. I chose the latter path.
8 years later, I'm no guru, but I can command line my way out of a paper bag if I have to.
P.S. I was always impressed with CentOS. Up until recently, there were almost always installations of CentOS and Debian on all my systems along with my primary OS, Slackware. Lately though, I've suspended experimentation for the most part. I'm just happy using my rock solid Slackware OS. The lessening of tinkering has also been a large part of the reason my writing output on my blog has diminished, unfortunately.
Blog focus
Yes, I recently took another look at the blog and realised it's no longer so GNU/Linux-centric.
Blog Evolution
Well, it was never really meant to be purely GNU/Linux. Nocturnal Slacker v1.0 is the direct descendant of my original blog from when I was writing on Chris Pirillo's LockerGnome site a few years back. It was technically oriented, but also had general topics.
When I left LockerGnome, after changes were made to that site, I divided Nocturnal Slacker down into two distinct blogs: v1.0 remains technical and v2.0 is purely general topics. The original Nocturnal Slacker blog is still available as an archive, though.
They can be accessed from my website --> http://vtel57.com
All techie stuff and no general topic rants make Eric a dull boy.
LockerGnome and Pirillo
I have not seen anything from LockerGnome or even Pirillo for a long time. Did he collapse with Windows' demise?
Pirillo Still Kickin'
Chris is still around --> http://www.lockergnome.com/
Lockergnome has gone through some serious transformations and refocusing over the last few years, though. Chris seemed to move himself almost primarily to his video channel on YouTube. The original Lockergnome site is still up, but it's much different that it was in the past.
Lockergnome
One sure thing is, Lockergnome is no longer influential.
I used to see many links to/articles in Lockergnome.
Last I spoke to Chris, it was about removing some USENET archives he had put there (he removed). That was a very long time ago.
Slackware
I used to want to move to Arch or its derivatives, but I found the documentation a bit daunting. The same goes for Slackware and I used to stay out of Debian for similar reasons (until several years ago). Gentoo was out of the question and it doesn't seem to be quite so active anymore (barely any releases).
What would be the advantage of using Slackware on a server or desktop at this stage?