P2 Slackware as default?

[EssoAir]

This just occured to me. Since it has so much compatability and capability, why not make Slackware the default OS on the P2? Do we really need SuperZ?

 

[ekianjo]

WHo ever said we would have SZ as default ? 

For the Pandora Successor we will likely have a full, real distribution, and not something hybrid like SZ. 

Note that Slackware does not only have advantages - have you actually used it ? Installing new packages is not beginner-friendly (at least at this stage).

 

[EssoAir]

I would think that any issues could be patched before launch

 

[MrConfusion]

I always saw Slackware as an "the average hacker with varying unix experience"-friendly starting point.

Something an individual can carve to his own taste.

I'm not sure it's the best choice as a base for a "one size fits all"-linux distro.

You'd maybe end up configuring shiny stuff that would have already existed in some other, more cluttered distros...

 

[comradekingu]

Could you further your argument to separate it from the other major distros that have ARM builds?  Debian, ubuntu, Fedora, Arch, etc.

 

[MrConfusion]

I feel Slackware does not push you in any direction in any way. It's a blessing and a curse.


If you install everything you create a godawfull mess messier even than Ubuntu (saying a lot) and far less capable of taking care of itself.

If you install just the bare minimum you get absolute control and will know exactly what you get, probably installing ready made packages and compiling yourself depending on your target system. But the price you pay is time spent. And that is definitely not what you'd expect from a shiny new gaming device, so obviously that cannot be left up to the user.

If you are packaging the said device to sell it and go in between these two options, it might not be as plug and play as you would get out of the box with something else? Could be that it is not as easy to maintain for the maintainer as something like Ubuntu?

Well, I don't know, could of course be the other way too, might be Ubuntu pushes too much clutter at you and you get overwhelmed with work trying to keep up. Slack never does that, that's for sure.

It all depends on how many and what level of modifications are to be expected.

The current SL4P is not something my Windows/OSX/iOS/Android loving acquintances would enjoy using. In fact they'll see zero difference between that and SuperZaxxon. Though you can see a lot of time and effort has already been put there.

I still keep wondering, though, if memory and CPU were no issues, would people's tastes steer more towards a flashier desktop?

(

I, on the other hand wasn't actually too pleased with the Slackware root provided for the Pandora. Simple reason: It defaulted to having a UI and came with too much redundant clutter (un-Slackwareish, if you ask me...). Yes, it was a trivial matter to alter inittab so it no longer starts X at boot. Somewhat more bothersome, but still trivial to tediously go through the package list and remove stuff by hand...

)

Aside from Slackware I've tried using Gentoo and Ubuntu mainly. Others like RedHat derivatives have been just that: "the others". I've come across a myriad of them at work but never bothered at home.

Gentoo was OK initially, but then got messy and nontrivial to maintain, I kept it running, though, until it was time to swap a disk and at that point replaced it with Slack.

Ubuntu has mostly been a disaster for me... I guessed as much in advance, but decided to give it a go anyways due to the hype. I always seem to end up scraping off stuff that I perceive as "bloat" (starting from stuff like NetworkManager) so much that updates start breaking the system and there goes the main advantage I saw to Ubuntu out the window... You know you're not "getting it" when your server's rc.local compiles a bunch of kernel modules just in case an update broke them...

Slackware is nicely balanced between these two. Maybe other similar ones do exist, but I have not tried them. Either way when I think of what the common people would expect from a desktop these days, I think Ubuntu comes closest. Unfortunately. And I think it might be something like the Pandora could benefit from such a steady stream of updates? I guess that's my main point in this musing...

I myself keep drawn back towards Slackware time and again. I don't know, it could just be that it's because my first experience from that system dates back to 1994 or 3 or something like that. A Slackware installation was the first rootfs I acquired that was not built from the thick pile of floppies brought over by a friend. And I was on that system for years afterwards without major updates or problems... good times...

 

[slaeshjag]

^ Yes, ubuntu is a bit of a disaster in its desktop shape. But that doesn't mean all debian-based distros are. Even Ubuntu mini is okay. The main problem with distros for the current pandora, is the space that it uses up on the NAND. This will probably be less of a problem on a successor.

Personally, I would never use slackware. It was nice in the 90's, but it feels like it's still kinda stuck there...

While LinuxSwat has done a good job keeping it up, his build system seems like a greater disaster than even Zaxxon's. And that's after applying aTc's sayings of critical components of the system only existing in notaz home directory

Ideally, the successor would use a distro that's already well supported on ARMv7 devices, with pandora specific packages overlayed. That way, there'd (hopefully) be no need to maintain a complicated build infrastructure that breaks all the time.

Although, if bitbake actually is close to working now, in a more maintainable state for .next, then it might be worth considering just using that

 

[ekianjo]

^ Yes, ubuntu is a bit of a disaster in its desktop shape

What are you refering to ? Unity ? You can remove Unity without any issue and use any other kind of Windows Manager to make Ubuntu to your taste. I wouldn't call it a disaster at all.

 

[slaeshjag]

Removing unity, and most of the other ubuntu crap, and setting up something else, *will* break during the next update. 

 

[TrashyMG]

Removing unity, and most of the other ubuntu crap, and setting up something else, *will* break during the next update.

You may as just use straight up Debian over Ubuntu..

Others like RedHat derivatives have been just that: "the others".

Being a Linux user for 15 years I've always seen anything other than the Redhat and Slackware camp as the others..

 

[ekianjo]

Removing unity, and most of the other ubuntu crap, and setting up something else, *will* break during the next update.

What are you talking about ?

You may as just use straight up Debian over Ubuntu..

Yeah, if you want to have ancient packages which are 3 years old, that's indeed a good strategy.

 

[Binky]

Given that most of a Pandora-sucessor's packages will probably be PND on an SD card, do we care about Debian's tendency to be outrageously outdated?

 

[TrashyMG]

Yeah, if you want to have ancient packages which are 3 years old, that's indeed a good strategy.

Wheezy came out earlier this year.. not sure what you are talking about 3 year old packages..

 

[slaeshjag]

Removing unity, and most of the other ubuntu crap, and setting up something else, *will* break during the next update.

What are you talking about ?

As I have an rl-friend who went with the unwise decision to use desktop ubuntu together with a tiling VM, I got a front row seat to watch how stuff started falling apart after an update. My favourite this far is the ubuntu lock screen. Sometimes, the input field will stop responding, making it impossible to input your password. It'll detect caps lock etc. just fine, but a password is not going to be typed in. But it only happens sometimes

 

[Asiyura]

AFAIK only Debian "stable" distro use outdated packages (because they're aimed for people that manage large pools of computers), the "unstable" ones are up-to-date (aimed at everyone for their personal computer, a bit less secure and less stable though).

 

[EvilDragon]

We're currently planning to use Debian, for multiple reasons.

1. It's switching to ARMv7 as well.

2. It's very stable - and if you want to have latest packages available, you can always switch to sid or experimental. For example, latest LibreOffice version is 4.1.3, which is also available via Debian Sid...

3. The build system is similar to OE (what we are currently using), so it's easy to maintain our own optimized and customized base system with higher priority and use the standard Debian repositories for apps.

 

[CrazyIvan]

We're currently planning to use Debian, for multiple reasons.

1. It's switching to ARMv7 as well.

2. It's very stable - and if you want to have latest packages available, you can always switch to sid or experimental. For example, latest LibreOffice version is 4.1.3, which is also available via Debian Sid...

3. The build system is similar to OE (what we are currently using), so it's easy to maintain our own optimized and customized base system with higher priority and use the standard Debian repositories for apps.

There are some points why Debian could be sub-optimal for p2

 - It aims to be generic multi-system distro, not just linux distro. That means no systemd (probably), no desktop-specific features like fast boot. There was a big discussion about debian goals when discussing if default init system should be changed and which new system should be used.

 - It needs large amount of disk space for package/index cache and package cache grows with time unless cleared. Not a big problem if you have 8G+ flash but a problem with 512M - 1G flash sizes.

 - Updating package index takes a long time, especially on mobile devices.

I'm a long time debian user and I like it but these flaws are present and sometimes are pointed to

 

[ShleeDragon]

archlinux arm 4ever.

 

[slaeshjag]

We're currently planning to use Debian, for multiple reasons.

1. It's switching to ARMv7 as well.

2. It's very stable - and if you want to have latest packages available, you can always switch to sid or experimental. For example, latest LibreOffice version is 4.1.3, which is also available via Debian Sid...

3. The build system is similar to OE (what we are currently using), so it's easy to maintain our own optimized and customized base system with higher priority and use the standard Debian repositories for apps.

There are some points why Debian could be sub-optimal for p2

 - It aims to be generic multi-system distro, not just linux distro. That means no systemd (probably), no desktop-specific features like fast boot. There was a big discussion about debian goals when discussing if default init system should be changed and which new system should be used.

 - It needs large amount of disk space for package/index cache and package cache grows with time unless cleared. Not a big problem if you have 8G+ flash but a problem with 512M - 1G flash sizes.

 - Updating package index takes a long time, especially on mobile devices.

I'm a long time debian user and I like it but these flaws are present and sometimes are pointed to

The successor will probably use an eMMC card for internal storage, so the space question, and somewhat the package indexing time, will be less of a problem than it'd be for the pandora today.

 

[WizardStan]

It's very stable

That's because everything is several years out of date, sometimes long after future versions have themselves been deemed stable and including necessary patches.

you can always switch to sid or experimental

And break everything else. At least there'd be no multi-arch problems to deal with; either something is compiled for ARM or it isn't.

Glob I hate Debian... Which is to say you should use it for the reasons you've mentioned and this is the only time I'll ever complain, I'd just wish we had something that wasn't as paranoid about updates.