Discussion:
Slackware's future
Add Reply
James H. Markowitz
2018-07-04 00:20:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
It has been a long time since the most recent release of
Slackware was announced. In the meantime, numerous packages have become
obsolete. Even in Slackbuilds, many packages can't be updated because
they depend on new versions of software that is indeed available in the
latest release, 14.2, but in rather old versions, sometimes not even
supported any longer.

14.2 is currently over two years old - an eternity in the Linux
world. While I am all for the Slackware philosophy of making sure that
the system is stable, rather than having the latest and greatest (and I
love the fact that Slackware keeps shunning systemd) the truth is, that
philosophy may result in an obsolete system. That does not mean
"useless", of course, but it does mean "less useful".

The fact is that 14.2 is seriously beginning to show its age,
even with the pathes regularly released for it. There is activity in the
current branch all right but, it does not seem to be the case that a new
release is imminent - meaning anything less than several months, at best.

I never thought it would come to this but, if no new Slackware
release is announced within the next couple of months, I will seriously
start looking into other distributions, or perhaps one of the BSDs.
James Taylor
2018-07-04 00:28:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James H. Markowitz
It has been a long time since the most recent release of
Slackware was announced. In the meantime, numerous packages have become
obsolete. Even in Slackbuilds, many packages can't be updated because
they depend on new versions of software that is indeed available in the
latest release, 14.2, but in rather old versions, sometimes not even
supported any longer.
14.2 is currently over two years old - an eternity in the Linux
world. While I am all for the Slackware philosophy of making sure that
the system is stable, rather than having the latest and greatest (and I
love the fact that Slackware keeps shunning systemd) the truth is, that
philosophy may result in an obsolete system. That does not mean
"useless", of course, but it does mean "less useful".
The fact is that 14.2 is seriously beginning to show its age,
even with the pathes regularly released for it. There is activity in the
current branch all right but, it does not seem to be the case that a new
release is imminent - meaning anything less than several months, at best.
I never thought it would come to this but, if no new Slackware
release is announced within the next couple of months, I will seriously
start looking into other distributions, or perhaps one of the BSDs.
Well, that is certainly a personal decision and I don't think anyone
holds a decision like that against you. Have you considered
transitioning to "-current"?

Maybe it would help to get a little more context about this first,
though. Is there any package in particular that you're wishing was
up-to-date and is not? Is it a list of packages? What needs to be done
so that the software can meet your needs?

Sorry for the interrogation. I can only speak to my own needs, which
14.2 meets, and your case is undoubtedly different. Every bit of
information helps.
Martha Adams
2018-07-04 03:07:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James H. Markowitz
It has been a long time since the most recent release of
Slackware was announced. In the meantime, numerous packages have become
obsolete. Even in Slackbuilds, many packages can't be updated because
they depend on new versions of software that is indeed available in the
latest release, 14.2, but in rather old versions, sometimes not even
supported any longer.
14.2 is currently over two years old - an eternity in the Linux
world. While I am all for the Slackware philosophy of making sure that
the system is stable, rather than having the latest and greatest (and I
love the fact that Slackware keeps shunning systemd) the truth is, that
philosophy may result in an obsolete system. That does not mean
"useless", of course, but it does mean "less useful".
---snip ---
I think this is re Slackware's future, and I'm looking intensely at
that. Maybe Slackware is coming to the end of its story; maybe we
don't see new and news because where to go from here is a puzzlement.
Or something else; but if we're at a critical point, well, that's
how it looks to me. I'd like to go on being a Slacker but if that's
not to be, from here I see two options, and a critical (to me) detail.

The detail is, I like twm as my screen manager. I know there are
others out there, which all look too Microsofty to me. Basic twm is
for me, Just Right, so if some other os can't take twm, I'm not
interested.

Given that, then, I think one option for me is move on to Arch Linux.
And the other is, go to one of the BSDs, most likely OpenBSD. I have
not yet started one of these in a local machine, but I'm thinking
about it and a little birdy whispers in my ear, Martha, do this before
you're sorry you didn't.

I think a core issue here is *complexification*. It seems, given an
os, it grows. Never mind what it's good for. But my point about
complexification, other than that it hurts the work and I avoid it
like poison as far as possible (I'm an emacs/TeX person) out there
in the real world it's a serious topic and many people want it.

So I wonder if the core problem at the Slackware core offices is,
they're too closed? Have used up all the possibilities in talking
to each other, resulting in loss of energy? ??

Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [Tues 2018 Jly 03]
James Taylor
2018-07-04 04:11:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martha Adams
I think this is re Slackware's future, and I'm looking intensely at
that. Maybe Slackware is coming to the end of its story; maybe we
don't see new and news because where to go from here is a puzzlement.
Or something else; but if we're at a critical point, well, that's
how it looks to me. I'd like to go on being a Slacker but if that's
not to be, from here I see two options, and a critical (to me) detail.
So I wonder if the core problem at the Slackware core offices is,
they're too closed? Have used up all the possibilities in talking
to each other, resulting in loss of energy? ??
Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [Tues 2018 Jly 03]
I think that might be sounding the alarm far too early, really. I can
think of quite a few interested parties that would happily take over if
anything should happen to Slackware that would threaten its continued
production and use. Look what happened with the Salix and Porteus
teams.

But I do think that you have both a point and an interesting idea to
explore further. Slackware is indeed a lot more centralized than several
other distros, but I see that as a virtue in maintaining its
philosophy. Is there a downside? I'm sure that there is, but
I would sooner endure the downsides than lose what I like about
Slackware.

Let's say this for what it is - if Slackware ever reaches an end, there
is plenty of material there for continuation. None of the ideas will be
lost, all the old scripts and configuration files will still be there,
and no doubt a very frustrated userbase will power on one way or
another. The only question will be *how* they go about it.

But more to the point of the original message, if something is
bothersome in Slackware, you're welcome to ask about it,
respectfully. Don't assume that it's human negligence that is creating
the issue. Often there are demands which a small group simply cannot
meet right away, and it is not worth pointing blame for something like that.
Mike Spencer
2018-07-04 07:29:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martha Adams
Post by James H. Markowitz
It has been a long time since the most recent release of
Slackware was announced. In the meantime, numerous packages have become
obsolete. Even in Slackbuilds, many packages can't be updated because
they depend on new versions of software that is indeed available in the
latest release, 14.2, but in rather old versions, sometimes not even
supported any longer.
14.2 is currently over two years old - an eternity in the Linux
world. While I am all for the Slackware philosophy of making sure that
the system is stable, rather than having the latest and greatest (and I
love the fact that Slackware keeps shunning systemd) the truth is, that
philosophy may result in an obsolete system. That does not mean
"useless", of course, but it does mean "less useful".
---snip ---
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box. Only complaints are
failure to support a browser new enough to do latest crypto and a USB
flaw for which there's a workaround.
Post by Martha Adams
I think this is re Slackware's future, and I'm looking intensely at
that. Maybe Slackware is coming to the end of its story; maybe we
don't see new and news because where to go from here is a puzzlement.
Or something else; but if we're at a critical point, well, that's
how it looks to me. I'd like to go on being a Slacker but if that's
not to be, from here I see two options, and a critical (to me) detail.
The detail is, I like twm as my screen manager. I know there are
others out there, which all look too Microsofty to me. Basic twm is
for me, Just Right, so if some other os can't take twm, I'm not
interested.
Same here.

I'm in the process of upgrading from 14.1 to 14.2 on my laptop.
Solely to get the crypto support for a browser. Really annoying
because it's much more bothersome (or impossible) to tweak new
browsers to eliminate bloat, crap, tracking etc. in the way I'm used
to. In any case, nothing else shows any need for upgrading.

twm doesn't have a task bar so network manager fails but wicd-curses
seems to be just fine.
Post by Martha Adams
Given that, then, I think one option for me is move on to Arch Linux.
And the other is, go to one of the BSDs, most likely OpenBSD. I have
not yet started one of these in a local machine, but I'm thinking
about it and a little birdy whispers in my ear, Martha, do this before
you're sorry you didn't.
Well, I'm not going anywhere until I absolutely can't get along with
Slackware. Don't foresee that any time soon.
Post by Martha Adams
I think a core issue here is *complexification*. It seems, given an
os, it grows. Never mind what it's good for. But my point about
complexification, other than that it hurts the work and I avoid it
like poison as far as possible (I'm an emacs/TeX person) out there
in the real world it's a serious topic and many people want it.
Not me. The more complexity, the more has to be buried under more and
more layers of software to manage the stuff that's there to manage the
stuff that....etc. My choice of Slackware is because of the notion
that I can understand it if it doesn't "just work". Only it usually
just works.
Post by Martha Adams
So I wonder if the core problem at the Slackware core offices is,
they're too closed? Have used up all the possibilities in talking
to each other, resulting in loss of energy? ??
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Dan C
2018-07-05 02:28:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
Why?
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as the woodpecker approached his hot-air balloon.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: Loading Image...
notbob
2018-07-05 14:37:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
Why?
Prolly cuz his computer is so old (read slow) it gags on anything newer.

BTDT
nb
Mike Spencer
2018-07-05 23:36:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by notbob
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
Why?
Prolly cuz his computer is so old (read slow) it gags on anything newer.
BTDT
Not the case. It's old -- IBM P4 -- but Slack 12 ran fine. I
downgraded to 11.0, bought the DVD from Patrick.

It's because the libraries -- glibc? -- in 12.0 and after don't
support Netscape Navigator 4.76. Next question?

Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance. Unfortunately,
Slack 11 won't, AFAICT, run FF newer than 2.x so all the sites that
are opting for the very latest crypto protocol are going dark for me.

Yes, I have a laptop with Slack 14.2 and one with 14.1. When I want
one of those sites badly enough to wait, on my dialup connection, for
all those megabyte images that are rendered down to 20%, all the js,
bloat, CSS, tracking files/images etc. to trickle through the pipe, I
can fire up one of them, masquerade it through the desktop or carry it
out to where there's broadband and wifi. Shpx, xkcd demands that one
use the latest crypto-enabled browser, presumably to protect me
against attacks that NN 4.76 probably is immune to. To look at a
cartoon. Yes, crypto is cool but sites should negotiate what protocol
the user requests and serve accordingly, not demand the user
accommodate whatever the latest server package defaults to.

I pretty well trust the crypto itself but not the implementation
superstructure of stuff compiled into browsers at big compnaies, the
cert companies and all. Recent flap over encrypted email failure was
that kind of superstructure failure, not the crypto. So all this
"HTTPS everywhere" doesn't make me feel safer, it just pisses me off.

Just stumbled over another end-run-the-crypto attack as I write:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/rash-of-fortnite-cheaters-infected-by-malware-that-breaks-https-encryption/

I suspect you're sorry you asked. :-)
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

My electric toaster is 105 years old and works great.
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Dan C
2018-07-06 01:26:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
Post by notbob
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
Why?
Prolly cuz his computer is so old (read slow) it gags on anything newer.
BTDT
Not the case. It's old -- IBM P4 -- but Slack 12 ran fine. I
downgraded to 11.0, bought the DVD from Patrick.
It's because the libraries -- glibc? -- in 12.0 and after don't support
Netscape Navigator 4.76. Next question?
Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance. Unfortunately,
Slack 11 won't, AFAICT, run FF newer than 2.x so all the sites that are
opting for the very latest crypto protocol are going dark for me.
Yes, I have a laptop with Slack 14.2 and one with 14.1. When I want one
of those sites badly enough to wait, on my dialup connection, for all
those megabyte images that are rendered down to 20%, all the js,
bloat, CSS, tracking files/images etc. to trickle through the pipe, I
can fire up one of them, masquerade it through the desktop or carry it
out to where there's broadband and wifi. Shpx, xkcd demands that one
use the latest crypto-enabled browser, presumably to protect me against
attacks that NN 4.76 probably is immune to. To look at a cartoon. Yes,
crypto is cool but sites should negotiate what protocol the user
requests and serve accordingly, not demand the user accommodate whatever
the latest server package defaults to.
I pretty well trust the crypto itself but not the implementation
superstructure of stuff compiled into browsers at big compnaies, the
cert companies and all. Recent flap over encrypted email failure was
that kind of superstructure failure, not the crypto. So all this "HTTPS
everywhere" doesn't make me feel safer, it just pisses me off.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/rash-of-fortnite-
cheaters-infected-by-malware-that-breaks-https-encryption/
Post by Mike Spencer
I suspect you're sorry you asked. :-)
Well, I'm the one who asked, and no, not sorry. :)

My next question is.... what's the need to turn all that stuff off? Is it
a speed thing? Pages have gotten cumbersome and slower than before, is
that it? I can (sort of) see that, but with decent (not the best)
hardware, and a good internet connection, things aren't so bad. Would
seem to be better than missing content on major/most sites, at least to me.

Am I correct here, or is there some other reason to use the old stuff?
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
"Bother!" said Pooh, as he declared his horse a Senator.
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Thanks, Obama: http://brandybuck.site40.net/pics/politica/thanks.jpg
Rich
2018-07-06 03:26:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan C
Post by Mike Spencer
...
Yes, I have a laptop with Slack 14.2 and one with 14.1. When I want one
of those sites badly enough to wait, on my *dialup connection*,
..
I suspect you're sorry you asked. :-)
Well, I'm the one who asked, and no, not sorry. :)
My next question is.... what's the need to turn all that stuff off?
Is it a speed thing?
See the highlighted two words above in the quote from Mike's text.
Those of no longer on "dialup" have long since forgotten just how slow
it was.
Post by Dan C
hardware, and a *good internet connection*, things aren't so bad.
Would
Dialup, in todays world, will hardly qualify as a "good internet
connection".
Martha Adams
2018-07-06 03:44:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
Post by Mike Spencer
Post by notbob
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
Why?
Prolly cuz his computer is so old (read slow) it gags on anything newer.
BTDT
Not the case. It's old -- IBM P4 -- but Slack 12 ran fine. I
downgraded to 11.0, bought the DVD from Patrick.
It's because the libraries -- glibc? -- in 12.0 and after don't support
Netscape Navigator 4.76. Next question?
Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance. Unfortunately,
Slack 11 won't, AFAICT, run FF newer than 2.x so all the sites that are
opting for the very latest crypto protocol are going dark for me.
Yes, I have a laptop with Slack 14.2 and one with 14.1. When I want one
of those sites badly enough to wait, on my dialup connection, for all
those megabyte images that are rendered down to 20%, all the js,
bloat, CSS, tracking files/images etc. to trickle through the pipe, I
can fire up one of them, masquerade it through the desktop or carry it
out to where there's broadband and wifi. Shpx, xkcd demands that one
use the latest crypto-enabled browser, presumably to protect me against
attacks that NN 4.76 probably is immune to. To look at a cartoon. Yes,
crypto is cool but sites should negotiate what protocol the user
requests and serve accordingly, not demand the user accommodate whatever
the latest server package defaults to.
I pretty well trust the crypto itself but not the implementation
superstructure of stuff compiled into browsers at big compnaies, the
cert companies and all. Recent flap over encrypted email failure was
that kind of superstructure failure, not the crypto. So all this "HTTPS
everywhere" doesn't make me feel safer, it just pisses me off.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/rash-of-fortnite-
cheaters-infected-by-malware-that-breaks-https-encryption/
Post by Mike Spencer
I suspect you're sorry you asked. :-)
Well, I'm the one who asked, and no, not sorry. :)
My next question is.... what's the need to turn all that stuff off? Is it
a speed thing? Pages have gotten cumbersome and slower than before, is
that it? I can (sort of) see that, but with decent (not the best)
hardware, and a good internet connection, things aren't so bad. Would
seem to be better than missing content on major/most sites, at least to me.
Am I correct here, or is there some other reason to use the old stuff?
Actually, *yes*. I'm doing fine with emacs and TeX; and I update my
system because it seems a good idea, not a pressing need. Let's not
confuse the age of the machine with the age of what's in it. The same
plain text that would have served Plato fine, works now. If you have
some ideas how to update the text in Patrick OBrian, Jack Vance, or
JRR Tolkein, I'd be interested to see a discussion of why those works
are thus improved. Old text frequently is good text, and older
hardware has certain advantages over newer, elaborated and complexified
hardware. So I believe, there are lots of good reasons to use "the
old stuff" and I think their effect approaches compelling.

Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [Thr 2018 Jly 05]
Mike Spencer
2018-07-06 07:07:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[big snip]
Post by Mike Spencer
Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance.
[snip]
I suspect you're sorry you asked. :-)
Well, I'm the one who asked, and no, not sorry. :)
Oh, good.
My next question is.... what's the need to turn all that stuff off? Is it
a speed thing?
Speed is the main factor. Say a news or opinion site [1] or opinion
site will have 20 or items headlined. Each item is accompanied by a
stock photo. Do I need to see yet another photo of the Bdelygma in
Chief? Of crowds and spokespersons? Just to look at a list of
news items?

And there's the ads. I normally never see ads, well, except for the
labeled text items returned by a Google search. And some of those ads
refresh every few seconds with more megabytes of image. So yes, speed
over dialup is the big one.

Running neck and neck is ads. When I take the laptop out to the
modern world and look at the web, I'm always a little shocked at all
the ad-crap cluttering the screen. Of course, there it d/l's real
quick but it's still annoying and distracting.

And then there's tracking. Not that there's much of anything anyone
(short, perhaps, of personally targeting me out of spite) could learn
by tracking my web usage that would benefit them or hurt me. So some
one knows I've Googled "paroxysmal presbysternismus". They're not
going to screw up my Canadian medical coverage with that knowledge or
sell me nose drops. It just irritates me.
Pages have gotten cumbersome and slower than before, is
that it?
And you have to *look* at it. FF has View->Page Style->No Style that
makes it a little less aggressive but only a little. And on dialup,
the difference between the base page and all the LINK files, images
and IFRAMES is from 100% up to an order of magnitude slower.
I can (sort of) see that, but with decent (not the best) hardware,
and a good internet connection, things aren't so bad. Would seem to
be better than missing content on major/most sites, at least to me.
Yeah, Real Soon Now I'm going to have to do something about speed,
probably one of those widgets (I forget the tech terminology) that does
data over a cell connection. I could get rural wireless that's pretty
fast but the I'd have techs on the roof dicking with the antenna or
running overhead cables from the higher studio roof. And upgrade to
Slack 14.2. I've already spent a few hours looking up what relevant
entries in About:config mean and disabled a lot of stuff on the 14.2
laptop but it only partially does the job.

Have yet to fetch add-ons/plug-ins that disable ads, js etc. because
NN 4.76 does it for me.
Am I correct here, or is there some other reason to use the old stuff?
I would read several other sites with broadband and a new
system/browser -- NYT, WaPo, xkcd. There are a few videos -- about
blacksmithing, old movies, this & that -- on U-Tube I'd fetch. And if
I really want something I *can* drive to the village store or 12
mi. into town and do it at the library. There's some good stuff on TV
but I've gotten along without it for, what?...40 years. The downside
of TV justifies the decision to get along without it. I can get along
without the NYT.

Social media? Face book? Nah. Now a friend was getting the
run-around from a major auto mfgr about major warrantee. His wife
located the responsible person on Facebook and posted the details on
his personal page (wall?). Corporate compliance was hastily
forthcoming. So I see possibilities -- never say never -- but I don't
need it now, don't want what they have to offer, so I don't need the
computational gumpties to do megabytes of js and all that's involved.

[1] I forget which are the most egregious offender because I normally
don't see the images.
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

My electric toaster is 105 years oldand works fine.
notbob
2018-07-11 16:08:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dan C
Pages have gotten cumbersome and slower than before, is
that it?
Mostly!

My brother hadda buy me a new i3 box cuz my old P4 box was jes too slow.
Now, I'm using W10 and waiting fer a new Slackware 15. I still use my
old P4 with 14.1 fer checking my primary financial institution stuff,
but it's sooooo slow! ;)

nb

Richard Kettlewell
2018-07-06 06:37:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance. Unfortunately,
Slack 11 won't, AFAICT, run FF newer than 2.x so all the sites that
are opting for the very latest crypto protocol are going dark for me.
Yes, I have a laptop with Slack 14.2 and one with 14.1. When I want
one of those sites badly enough to wait, on my dialup connection, for
all those megabyte images that are rendered down to 20%, all the js,
bloat, CSS, tracking files/images etc. to trickle through the pipe, I
can fire up one of them, masquerade it through the desktop or carry it
out to where there's broadband and wifi. Shpx, xkcd demands that one
use the latest crypto-enabled browser, presumably to protect me
against attacks that NN 4.76 probably is immune to. To look at a
cartoon. Yes, crypto is cool but sites should negotiate what protocol
the user requests and serve accordingly, not demand the user
accommodate whatever the latest server package defaults to.
I pretty well trust the crypto itself but not the implementation
superstructure of stuff compiled into browsers at big compnaies, the
cert companies and all.
Does 4.76 have anything more recent than SSLv3? If not you then should
not trust the crypto there; it is thoroughly broken.
Post by Mike Spencer
Recent flap over encrypted email failure was that kind of
superstructure failure, not the crypto. So all this "HTTPS
everywhere" doesn't make me feel safer, it just pisses me off.
Assuming you mean ‘efail’, the crypto is broken, not just the
surrounding applications. The paper goes into detail but even the web
page makes this clear.
--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Eli the Bearded
2018-07-06 07:01:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance. Unfortunately,
Slack 11 won't, AFAICT, run FF newer than 2.x so all the sites that
are opting for the very latest crypto protocol are going dark for me.
Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard ("PCI Compliance") requires
sites stop accepting older, now easily broken, SSL / TLS versions.
Anything older than TLS 1.2 should be refused as of July 2018 by any
company that deals with credit cards, or any company forced into PCI
compliance by dint of other companies they interact with.

You might want to look into running some sort of HTTPS-to-HTTP endpoint
proxy in front of your browser instead. Technically it is quite feasible, if a
tad complicated, but I can't think of one that exists. You might be able
to get a MITM proxy (eg mitmproxy) to do it for you, or at least to talk
to the sites in secure TLS and your browser in insecure SSL.

Elijah
------
spent some time recently fixing ancient RHEL systems for this TLS thing
John Forkosh
2018-07-07 07:52:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
It's old -- IBM P4 -- but Slack 12 ran fine. I
downgraded to 11.0, bought the DVD from Patrick.
It's because the libraries -- glibc? -- in 12.0 and after don't
support Netscape Navigator 4.76.
If libraries are your only reason/problem, you can probably
pick off the libraries you need from your 11.0 dvd and install
them on a later slackware.

I had a similar "libraries problem" with Crisp version 2.2e,
an old free/share-ware version of the now-pricey crisp.com editor.
It stopped running somewhere around slack 8-or-9, but the executable
image announced the libraries it couldn't find, which I was able
to just copy over from earlier slackwares. Then crisp2.2e worked fine.
(But then after a while I just decided it was time to learn emacs.)
--
John Forkosh ( mailto: ***@f.com where j=john and f=forkosh )
Mike Spencer
2018-07-07 19:54:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Forkosh
Post by Mike Spencer
I'm still using Slack 11.0 on my main box.
[...]
It's because the libraries -- glibc? -- in 12.0 and after don't
support Netscape Navigator 4.76.
If libraries are your only reason/problem, you can probably
pick off the libraries you need from your 11.0 dvd and install
them on a later slackware.
Yeah. I suppose I should try that. Less demanding of limited
resources on the now elderly P4 than a VM. I've messed with that
before. I have a copy of Maple V, picked up at a yard sale, that
requires (I forget) lib4 or lib5. Had it all working on Slack 10,
never got it right again after going 10->12->11.

IIRC, there are several assorted pitfalls, gotchas and the like in
trying to get old libs to run in parallel with curent ones. But I
might try it on my testbed laptop for Slack 14.2 upgrade.
Post by John Forkosh
I had a similar "libraries problem" with Crisp version 2.2e,
an old free/share-ware version of the now-pricey crisp.com editor.
It stopped running somewhere around slack 8-or-9, but the executable
image announced the libraries it couldn't find, which I was able
to just copy over from earlier slackwares. Then crisp2.2e worked fine.
(But then after a while I just decided it was time to learn emacs.)
Hah! I was shunted, more or less by happenstance, straight from
WordStar on CP/M to Emacs on Unix & X. After a rocky courtship, we've
been inseperable for 30 years. :-)
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada
Michael Black
2018-07-08 14:07:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Spencer
Why do I want NN 4.76? It allows me easily to turn off js and images,
doesn't support autoloading of files in <LINK... tags, doesn't support
CSS and several other things that cause me annoyance. Unfortunately,
Slack 11 won't, AFAICT, run FF newer than 2.x so all the sites that
are opting for the very latest crypto protocol are going dark for me.
Do individuals still compile the glossy browsers now?

If so, maybe the options you want are still in the source code, but
commented out since "nobody wants a graphic browser that doesn't do
graphics". So if you could uncomment those old menu entries, and compile,
then you get the latest brosser but with the ability to set things like
the old ones.

I'd completely forgotten that those options were there.

I used lynx for a long time, it was my primary browser for 16 years until
I moved to DSL. And there was always the option of viewing a graphic by
invoking a graphic program, that always worked well. But there were also
pages that were hard to figure out without a graphic browser, and I
suspect that's even worse now.

I don't remember a lot of problems in the "distant past", but in recent
years I've realy had to upgrade graphic browsers, sites no longer letting
me in. Some, like indigo, don't even have the decency to tell you you
need a newer browser, I'd enter my name and password and it would just sit
there churning "forever". But I guess some of that is because I'm
actually using the internet to order things and check my bank account, so
there is real reason to keep security up.

Michael
Henrik Carlqvist
2018-07-04 05:45:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
It has been a long time since the most recent release of Slackware
It might have been long, but I would not say surprisingly long.
that philosophy may result in an obsolete system. That does not mean
"useless", of course, but it does mean "less useful".
Usually each Slackware release gets gets some kind of support for at
least 5 years. However, this support might decrease as some upstream
package sources might stop supporting the old envirinment.

For instance, Slackware 13.0 is at the time of this writing still
supported, but has not had any updated firefox package since version
3.6.28 which was released spring 2012.

So it might be a rather good decision to mark Slackware 13 EOL within
some day...

Even though it might not work with all packages, in most cases when you
feel the need of a newer version of something you can simply download the
newer source and update the slackbuild script. This applies both to the
slackbuild scripts included with Slackware and scripts from other sources
like slackbuilds.org. However, doing that with an application might also
rise the need to do so with a few libraries and in the end you might not
have a more stable system than Slackware current.

regards Henrik
Eef Hartman
2018-07-04 10:40:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Henrik Carlqvist
So it might be a rather good decision to mark Slackware 13 EOL within
some day...
This week all 13.* releases will go EOL:
Fri Apr 6 20:47:43 UTC 2018
####################################################################
# NOTICE OF INPENDING EOL (END OF LIFE) FOR OLD SLACKWARE VERSIONS #
# #
# Effective July 5, 2018, security patches will no longer be #
# provided for the following versions of Slackware (which will all #
# be more than 7 years old at that time): #
# Slackware 13.0, Slackware 13.1, Slackware 13.37. #
# If you are still running these versions you should consider #
# migrating to a newer version (preferably as recent as possible). #
# Alternately, you may make arrangements to handle your own #
# security patches. #
####################################################################
(from the ChangeLog.txt)

Actually even 14.0 is already almost 6 years old so may go EOL
"real soon now" <grin>.
s***@Rosevear.hopto.org
2018-07-04 06:18:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James H. Markowitz
It has been a long time since the most recent release of
Slackware was announced. In the meantime, numerous packages have become
obsolete. Even in Slackbuilds, many packages can't be updated because
they depend on new versions of software that is indeed available in the
latest release, 14.2, but in rather old versions, sometimes not even
supported any longer.
14.2 is currently over two years old - an eternity in the Linux
world. While I am all for the Slackware philosophy of making sure that
the system is stable, rather than having the latest and greatest (and I
love the fact that Slackware keeps shunning systemd) the truth is, that
philosophy may result in an obsolete system. That does not mean
"useless", of course, but it does mean "less useful".
The fact is that 14.2 is seriously beginning to show its age,
even with the pathes regularly released for it. There is activity in the
current branch all right but, it does not seem to be the case that a new
release is imminent - meaning anything less than several months, at best.
I never thought it would come to this but, if no new Slackware
release is announced within the next couple of months, I will seriously
start looking into other distributions, or perhaps one of the BSDs.
I learned an interesting saying many years ago:

If you want it bad, that's how you get it.

Yes, there has been a reduction in the rate of Slackware releases.
(See my graph at
http://joeslife.org/projects/slack_stuff/graph/releases-r.pdf )

Perhaps you are in a hurry?

-Joe
Mike Spencer
2018-07-05 23:41:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@Rosevear.hopto.org
Perhaps you are in a hurry?
Omnes festinatio ex parte diaboli est.
--
Mike Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada

My electric toaster is 105 years old and works fine.
Ralph Spitzner
2018-07-07 12:41:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James H. Markowitz
I never thought it would come to this but, if no new Slackware
release is announced within the next couple of months, I will seriously
start looking into other distributions, or perhaps one of the BSDs.
Just my 0.02$
I'm running slackware since '98 (not on the same machine :-) , and I'm
pretty sure I've learned how to update 'packages' and 'dependencies' on
my own by now.

I'm following -current right now.
I also prepare my own kernel,
So, in any case Slackware is a good starting point if you want to
_understand_ your system, it's easier than LFS, anyway.

Some people need a Windows replacement, though.
That's why Debuntnut takes the fame...

Also Slackware really is just a few people _not_ driving
Ferrari's or Tesla's to go to work :-P



-rasp
Loading...