I'm using Slackware to deploy thin servers. Slackware alone is functional in this arena. Packages are well selected in the distribution, and should I need something else there is no problem in compiling from the source on your own. True, Slackware has no dependency provisions for its packages. But since simplicity is in the philosophy of the distribution, it takes little time to get acquainted with many of its packages, thus rendering packet management less useful. The "D" disk set, even by default, will suffice for compiling most of the code necessary for servers should they be not included in the distribution. True, also, that Slackware has no big set of secure packages. But this means that distribution maintenance will not be bloated with package maintainers. You will also have a rather greater control over your system since you don't have a big set of packages where you rely on package management, and you virtually know every functional component in your system.
... VFA: Visiting Foreign Aggressor ... Yankee go home! --> Balky On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Ian C. Sison wrote: > Slackware used as a distro for multiple servers is an unwise decisision. > It does not have a package manager like RPM or DEB. To have a > maintainable and sustainable network of linux servers, you need good > package management. _ Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
