Amazing! So, now I "hijacked" my own thread?

Look to the thread title, man! See the light? Also see who is the OP of this thread before to write walls of text...

3 members found this post helpful.

That's just your opinion. We use slackware where I work and the lack of PAM is irrelevant. So please don't make blanket statements.

2 members found this post helpful.

why this should be bad? (but_why.gif)

Also, there, we use Slackware where I work and the lack of PAM is irrelevant. Because, after all, they payed a guy (me), to modify the Slackware as they want.

But I seen hundreds times how the things are:

Manager of Company X: So, we need to implement that new Project under Linux, and it should have a good interchangeability with the existent infrastructure (read as dozens Windows Server units).

Team Leader to Administrators: So, what Linux we use, for a facile Centralized Authentication & Co., using the actual infrastructure?

The Crowd of Administrators Kerberos, LDAP, blah, blah. And as Operating System, we suggest RHEL or CentOS as second option.

Administrator Y: But we can use Slackware! Is small, is simple, and so on...

Whatever Administrator: But, we will need, as base, the LinuxPAM. Slackware have it?

Administrator Y: Nope! But we can rebuild it with PAM.

Team Leader of Administrators: I said to use an existent Linux Operating System, not to develop one! No way!

-----------------

No one ask to Slackware to introduce Corporate ready components for deal face-to-face with RHEL, but Slackware to pass from the 99.9 of the Team Leaders from Corporate environment, you should not rebuild the distro's core components.

That's idea!

3 members found this post helpful.

Because 99% from the Linux (users) share is right on the Corporate environments. We are a handful those who use Linux @Home.

Just because Slackware forces you to learn to do for yourself doesn't make it unfriendly to Corporate IT, it actually makes it more adaptable to Corporate IT than others, because it can more easily restructured to fit Corporate IT site specifications.

IF Slackware pass beyond your Team Leader...


See my previous post, for a opinion about how think those Team Leaders.

BTW, Tobi, you aren't a Moderator?

What you guys do about this wall of Korean speaking spams?

Just saying...

beside not agreeing with the numbers, talking about my personal experience and the places I've worked in (one with 400 employers, another with 220, another one with 2000 and so on), IMHO, if corporate environments want a stable, corporate-ready linux distribution they should pay for it or pay a team that maintains it for them.
no corporation deserve a free operating system.

so I personally don't care if distribution X is not ready for the enterprise: it's time that the enterprises invest their money in the right place and stop throwing it away on shitty proprietary solutions.

6 members found this post helpful.

You're dreaming that your purpose here is more than being a troll.

I guess if you complain about everything then you can imagine you've been leading the way. Do you even remember why the $ARCH change was made on 32-bit, or did you ever pay attention to know? It wasn't done because you wouldn't shut up about it, that's for sure.

11 members found this post helpful.

Tobi is a HERO for the work he's doing keeping this place clean today. And any of the other mods too.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...0/#post5483978
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...0/#post5484001

6 members found this post helpful.

and they used Slackware and updated it with their own PAM builds?
I guess not.

my experience is:
except a very few exceptions where some enthusiasts care about Slackware is not available in companies. and for enthusiasts its can be hard to use it because you might experience some opposition and since it is that easy to argue why Slackware is a nogo, its not friendly to companies, on more of ubuntu/debian/rhel/centos/suse will make it.

as long as you do not make the decisions for the companies it does not matter what you care or not.

2 members found this post helpful.

I'd rather read those than most of your posts.

9 members found this post helpful.

who told you I don't? In some cases I did/do.
and beside that I can freely criticize idiotic technical decisions, I think I don't need your permission.

I did not assume that you are not one of the a very few exceptions and enthusiasts that care about Slackware in companies.
may I ask how many Slackware installations with PAM do you maintain and if the builds public accessible?