[SOLVED] Bluetooth Failing To Connect

[djemos]

As considering Slackel's birth on 2005, i look back and see how many years have passed. It seems it is yesterday. Slackel it is still here, alive, while so many other distro's have stopped.

[djemos]

Papasot, i installed debian many years ago and i did not keep it more than a month. I did not like the "we do it for you" if you walk out of path and install packages by your own then system become problematic. I like to be the master and to control everything in my system. This is why i loved slackware except simplicity, stability and speed. I also liked redhat while mandrake was the worst distro i ever used, full of bugs while suse-5.2 was slow. I used Gentoo more than a year but tired to compile everything. I used arch linux for 5 months but system was broken when some developer put a package in repos and break everything in the system.

[juliusse]

My two cents.
My first Linux install was slackware 3.5 back in 1998, installed with floppies that were coming with a magazine.
Then I had installed, used and maintained many Linux distros, but never on my personal machines, which have stayed on slackware.
In 2010, I decided to try salix on an old laptop to give a try. And salix has stayed on this laptop. I found it easy to maintain, and installed it also on my wife's laptop. My personal machine at this time was still running Slackware-current.
But, two years ago, I decided to try Slackel, on which I was keeping an eye since years, and finally adopted Slackel for all my machines, including my wife's one.
With the time I have become lazy and I find more simple to start from Slackel and adding what I need, than starting from Slackware-current and removing what I don't.
Even on my old 2gb ThinkPad, Slackel 64 bits runs faster and better than a crapbuntu 32bits.
And cherry on the cake, Djemos is there to answer to questions... This is what I call "premium".

[djemos]

My first Linux install was slackware 3.5 back in 1998, installed with floppies that were coming with a magazine.

I have read how difficult was to install slackware from floppies. I mean not everyone can do it.
I had internet connection since 1994 or 1995 i don't remember. It was slow and expensive connecting with a modem i could not download 400 - 500MB a linux iso, it would take ages. We are talking about a few Kb of speed. Ι used DOS what else and later win95. "Ancient ages".
So it was cheaper to make a phone on 1998 and buy from a book technical shop in Athens Papasotiriou my first redhat 5.0. I remember i asked them what linux distributions you have. They told me redhat and slackware but people prefer redhat. So they sent me by post the redhat 5.0 in a nice box with a very polished book manual of redhat.

Thanks for your good words about slackel.

[Papasot]

Papasot, i installed debian many years ago and i did not keep it more than a month. I did not like the "we do it for you" if you walk out of path and install packages by your own then system become problematic.

I always had Debian "Testing" (not "Stable") back then. One of the reasons was the fact "Testing" was not "we do it for you". I was able to install what I wanted, remove anything I didn't want, and configure the system the way I wanted. It was less stable than Slackel today though; I had to do special tricks more often, just because a updated package broke others. In general, however, it was nice. But that belongs to the past, when Debian was a decent distribution. Nowadays Debian is just another crappy distribution dragged behind RedHat (systemd) chariot, together with many other distributions.

Even on my old 2gb ThinkPad, Slackel 64 bits runs faster and better than a crapbuntu 32bits.
And cherry on the cake, Djemos is there to answer to questions... This is what I call "premium".

I am not at home and I am typing this on an old machine way weaker than your Thinkpad, with 1 Gb of RAM - and it works flawlessly. It might not be the fastest machine ever, due to its weak CPU. But it can do anything I need, including developing my own libraries when I am not at home. And that with the latest gcc and auxiliary libraries. The exact same machine cannot run Crapbuntu even if I wanted to. I've seen Crapbuntu running extremely slow on machines much better than mine. Djemos also reported running Slackel on machines with much less than 1 Gb of RAM.
As for the cherry on the cake, user support on Slackel is much better than what "big" fat distributions have to offer, to the point there is no comparison.

[juliusse]

The main reason for me to run Slackware and derivatives is because I want something solid and reliable. Moreover, the vast majority of Slack* community has good practices. I mean that they don't want a quick and dirty solution, they prefer wait for the good one. With a friend, we call Ubuntu "windows 9", a lot of incompetents users believing that .deb is the 8th marvel, and like windows, a lot of bad advices to run and repair...
On servers that I use/maintain, I run mostly BSDs. I found that the philosophy of slack* distros is nearly the same. KISS and Unix like.
For the systemd topic, this is what I think.
When people tell me that "today with systemd you can do lots of things and it's better than sysV", my answer is always "I don't care, I use rc.d"....

[djemos]

On servers that I use/maintain, I run mostly BSDs.

I have installed FreeBSD in the past a lot of years ago but i had hardware problems. I could not find driver for a device i don't remember now. How is the situation today?
This is why BSDs are used mostly on servers because of security, stability and speed but not as desktop systems?

[Papasot]

For the systemd topic, this is what I think.
When people tell me that "today with systemd you can do lots of things and it's better than sysV", my answer is always "I don't care, I use rc.d"....

Systemd is broken by design and beyond repair. An init system must be an init system and nothing else. Systemd was NOT designed to be an init system. It is supposed to be, at least that was what they said in the beginning. But in reality systemd is an intrusive piece of poettering crapware trying to to take over everything, making everything dependent to it, essentially trying to be a "second kernel". Not to mention binary logs, the silly demands to change the Linux kernel instead of fixing their bugs, and poettering's absurdities, such as going to conferences just to interrupt speakers and talk about his crapware... literally everything related to systemd is garbage. So no, thank you. If it ever happens running Linux means accepting systemd, I will just move to BSD without any doubt.

I have installed FreeBSD in the past a lot of years ago but i had hardware problems. I could not find driver for a device i don't remember now. How is the situation today?
This is why BSDs are used mostly on servers because of security, stability and speed but not as desktop systems?

I do maintain a FreeBSD partition, just to keep an eye on it and how it is progressing. Setting up a system with, e.g., Xfce, is still something you do manually, but device drivers are much less of a problem today, and it is rock-solid stable just as Slackware. Nevertheless, FreeBSD was not designed to be a "desktop" system. However, there are FreeBSD-based ditributions which are designed to be "desktop friendly". Until recently, the most dominant one was TrueOS (formerly known as PC-BSD), but it was discontinued and, to be honest, it was never my BSD choice. Right now, there are several desktop choices, such as FuryBSD and MidnightBSD. There is also NomadBSD, designed to offer USB persistent installation from the ground up. I tried them all, but I still think if you want to set up a BSD-based desktop, best choice is to start from FreeBSD and build it up step by step.

[juliusse]

@Papasot, for me the init war is over, and systemd has lost it. Just take a look at distrowatch. I know it's not exactly relevant, but it's a good indication.
This means there will always be a solution to avoid systemd.

Now, about BSDs. Of course it's not by design a laptop OS, but the fact is that you can install and run it, but it needs a little bit of work, or choosing the machine in purpose (like a good old thinkpad t430 which can run anything).
The best option if you want to run BSD on a laptop is GhostBSD. This is the most mature project for BSD on a desktop, it's there since 2010, and has all that you need for a desktop machine, very close to FreeBSD and more "sexy" than TrueOS was.
But honestly, for a desktop usage, I find that Linux is more versatile and practical. And if you run a distribution like Slackware, Slackel, Salix, or Void for example, you've nearly got the best of two worlds.
I use BSD for servers (mostly FreeBSD and OpenBSD), because it allows me to do more things than Linux, and in a cleaner way. ZFS, pools, jails... are more efficient, powerful and simply better tools than RAID and docks. Moreover, on a server, I prefer a system which is clean and unbreakable. With BSD you will never have an update/upgrade or dependency problem due to the port system. A server running BSD just runs without problems. Of course there is a learning curve.


This is why I run Slackel, because, it's Slackware, and it allows me to be sure that I won't have problems. Slackware is the most Unix-like distribution, the init system is BSD-like, and it's solid. On Slackel, the repos are clean, the salix tools help a lot in maintaining quickly the system, but I can do what I want if so (by the way I must admit that slapt-get is now better since Djemos have changed it to use original pkgtools). And, the possibility to use Slackbuilds in a simple way is very nice.(And never tell me that Slackbuilds are equivalent of the crappy AUR repo, Slackbuilds are far better).

[Papasot]

@Papasot, for me the init war is over, and systemd has lost it. Just take a look at distrowatch. I know it's not exactly relevant, but it's a good indication.
This means there will always be a solution to avoid systemd.

You are right, systemd (RedHat) lost the war for complete domination, but it's still the "init" system (like I said it's not an init system at all) adopted by most distributions. This just isn't right. But yes, there will always be an option to avoid it. And I don't like "almost avoid it" with "shims" etc.
At any rate, the bitter truth is we are dwarfed by the worst operating system ever, namely Micro$oft Window$ (version doesn't matter much, they are all crap and the only thing that varies is the degree of crapness). Being dwarfed by such a crap isn't just "not right". It's criminal, and yet nobody (or very few) seem to care.

Now, about BSDs. Of course it's not by design a laptop OS, but the fact is that you can install and run it, but it needs a little bit of work, or choosing the machine in purpose (like a good old thinkpad t430 which can run anything).
The best option if you want to run BSD on a laptop is GhostBSD. This is the most mature project for BSD on a desktop, it's there since 2010, and has all that you need for a desktop machine, very close to FreeBSD and more "sexy" than TrueOS was.

Like I said I do have a partition with a desktop installation of FreeBSD. But it wasn't the easiest thing in the world to set it up, and to be honest I don't quite remember the details of this task. I didn't try GhostBSD but sounds like it is worth a try.

And, the possibility to use Slackbuilds in a simple way is very nice.(And never tell me that Slackbuilds are equivalent of the crappy AUR repo, Slackbuilds are far better).

Slackbuilds are nice, although some have issues (not working, outdated version of software etc). What I usually do is try a slackbuild if I really need it, but if I encounter issues or if it's not the version I wanted, I just build my own package and put it in my personal repository, I also send it to Djemos if I think it is worth being in Slackel.