Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Linux Updates

Expand Messages
  • Paul
    ... ... I ve often seen plenty of reasons later code could not be built. Configure scripts look for = versions of development packages to build
    Message 1 of 20 , Mar 8, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com, "C. Beck" <usabecker@...> wrote:

      <snip>

      > There is no reason the latest version of whatever couldn't be built
      > from source on your machine if desired. Granted that may still be
      > considered bad luck, but it is an option.
      >

      I've often seen plenty of reasons later code could not be built. Configure scripts look for >= versions of development packages to build against. Often if one software package is out of date many are, and that leaves you with tool chains that do not meet minimum requirements.

      I run Debian stable so I see it all of the time. I don't know why developers set such stringent standards, I suspect they don't even realize they're doing it half of the time, it works for them, so they don't give it another thought. Everyone should be running the distribution they are, etc. etc. It could also be laziness, or simple incompetence too.
    • C. Beck
      ... Configure scripts look for = versions of development packages to build against. Often if one software package is out of date many are, and that leaves you
      Message 2 of 20 , Mar 8, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mar 8, 2013 7:04 AM, "Paul" <pfrederick1@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com, "C. Beck" <usabecker@...> wrote:
        >
        > <snip>
        >
        >
        > > There is no reason the latest version of whatever couldn't be built
        > > from source on your machine if desired. Granted that may still be
        > > considered bad luck, but it is an option.
        > >
        >
        > I've often seen plenty of reasons later code could not be built.
        Configure scripts look for >= versions of development packages to build
        against. Often if one software package is out of date many are, and that
        leaves you with tool chains that do not meet minimum requirements.

        Yeah, that would be what I consider the bad luck part. My point was just
        that relying on a distribution's repositories is not the only option
        available for installing software in linux - That's what the comment I
        responded to seemed to be saying. There are often ways around dependency
        issues if a program is wanted bad enough - at least that has been my
        limited experience.

        >
        > I run Debian stable so I see it all of the time. I don't know why
        developers set such stringent standards, I suspect they don't even realize
        they're doing it half of the time, it works for them, so they don't give it
        another thought. Everyone should be running the distribution they are, etc.
        etc. It could also be laziness, or simple incompetence too.

        I'm not in a position to judge them, but it can be very annoying at times,
        that is for sure.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Paul
        ... Well my limited experience began in 1996 for Linux. For the first 6 years I ran Linux I mainly used Slackware too. Back then Slackware wasn t known for its
        Message 3 of 20 , Mar 8, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com, "C. Beck" <usabecker@...> wrote:
          >
          > Yeah, that would be what I consider the bad luck part. My point was just
          > that relying on a distribution's repositories is not the only option
          > available for installing software in linux - That's what the comment I
          > responded to seemed to be saying. There are often ways around dependency
          > issues if a program is wanted bad enough - at least that has been my
          > limited experience.
          >

          Well my limited experience began in 1996 for Linux. For the first 6 years I ran Linux I mainly used Slackware too. Back then Slackware wasn't known for its strong package management either. It was a great system, simple enough anyone could hack around with it, solid enough it was predictable out of the box too. But once you started adding to it on your own then things quickly got very difficult to keep up with.

          By 2001 I'd given that life up for the much easier RPM method of dealing with things. That was a golden era then, full of promise, and hope for the future. Then Red Hat became a publicly traded company, but that is a story for another time ...

          Anyhow, be careful what you want, you just may get it, then come to realize it isn't worth the trouble after all.

          Fact is there is a reason every distribution uses virtually the same scheme of package management that keeps track of versions, dependencies, and files today. Because no one really wants to do that on their own. It is in a word drudgery. It is dull, boring, tedious, and hard too! But most of all it is ultimately a waste of time. Duplication of effort always is.
        • highskywhy@yahoo.de
          Sa Mär 09 13:10:36 2013 Good afternoon Thank You for help. ... ... what the ... your Ubuntu ... There is no reason the latest version of whatever
          Message 4 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            Sa Mär 09 13:10:36 2013
            Good afternoon
            Thank You for help.


            On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Pascal <pascal.bernhard@...> wrote:
            >
            <snip>
            >
            > If not, then no. With most Linux distributions you are dependent on
            what the
            > repositories provide and if there is not latest Firefox available for
            your Ubuntu
            > version then bad luck.

            There is no reason the latest version of whatever couldn't be built
            from source on your machine if desired. Granted that may still be
            considered bad luck, but it is an option.
            *
            Thank You.

            > Kernel updates are rather rare on Ubuntu. Most of the time only minor
            version steps
            > are taken. As long as all the hardware works, I would not install a
            newer kernel
            > version manually. Why fix a system that ain't broke.

            I'd like to think updates are often to improve performance and/or fix
            security holes.
            *
            But it is a lot
            isnt it.

            Regards
            Sophie
          • highskywhy@yahoo.de
            Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013 Good afternoon Thank You for help. ... When you close a terminal you are done with that session. sudo -s is valid until I close the
            Message 5 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013
              Good afternoon
              Thank You for help.

              > Does sudo -s be valid during the whole session
              > or until I close the terminal?


              When you close a terminal you are done with that session.

              sudo -s is valid
              until I close the terminal
              isnt it.

              Regards
              Sophie
            • highskywhy@yahoo.de
              Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013 Good afternoon Thank You for help. ... I ve often seen plenty of reasons later code could not be built. Configure scripts look for =
              Message 6 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013
                Good afternoon
                Thank You for help.

                > There is no reason the latest version of whatever couldn't be built
                > from source on your machine if desired. Granted that may still be
                > considered bad luck, but it is an option.
                >

                I've often seen plenty of reasons later code could not be built.
                Configure scripts look for >= versions of development packages to build
                against. Often if one software package is out of date many are, and that
                leaves you with tool chains that do not meet minimum requirements.
                *
                OK


                I run Debian stable so I see it all of the time. I don't know why
                developers set such stringent standards, I suspect they don't even
                realize they're doing it half of the time, it works for them, so they
                don't give it another thought. Everyone should be running the
                distribution they are, etc. etc. It could also be laziness, or simple
                incompetence too.
                *
                OK
                Question:
                I use Gimp.
                I can start it with the terminal.
                But I cannot start it with the gui. Then there is an error.
                Is their a way to repeat it?
                *
                Question:
                I install on one Linux: Audio-Rekorder
                Fine.
                I install on another Linux: Audio Rekorder. But this time I cannot use
                the program. What shall I do?

                Regards
                Sophie
              • highskywhy@yahoo.de
                Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013 Good afternoon Thank You for help. ... Configure scripts look for = versions of development packages to build against. Often if one
                Message 7 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013
                  Good afternoon
                  Thank You for help.

                  > > There is no reason the latest version of whatever couldn't be built
                  > > from source on your machine if desired. Granted that may still be
                  > > considered bad luck, but it is an option.
                  > >
                  >
                  > I've often seen plenty of reasons later code could not be built.
                  Configure scripts look for >= versions of development packages to build
                  against. Often if one software package is out of date many are, and that
                  leaves you with tool chains that do not meet minimum requirements.

                  Yeah, that would be what I consider the bad luck part. My point was just
                  that relying on a distribution's repositories is not the only option
                  available for installing software in linux - That's what the comment I
                  responded to seemed to be saying. There are often ways around dependency
                  issues if a program is wanted bad enough - at least that has been my
                  limited experience.
                  *
                  OK


                  >
                  > I run Debian stable so I see it all of the time. I don't know why
                  developers set such stringent standards, I suspect they don't even realize
                  they're doing it half of the time, it works for them, so they don't give it
                  another thought. Everyone should be running the distribution they are, etc.
                  etc. It could also be laziness, or simple incompetence too.

                  I'm not in a position to judge them, but it can be very annoying at times,
                  that is for sure.
                  *

                  Is there a way to clean Linux
                  if there are update-problems?

                  Regards
                  Sophie
                • highskywhy@yahoo.de
                  Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013 Good afternoon Thank You for help. ... was just ... dependency ... * Is the best way if the updates does make problems with the os to
                  Message 8 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Sa Mär 09 13:19:41 2013
                    Good afternoon
                    Thank You for help.
                    > >
                    > > Yeah, that would be what I consider the bad luck part. My point
                    was just
                    > > that relying on a distribution's repositories is not the only option
                    > > available for installing software in linux - That's what the comment I
                    > > responded to seemed to be saying. There are often ways around
                    dependency
                    > > issues if a program is wanted bad enough - at least that has been my
                    > > limited experience.
                    > >
                    >
                    > Well my limited experience began in 1996 for Linux. For the first 6
                    > years I ran Linux I mainly used Slackware too. Back then Slackware
                    > wasn't known for its strong package management either. It was a great
                    > system, simple enough anyone could hack around with it, solid enough it
                    > was predictable out of the box too. But once you started adding to it on
                    > your own then things quickly got very difficult to keep up with.
                    >
                    > By 2001 I'd given that life up for the much easier RPM method of dealing
                    > with things. That was a golden era then, full of promise, and hope for
                    > the future. Then Red Hat became a publicly traded company, but that is a
                    > story for another time ...
                    >
                    > Anyhow, be careful what you want, you just may get it, then come to
                    > realize it isn't worth the trouble after all.
                    >
                    > Fact is there is a reason every distribution uses virtually the same
                    > scheme of package management that keeps track of versions, dependencies,
                    > and files today. Because no one really wants to do that on their own. It
                    > is in a word drudgery. It is dull, boring, tedious, and hard too! But
                    > most of all it is ultimately a waste of time. Duplication of effort
                    > always is.
                    *
                    Is the best way
                    if the updates does make problems with the os
                    to download a new iso-file and install Linux again
                    or is there a cleaning procedure?

                    Regards
                    Sophie
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.