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

Re: Linux Updates

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 20 , Mar 8, 2013
      --- 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 2 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
        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 3 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
          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 4 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
            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 5 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
              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 6 of 20 , Mar 9, 2013
                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.