This guy named Jorge about installing software.

foolish · #1 17th August 2004, 05:07 PM

Here's this guy Jorges ramblings about why installing software in linux distribution are so hard. He uses Fedora Core 2 and Debian as examples.

All I can say is: My thoughts exactly! Good read.

Here's my favorite part, and I know of some that really read this through:

Quote:

So what's my point? My point is, we as users need to start encouraging new users to use their distribution how it was meant to be used. Developers, find ways to cooperate to make this easier. Rouge binaries that show up as the first hit on Google for "Firefox FC2" are going to get your users in trouble. If you're advice to a new user involves the phrases like "force", or "add this experimental source", or "just grab the tarballs", stop for a minute and THINK. Let experienced users deal with garnome and jhbuild. Don't expect a new user to understand why "grabbing the vanilla source from kernel.org" is better. It might be better for you, but chances are, it's not good for whoever is just starting out in Linux.

Sure, you experts continue to build from source, that's fine, but to a new user who just wants the new Firefox, it's all foreign to him. Let's leave "hunt and peck" package management to the Windows world, we've got our systems in place, let's start using them.

And here'se the link to the whole thing: http://www.whiprush.org/2004/08/aha_proof_were_.html

fjleal · #2 18th August 2004, 01:40 AM

Is installing software in Linux distributions hard?!?...

imdeemvp · #3 18th August 2004, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fjleal

Is installing software in Linux distributions hard?!?...

for the handicap people of M$ .......i mean the so call MCSE

Jman · #4 18th August 2004, 03:43 AM

A little bit of a rant, but hey it's a blog.

I'm trying to get what he's saying. First he says that too many packages are confusing. Then he says that instead of directing people to the main site (mozilla.org for example) they should check their own distro. I guess he's saying that the current system is kind of broken, as the packagers and the developers don't communicate enough.

This is not an issue for Microsoft as the developers and packages are the same people, and they only build for one "distribution".

But he does realize that the effort required to work things out a couple of months (!) before release on every package is very difficult. But maybe at least the flagship software, Mozilla/Firefox, OpenOffice.org, Gnome/KDE, etc. the developers and the packagers could work out more issues.

While choices are good I see how this gets confusing, with multiple repositories accessed with several package managment tools.

I'm totally with him on the attitude: "wrong distro" or "compiling from source is much better, n00b" is the worst thing to do to new users.

Whatever the case, if you're a developer or a packager, keep up the good work!

sailor · #5 18th August 2004, 04:44 AM

He does point out some problems, but I think all can be solved with a little homework and common sense...
someone made the analogy that "linux is like a rollercoaster, you have to be this tall to ride"...unfortunately that still applies...but things are getting better and easier...
I failed miserablely trying linux the first few times, why? I did not read the manual....that is the legacy of windows (wizards do it all for you).

fjleal · #6 18th August 2004, 11:33 AM

It seems to me that a few questions people coming from the Windows world often raise are related to the level of freedom of choice you have under Linux. You may get programs from multiple sources (this normally doesn't happen in Windows, with commercial applications being sold by a single company). You may get those programs as code to compile, or as a binary (this is very rare in Windows). Even as a binary, the same application can be packaged in different ways (rpm, tar.gz, tgz, ...). Etc...

Now, talking about compiling and building may sound unfamiliar to those that are not programmers or don't know how is an application created and maintained. But it is the same thing for Windows, if someone makes available an application as both source code and a binary (Mozilla, for instance).

The way I see it, it's all about freedom of choice, having multiple choices to choose upon. Windows people are not used to it. But I don't think that's hard by any means, not even hard to explain.