Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Now i was wondering, is it possible to install software from source using the GUI alone?
Before we start the insults (ok, us here on this forum are sophistimacated enough not to do that), this is for study more than me wanting to butcher shell usage.
Decompressing the code, yes, can be done.
./configure ... should be doable
make - Compiling the code, presumably using an IDE or something (never tried so not sure) should work
running the install using "make install" ... now this i have problems with, can that be done?
Could anyone point to a GUI only (ie no use of the console in any way, shape or form) install of any of the Kernel sources? or any other program from source alone?
Re: Compiling from source in a Graphic User Interface
Quote:
Originally posted by chakkerz running the install using "make install" ... now this i have problems with, can that be done?
su to root then do make install from that directory.
Quote:
Originally posted by chakkerz
Could anyone point to a GUI only (ie no use of the console in any way, shape or form) install of any of the Kernel sources? or any other program from source alone?
whats wrong with installing the kernel from the console? just wget ur sources from kernel.org, unpack them to /usr/src then use make menuconfig to configure it, then compile it and copy the kernel over to /boot.
I'm doing HCI research and, in short whilst i'm biased in favour of CLI with some nice modelled outcomes, i need to compare the two UI unbiased, and so ... yes.
There is nothing wrong with the console, but novice users prefer the GUI, and from some of the models i've done, quite rightly, since it beats CLI by 200% in terms of speed. for expert users, this changes dramatically in favour of the CLI.
So i agree, CLI roxx , but i can't base my research on anecdotal evidence.
Thanks for the kconfigure link. I'd like to keep this going for a while, the forum i mean, so if anyone has any other input, please let's hear it
Personally, I don't understand the CLI for everything approach. It seems just as bigoted as the GUI-only paradigm. There's certain tasks which are done more efficiently graphically, and some through the command line, it all just depends.
Compiling an app is one task that is probably best to do on the command line. As kconfigure illustrates, there are some benefits (i.e selecting configuration arguments with the click of a mouse), but if something goes wrong it's nice to be able to work with the filesystem, edit a Makefile, all from the same interface, in which case a command line is best to have. Also, I personally believe someone who doesn't want to work with a command line, shouldn't be trying to compile an app, as potentially it may require some knowledge of software development, even if only in the abstract. Considering the number of alternative binary installation methods, a n00b shouldn't have to mess with source.
As far as the GUI, there are obvious benefits. Only a command-line nazi lunatic would claim that editing images (i.e The Gimp) is best done via CLI. Many other tasks are more efficient to some degree graphically, such as audio processing (recording, editing, mixing, etc.), 3D design, web browsing, simple file management (i.e drag-n-drop files to an sftp server via Konqueror, not more complex tasks utilizing find, grep, etc.).
Basically, I think it's ridiculous to think one paradigm should be picked to the complete abandonment of the other. They both have there place, and I'd venture to say they'll continue to exist in some form in the future. Just look at Star Trek: In addition to the holodeck (which is underused in my opinion), they still have graphical panels (GUI), and an AI voice interface (basically, a verbal command line). I think in the future the two will continue to co-exist in the same manner. Hopefully mentioning TNG hasn't completely invalidated my points :-D.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.