please explain me why there is so much of trouble in installing any software in linux

please explain me why there is so much of trouble in installing any software in linux? can there be any solution to this problem ?can we develop some means that makes it possible to make a single sofware package release for all machines ,has a nice gui interface like in windows,perform nearly every thing on its ownand may be launched just by a click on some file named as "setup" or something like this

just a guess, but the trouble comes from the huge variety of linux systems out there. if we made everybody use the same thing (library, tools, ect.), it would be a bit easier to run a generic install, but that kind of defeats the purpose of using linux doesn't it. if you want a smooth install download something that is writtin in pure java, like netbeans, and install it. i was blown away at how easy it was.

Originally posted by amolgupta please explain me why there is so much of trouble in installing any software in linux? can there be any solution to this problem ?can we develop some means that makes it possible to make a single sofware package release for all machines ,has a nice gui interface like in windows,perform nearly every thing on its ownand may be launched just by a click on some file named as "setup" or something like this

possible, yes ( technically, but you have the problem of distro's being set up different ways, different library versions, missing libraries, etc...). But really, it's not hard to install software if you know what you are doing. If you expect a simple setup program ( ala setup.exe) then windows would be your answer. If you expect the ability to have control over your system, how it's set up, and the ability to modify the software you use, then Linux/BSD would be your answer. If everything is pre-compiled, it kind of defeats the whole purpose of free software...

Originally posted by amolgupta can we develop some means that makes it possible to make a single sofware package release for all machines ,has a nice gui interface like in windows,perform nearly every thing on its ownand may be launched just by a click on some file named as "setup" or something like this

sounds like what these folks wanna do:

http://www.autopackage.org/


BTW: personally, i despise that project... but maybe you'll like it...

If you expect a simple setup program ( ala setup.exe) then windows would be your answer.

I think "apt-get install <package>" or "emerge <package>" or (my favourite) "cd /usr/ports/<category>/<package>; pkgmk -d -i" are easier than most Windows setup programs.

The question is how to get newbies to use these instead of the Rubbish Package Manager that comes with most big distros.

I personally beleive it is both of these two things:
(1): The lack of a good free installer program/builder.
(2): The library dependencies.

I know I have seen some good installers (E.g. bitrock) but I haven't personally tried them, and I've yet to see them used. The biggest problem probably is that there are so many dependancy problems. This library depends on this one, and that one on that, and the other here... In short, your installer would have to reinstall all the libraries on the system just to work, and the next one to come along would break the previous program, etc...

That is why most programs for Linux you have to recompile. If some group would get to gether and fix the linux libraries once and for all than I bet you would start seeing installers pop-up every where.

(Actually, all they would have to do to fix the "library" problem is have the #$^!*% (@%$^!$%^!@) system look for the libraries the program needs in the (#^&@&^&@) place the executable is!!!!)

Why doesn't linux do that btw? Why is it so hard? And I know I have alreadu asked this question a few times, but how DO I make my programs look for the libraries it needs in the place it is running? (without modifiying the paths, ldconfig, etc...)?

I'm a longtime Windows user and am *desperate* to find a version of Linux that I can live with. I'm currently using Suse Linux Professional 9.2 and would say I'm currently 35% satisfied / 65% incredibly frustrated as usual.

With regards to installing programs I have to say there *must* be an easier way!

I'm no expert but I gather a library is a bunch of functions that programs access to do stuff - right?

And some libraries need access to other libraries?

Why the heck can't we then have a nice little file labelled "setup" or "install" that asks you where you want to install the program and (if necessary) scans your hard drive to make sure all the required libraries exist and then just gets on with it?

Is this what RPM's are?

What's going on?

With regards to people not finding it a nuisance to type commands in manually - isn't the whole point of having a nice-looking GUI, a mouse pointer, pretty icons etc. so we don't have to remember what commands to type in - we click on something and it does it for us?

Does my frustration come through in this post?

Originally posted by The_Nerd (Actually, all they would have to do to fix the "library" problem is have the #$^!*% (@%$^!$%^!@) system look for the libraries the program needs in the (#^&@&^&@) place the executable is!!!!) Why doesn't linux do that btw? Why is it so hard? And I know I have alreadu asked this question a few times, but how DO I make my programs look for the libraries it needs in the place it is running? (without modifiying the paths, ldconfig, etc...)?

if you put the libs in the same directory, it defeats the whole purpose of shared libraries ( whether or not you like the idea of shared libs).

as for your second question, not sure you could do it outside of manipulating the environment ( without re-coding the app itself). it's pretty easy to do though ( setting up the paths), look at the way mozilla/firefox binaries do it.

Originally posted by amolgupta please explain me why there is so much of trouble in installing any software in linux? can there be any solution to this problem ?can we develop some means that makes it possible to make a single sofware package release for all machines ,has a nice gui interface like in windows,perform nearly every thing on its ownand may be launched just by a click on some file named as "setup" or something like this

I hear ya brother. Package management is my number one criteria for a linux distro. In my opinion, nobody is even in the same building as Gentoo's portage. Arch's pacman is very good as well.

Thanks for the quick replies guys.

Excuse my newbie ignorance but why would libraries need to be moved?

Can't libraries exist wherever they want to be and an installer program scan for them, find them and sort it all out for the user?

Isn't there a service running somewhere that handles all that mullarky?

Please bear in mind my extremely limited understanding of libraries - my total understanding is pretty much summarised in my last post!

Cheers.

Originally posted by phil_saunders I'm currently using Suse Linux Professional 9.2 and would say I'm currently 35% satisfied / 65% incredibly frustrated as usual. With regards to installing programs I have to say there *must* be an easier way!

I dont see how SuSe could make it any easier. You open YAST, select the programs you want to install, click install, and thats it.

Because distros are very different and everybody thinks that his solution is the best

Here's an example of the problem I have...

I want to install a program such as Xine so I can play DVD's - The user interface is a bit like Power DVD which I'm used to (I'll deal with the frustrations of trying to get encrypted DVD's to work later!).

1. I open Yast. (I'm asked for the root password - this gets really frustrating after a while).
2. I click on "Install and Remove software".
3. I'm presented with a fairly unfriendly looking screen.
4. I try changing the "Filter" dropdown list to "Package Groups" which would make more sense to me if it were labelled "Program Types" but that's by the by.
5. I find something called "xine-lib" with a summary of "Video Player With Plugins".
6. I check the box and click "Accept".
7. Now what?
8. Where's the program now then?
9. I have a look at "Multimedia" > "Video Players" on the menu and... nothing. Where is it?
10. If I wanted to try opening the program manually I don't know where it's been installed to?
11. If I could just download the program from the web, extract the files to where I saw fit, run a file labelled setup, drag the program into the menu myself I'd be delighted.

Is this too much to ask? Am I missing something?

xine-lib is just an engine, you need a front end to it. gxine, totem ( which might or might not be configured to use xine), kaffiene, xine_ui, etc.. are what you need to install now to use xine (Yast should have at least mentioned this - I don't use Suse so I don't know if it does or not).

phil_saunders, I would just recomend you to download the tar(las one is 1.0) of a xinelib. Install it(it takes only 3 command ./configure && make && make install) and then find frontend you like, I prefer xine-ui. ANy questions about any of the steps, write here, and we will get you box running these DVDs