Something linux lacks of is standardlization in installers. Some distros use apt-get, some use source, some use rpm, some use other formats etc etc...

They should make it like windows, you download a self extracting 100% stand alone installer, execute it, hit next a few times and boom, program is installed. Why is it not already like that? It can't be that hard to make. For those who prefer using the console, it could simply be text based instead of a GUI, but same idea. The problem #1 is that installing from source is a PIA you need to use the right arguments otherwise it does not work or screws up the system, installing from RPM is a PIA since it usually wants some other dependancies, then if you try and go through hell and find those files online and try to install then, you need more files, you end up having to download 1000's of dependancies before you can get a very simple program to work! That's simply horrible and bad software enginering. A downloaded program should come with everything it needs and have it's own installer that you just execute and go through a few questions (ex: path to install) and then it installs it and boom, and of story.

Does anyone else agree? I'm hoping that in the near future some kind of system like this will be standarlized to make things easier. I think this would greatly improve the linux market. For example, at this moment I would never recommend linux to anyone as a desktop operating system because of this fact, that if they want something, it's a PIA to install. Right now it's mostly meant for servers but they should still make it easier so that servers don't require rocket scientists to run.

I totally agree.

I'm kinda a newbie and I'm killing myself trying to install something as simple as mysql

rocket scientist? i'm a stupid carpenter with three linux boxes at home. no windows for over two years now.

if you want a desktop distro that will do everything for you, like click a couple of times for the install, grab xandros, libranet, turbolinux, mdk, fedora. they are out there, let them do their thing and then run the system. if you want something new installed, type it into the system and it will get it for you.

if you want to play the game of cross platform apps, rpms for deb, .deb for mdk, rh, then yes you will have to do everything that you have stated. if you stick to one system and install of the disks and then update it, you shouldn't have any problem at all.

i hope that your not looking for a flame war on this, it will be shut down in a hurry.

I'm hoping this won't turn into a flamewar...

But the propaganda about click and install is what is hoped, but it never happends that way. In theory, an RPM should install right away, but it's rarely the case. But if they make sure to include everything required for the program to run, you would not get that problem. When you buy a car, it comes with everything you need for it to work.

LOL, lets don't and say we did. Linux is NOT windows, and WE really don't want it to emulate windows either.......I don't want my hand held while installing Slackware!! period!

i STRONGLY disagree, like 320mb has said, it's not windows

it's also open source, so the fact that there are choices is actually a really great thing, because otherwise you would be saying 'why isn't there an alternate for the default package system?' :P

I'm happy I don't have windows-like installers: they can do with your system whatever they like and always leave rubbish behind if you deinstall (if there is a deinstallation program). I'm happy to have apt-get and .deb, it keeps my computer clean .

@Red Squirrel
i totally agree with you, but that will *never* happen. it would mean, some people would have to give up their favourite install-method. standards in linux are impossible to enforce.
linux will never be an os for everyone. just live with it or buy an mac (which isn't much of an improvement, considering it doesn't have an deinstallation method).

I'm pretty new to linux, but I have never had to many problems installing programs. I just do the ./configure, make, make install thing and usually everything work right. The only program I've ever had any problem with is Limewire, which I still haven't gotten that to work but I know it's something with Java thats screwed up. I have never really dealt with any of the RPM things cause I use Slackware 9.1 and that was the first linux distro I ever installed and used. In fact I haven't booted into my WinXP partition for months now. So I pretty happy with how things are right now.

I think if you like windows and can get around initial problems.. the best distribution to go with is slackware. You can update your basic packages with swaret.. and there is quite a bit of software you can download in package form off linuxpackages.net that you simply install with installpkg. If you keep the default configuration it'll automatically check dependencies and prompt so it can resolve them for you if you are missing something.

As far as outside programs you simply download a tool called checkinstall and then whatever program it is you get the source.. extract it
and then type
./configure
make
checkinstall (select S for slackware) and you are good to go with an installed slackware package which you can easily remove with pkgtool (or if you like xpkgtool is available to do it with an x-based interface).

I hate apt-get after using swaret and can't see what people see in it really. Swaret has never given me the huge amounts of error messages that dpkg gives all the time when upgrading a debian based system (tried libranet and woody)..

Mandrake and Redhat RPMs are highly overrated and you run into problems installing things fairly often..

BTW, the reason that applications in linux don't include everything they need to run is that everyone has different packages and distributions. There is no way they can know what you need to run and they don't want to be throwing older versions of things on your system when you already have it. Not only that it reduces download size to not have the huge windows install programs. There are installers that do work the way you are talking about. Ut2004 installs that way for example..

Anyway..

Hehe, why is it RH users always have problems with package management? Damn I hate RPM and I do everything I can to stay away from it. Red Squirrel, I seriously suggest running (far) away from Red Hat or Mandrake, especially if package management concerns you. The reason there will never be a standardized method of installing is because Linux is all about choices. However, there exists a distribution or 2 that will really attract your attention. I seriously recommend Gentoo Linux for a solution to your problem. Yes, it compiles source code, and yes it takes a lot longer than copying binary files, but no, it never (at least I never seen it) screw up. In fact, if a program needs a dependency, it will automatically download and compile that beforehand...and any dependencies the dependency needs, and so on...

Arch and Debian Linux are two alternative distributions with similar, yet not as powerful package management.

Oh yeah, and the best part about Gentoo is you will always have only the stuff you need, because the package manager is only installing what you request to be installed (and their dependencies).

Although I must warn you, Gentoo takes a while to install, and you must type quite a few commands. Fear not, everything is VERY VERY WELL documented in the Gentoo Handbook, and it's mostly a matter of copy/pasting.

I hope this helps.

some larger programs (such as mozilla and openoffice) already have that. the binaries are precompiled and an installer takes care of all the hard work.

keep in mind that windows only runs on x86 processors. linux supports a lot more. by only having an x86 binary you are limiting the potential users of that program. also you dont want to produce hundreds of binaries optimized for any variation of any possible archeitechture. that's what's so nice about source code and configure scripts.

that being said, i do admit that a clear majority of users are x86 users that dont really need an executable tailor made exactly for their configuration, as long as it runs ok.

a great solution would be a cross-distro package management tool (perhaps something made by the GNU/FSF could be agreed on by all distributions?). that means that that the software developers would not have to program their own installers but merely configure a script that would be run by the cross distro package management tool.

Nope, it needs intelligent and responsible users.


Cheers,
Tink

i have to agree with shellcode on this one. windows is not platform independent, and neither are those binary executables. go try to get the source from m$ so you can compile em yourself. laff...

(dot) tgz
works fine for me

---
I believe the day that linux has an auto installer like windows has, is the day we invite ourselfs to threats such as sasser and other very malicious virous attacks.
.tgz and .rpm are pushing those limits because of the complete ease to overlook what is actually being copied to your hard drive.