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.
6. While installing a new software, it doesn't resolve the dependencies itself, it assumes you are smart enough to do it yourself, though it does tell you what the dependencies are.
I have not used Slackware in quite a while. Is this a new feature?
P.S.: Your wording is rather poor in my opinion. You almost seem to imply that package management systems which perform automatic dependency resolution do it because they'd rather not make assumptions about the user's intelligence (compared to doing it because it is a useful feature for many users, regardless how smart they are). You are also saying that Slackware's PMS doesn't assume you are smart enough to figure out what the dependencies are, by providing this information (again, this sounds new to me.. back when I used Slackware no such information was provided by pkgtools).
I have not used Slackware in quite a while. Is this a new feature?
P.S.: Your wording is rather poor in my opinion. You almost seem to imply that package management systems which perform automatic dependency resolution do it because they'd rather not make assumptions about the user's intelligence (compared to doing it because it is a useful feature for many users, regardless how smart they are). You are also saying that Slackware's PMS doesn't assume you are smart enough to figure out what the dependencies are, by providing this information (again, this sounds new to me.. back when I used Slackware no such information was provided by pkgtools).
No, this is no new feature, at least I don't have that feature on my Slackware machines. I think what Anisha means is that sites like Slackbuilds.org or AlienBob's repository list the dependencies for the packages you can get from there.
Regarding the wording you mentioned, a race-car is build the way it is because the engineer assumes you are a good enough driver to handle the power it gives to you. That doesn't mean that you are forbidden to use a stock street car with an automatic transmission if you want to.
And so, my fellow *nix users: ask not what linux can do for you - ask what you can do for linux.
No,that's not true.Maybe she/he want to learn about linux or others.
Everyone can get what he want from linux,because linux belong to us.
Why linux lives in the world? We use it.
About me,I get happy from linux.
Interesting analogy, but I find it inaccurate. I'm thinking pkgtools assuming intelligence is closer to a race car assuming talent. Assumption of driving skill would thus be closer to assumption of knowledge. A person who does not know how to drive would surely not be encouraged to learn on a race car.
Thanks for clarifying, Tobi, I meant whatever you have said, though it is my fault that I didn't mention the Slackbuild/AlienBob's sites explicitly and also the fact that simple make does list out the dependencies.
A person who does not know how to drive would surely not be encouraged to learn on a race car.
Because this person's life would be in real danger when doing something like that. But there is nothing dangerous (at least for your life) in learning Linux. I would assume that if you know how to drive the race-car (Slackware), you will not have many problems to adapt your knowledge to different cars (distributions).
But anyways, it is up to personal choice how much about a system you want to learn. I used Debian before I came to Slackware, and I think I had a somewhat good knowledge about it. I could configure it the way I want, had build different systems and live-CDs, and so on. But when I started to use Slackware I had to realize how small my knowledge about Linux is in reality.
If you are fine with knowing your system, you should learn on your system. If you want to learn more I would recommend a system that forces you to learn more, like LFS, Slackware, Arch or Gentoo. Learning Linux has, at least in my opinion, nothing to do with dependency handling, but with how you have to configure it.
And starting off from a point where you have ample amount of documentation on your hands which makes you to get your hands dirty, a little, is IMO a good point to start.
At the same time (if you have enough interest in knowing how kernel deals with the processes/threads/files etc.) you can refer to the books I have mentioned in that Sticky thread. And then there are interesting tasks like creating your own system calls, creating your own shell, writing interrupt handlers, writing device drivers, etc. and last but not the least: developing your own operating system: http://wiki.osdev.org/Main_Page
I think, LFS will give you a confidence and you'll be able to see a source of light.
Yes,Miss Kaul,Actually I'm have lots of documentation as what you said.The most important one is :http://linux.vbird.org/
built by The Linux teacher---Vbird in China,Taiwan.However It's written by traditional Chinese,You can't read it.
Vbird teach all the chinese step by step with amount of examples.Now I'm learning the Shell Script on Vbird.org
I'm a chinese,but I like English.Because I can meet great people just like Anisha Kaul and communicate with the you!!
The second important one is tLDP.org I want to read the HowTos and Guides page by page ,but there's few examples.So I have to learn the Vbird first.Could you give me some documentations with lots of examples for newbies in English ?
Though I can't develop my own linux,could I learn the LFS now??
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,900
Rep:
From a guy who is an automotive technician (motor mechanic) to a pair of guys talking about race cars as an analogy can I just say you both should move away from this analogy. Just because you can turn a steering wheel and change gears in one type of car does not mean you can in another. Yes they may have a steering wheel and 4 road wheels but very few people can move from one type of race car to another easily and comfortably. I have seen many F1 and Indy drivers crash Australian V8Supercars simply because they couldn't handle it yet they have less power and do not reach the speed the open wheelers do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul
I meant whatever you have said
You do realise you just indicated you don't know what Tobi said don't you?
Yes, and all I have said in my previous post was with respect to LFS. And I don't know what is VBird.
Sorry,Miss Kaul,My English is poor,I'm improving it as soon as I can.
And thank you very much.You give me a new jop!! I did't know what will do after learning the shell script.Now I'm ready to learn LFS!!
Long,Long Live Anisha Kaul!!!!
TobiSGD: Apparently we are annoying some technicians (and I'm guessing we're also hijacking the thread).
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01
Just because you can turn a steering wheel and change gears in one type of car does not mean you can in another
From a guy who is a computer programmer to an automotive technician: so it is somewhat similar to how being able to manage packages via pkgtools does not imply you can (also, automatically) do it with dpkg / rpm / etc.?
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.