[SOLVED] difference of using tar.gz or rpm to install package

catiewong · 11-11-2018, 07:20 PM

I know package can not install by tar.gz or rpm way , if I install it with tar.gz way by using default setting setting ( do not change any path , parameter etc. ) , is it the same as by using rpm ?

lougavulin · 11-11-2018, 07:35 PM

Install by tar.gz, you mean from the sources and compile it ?

Often distributions changes things when they packages software. So no, you can't be sure it is the same thing. A lot of options are available when compiling.

And using rpm (or any official distro's packages) allow you to easily upgrade or remove packages. From source it is a bit harder.

John VV · 11-11-2018, 07:52 PM

Quote:

is it the same as by using rpm

as above , no it is not the same .
However you can make a rpm from the source code using "rpm-build" and install with your package manager ( yum/dnf/zypper)

berndbausch · 11-12-2018, 12:02 AM

Advantages of rpm compared to tarballs:

dependency check (although autoconf, often used to put a tarball together, checks dependencies as well)
you can install binaries
you get a database of all your installed software
thanks to the DB, you can verify, remove or update software with ease

Perhaps a few more.

EDIT disadvantages: tar and compilers are available on all platforms, not rpm. And when you use tar, you are forced to do more manual work and be more thorough, which can be considered a plus.

ilesterg · 11-12-2018, 12:52 AM

In additions to the answers above, are you presented with either a .tar.gz tarball or a .rpm file download choices? If that is so, most of the time the .tar.gz file contains the source code (which you can compile on different platforms), and the rpm file contains the RPM installer (which of course you can only run on RPM-based systems).