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.
qjoypad 4.1.0 is in the Ubuntu repositories. You can install it with a couple of mouse clicks in the Ubuntu Software Center, or with the following terminal command. Easy-peasy. Hope that helps.
A better question is, what software are you trying to install, and why aren't you installing it through your software/package manager?
That question is irrelevant as far as I can understand. Installing packages from source is everyones right.
Other than that you should be correct. Those two reasons are pretty much the only ones, unless the file is corrupt in some weird way.
just untar how ever it gets done, cd into dir, ls to see what files are in there, find the file you need to run, configure not config, or automake.sh to create a configure file, or MakeFile
then if MakeFile then run
make
sudo make install
else
run one of the others,
automake.sh then configure, then make, then sudo make install,
or configure, make, sudo make install.
simple as that, providing you have your depends developer headers installed, which is a topic for another day.
That question is irrelevant as far as I can understand. Installing packages from source is everyones right. Other than that you should be correct. Those two reasons are pretty much the only ones, unless the file is corrupt in some weird way.
Am I old fashion for using tar -zxvf?
Not a bit, and they can do whatever they want. However, based on the post, this seems to be a new user, so installing from source probably isn't the best idea. And (to me), unless you need a brand-new, bleeding edge feature/bugfix, there's little need to install from source. System updates and later administration is far easier with packages. Bear in mind, I'm not saying you SHOULD NEVER install from source, but for a new user who has an existing package? Don't think it's a good idea.
And based on the way the OP phrased their disjointed questions, I have to agree that recommending they install using a package manager is a great idea.
TB0ne's question also was a very early reply and we had yet to learn what the OP was trying to really do.
That question is irrelevant as far as I can understand. Installing packages from source is everyones right.
I agree 100%.
However, if a new friend is coming over to my house for the first time, and they ask, "How do I get in? The window is stuck!" it would be reasonable for me to reply, "Walk on in through the front door; it's open!"
However, if a new friend is coming over to my house for the first time, and they ask, "How do I get in? The window is stuck!" it would be reasonable for me to reply, "Walk on in through the front door; it's open!"
Haha, very true. But I think it is useful for people who are new to GNU/Linux to do things in a non-ubuntu way. Doing things the Ubuntu way they will never learn anything.
Ofcourse there is a balance between using packages and source, but I think source use should be encouraged, also for newbies, so they can learn about what they are actually doing. If you get too comfortable only using a package manager, that is what you will always do. It can be compared to someone in the GNU/Linux world who only uses a GUI. I mean, the tremendous power of using GNU/Linux really becomes visible when you use the CLI.
Perhaps it is the times, not sure. When I learned GNU/Linux there was no package management (although they probably existed), and everything I installed was from source.
I usually keep it to if it is not in the repo then go to source and install from there.
if the repo version is lesser then the source, remove the repo version install the source.
depending on what it is, in its complexity to install and configure it. Some stable releases if not all are too / or turn into outdated releases too soon for some of the apps running.
why keep the old version in the repo when upgraded app can still run without error on an old kernel and the frame work that is needed to just run it. go to source.
this, newbieie shouldn't do this or shouldn't do that, because he or she is a newbeie got a stop. they got to learn sometime, and they of all people should know what they are capable of learning of and doing, and how to find out.
as far as Ubuntutututu I found that it is too much Winux for me.
Haha, very true. But I think it is useful for people who are new to GNU/Linux to do things in a non-ubuntu way. Doing things the Ubuntu way they will never learn anything.
Of course there is a balance between using packages and source, but I think source use should be encouraged, also for newbies, so they can learn about what they are actually doing. If you get too comfortable only using a package manager, that is what you will always do. It can be compared to someone in the GNU/Linux world who only uses a GUI. I mean, the tremendous power of using GNU/Linux really becomes visible when you use the CLI.
Perhaps it is the times, not sure. When I learned GNU/Linux there was no package management (although they probably existed), and everything I installed was from source.
While I don't disagree in principal, there's a time for this. If a new user can't change directories...is building from source going to be a good thing for them at this point? And add to that the fact that each package may install differently (./config? ./configure? automake? cmake?), and a new user is going to be lost pretty quickly.
They've got to walk before they run. And unless I absolutely NEED the latest-and-greatest feature/bugfix, I'd much rather install via package and update manager, vs. source. I've got quite enough to take care of.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.