Is VLC any easier to install than mplayer?

I downloaded the rpms for codecs and skin and libdvdread and libdvdcrss and mplayer and all that good stuff into /opt. Extracted the codecs into /usr/local/lib/codecs and ran installation for them. Went back to /opt and extracted and installed all the others (saving mplayer for last) there. Nothing works, and installation instructions range from simply saying "yum - install x" to "go to the directory (WHICH directory is never specified) and install". Both these types of instructions are useless, and the reason why I left Redhat and Fedora for Mandriva in the first place.

So I thought that there might be a .bin install for VLC like there is for java in linux. If not, maybe VLC is easier to install than mplayer in general. Before I start searching for downloads though, I thought I'd ask: Is VLC easier to install than mplayer?

Install directions on VideoLans website are pretty straightforward..

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-mandriva.html

they don't explain how to add the necessary repositories, but that should be in the Mandriva documentation...

wouldn't a tarball install be simpler ? just confire make and make install the source code files.
Also on fedora 10, yum install vlc worked fine without any problem !
nishith

That depends. In your case, you might have all the dependencies of VLC pre-installed in Fedora. But that is not the case always. In fact, installing VLC from source is one hell of a task. If I remember right, last time I compiled it from source, it needed about 6-7 dependencies to be installed first to be able to build it, let alone the dependencies of dependencies .


moxieman99,
I think you should try using the package manager of your Linux distro instead, rather than installing these using individual RPMs. Package manager make the work a lot easier, for example Synaptic Package Manager.

BTW, which distro are you using?

----------------
Right now I am running Fedora Core 9. Problem is that yum (or for different distros apt - get, install, etc) doesn't allow me to learn anything. This is a problem with instructions that either assume too much in terms of knowledge or make no pretense of allowing someone to learn anything. Is it too much to ask for someone to put into their instructions that you want to extract into directory X and install there? From reading a mass of material I was able to gather that I should extract and install mplayer codecs first, into /usr/local/lib/codecs (if memory serves) and then install mplayer skins and mplayer into "the [unspecified] directory." God knows where libdvd stuff is supposed to go.

So I did that. I downloaded everything to /opt and did the codecs into /usr/local/lib/codecs (or whatever it was) and the other stuff into /opt. Nothing. Command line for mplayer and gmplayer simply said no such command.

But I followed the instructions!

Now look at java's .bin install. Clear instructions tell me where to put it and what to do and what is going to happen when I do it, and how I can modify installation.

I like linux, I really do, but I have to admit that when it comes to spreading the word that linux is a viable alternative for the average joe on the street, linux is its own worst enemy. Thirty plus years ago I was programming a DEC PDP-11 in assembler. I'm not afraid of computers. I don't mind having different packages and components to install in order to give someone the flexibility they want. But I don't think that linux will get anywhere by making install instructions and dependency resolution instructions that are too vague and assume too much knowledge for the average joe to use, and I don't feel like going back to school just because someone cannot write clearly and thinks I should join the priesthood in order to use linux. Sing and dance all you want, but Windows makes it simple, and that's why linux is on the outside looking in when it comes to home users. Open Office is a serious alternative to Windows Office. Why? Even in linux, install is clear and simple. It's not the best office suite (look at poll opinions here), but it is clear.

Enough rant. I will check out VLC's instructions. Thanks all.

I agree. I made the decision some years ago to move from MS to Linux because of MS's "business model", (I started with Fedora Core 4) and felt that I could make the transition fairly smoothly. Like you, I have a long-standing involvement in the IT industry as a developer and manager, and that has helped with the transition. I also have access to Linux Sys Admin guys where I work for when things get really sticky...

But the average Joe on the street without any technical expertise would be in for a surprise if he/she made the decision to move from MS to Linux. Which distro? Why so many different distros? What install options to select? What's this disk partitioning stuff? What's all this stuff about downloading and installing packages? What's a package, anyway? Where do I get help when things go wrong?

Help when problems occur - and they certainly do occur - is a major issue. Experienced Linux users know where to go for assistance. Novice users have a long road to travel, and they travel it on their own. Forums such as LinuxQuestions and others rely upon the willingness and the expertise of forum members to pass on their experience in response to raised issues. And in my experience, this response sometimes helps, sometimes does not, and is sometimes misleading. The adage "There is no such thing as a free lunch" seems to apply, here.

IMHO, Linux is still for geeks only. I won't be recommending to any of my non-technical friends that they make the switch from MS just yet.

Anyway, in response to your original issue, I used to download VLC on my earlier versions of Fedora installs in order to be able to play DVD's, but on my current Fedora 10 box, I now use Totem which is part of the F10 install. Let me know if you want further details.

both are VERY easy for fedora
you decide

RPMFusion repo installed

mplayer
----
vlc
installing both is preferred

back in fedora 4,5,6 i was building mplayer ( I had been building it for a while in MinGW ) the same for the qt smplayer ( MinGW) and MS visual studio . but it is WAY easer to just use yum and get on with something else .

----------------
I appreciate your help, John W, but as I originally posted, I'm trying not to use yum (or apt in other distros), as that teaches nothing. I'm trying to make sense of various installation instructions for rpm packages and wondering what it is in people's religions that make them unable to write clearly for the layman.

The trouble is that the different distros often handle things a bit differently from each other, because each one thinks that their way of doing things is "best". This has advantages as well as disadvantages, as you are discovering.
That's OK. I understand, but you'll have to start digging down inside your chosen distro to discover how it wants things to be done (eg where it thinks codecs should be kept). This is certainly educational, but after a while, becomes tedious and annoying, and "package managers" start looking very attractive.
Then those executables are somewhere that is not on your PATH.
Try echo $PATH to see what your PATH is set to.

Try executing them with the /full/path/to/executable like this for example /home/moxie/mplayer1.2/mplayer

If you are determined to do it yourself, and want to understand how things work, compile-from-source is the way to go, and I believe there's something called "slackware" that takes this as the default approach. Many people like it.

you can always build mplayer from source
the README and INSTALL are helpful as is google
the current mplayer builds fine with gcc4.1 ( i don't know about gcc4.3) but there is ONE HECK of a lot of dependencies that must be built FIRST. -- a VERY LONG LIST --

------------
Mplayer's source package readme file says to go to "the directory," which helped trigger my rant. WHAT **********ing directory? I downloaded to /opt. I assume the writer meant the directory I downloaded to. I went there -- as root -- and followed instructions.

The problem isn't linux. The problem is people refusing communicate clearly and then saying "Use yum." Package managers work, no question, but I don't see why installing linux programs should follow some Catholic-Church-priest-and-communicant model of operation.

Back to tinkering.

i am not about to copy an past the entirety of the help docs. read them

from the mplayer web site

http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/info.html#docs

-----------
I'm not going to paste them either, but thanks for proving my point. Section 1 says how wonderful Mplayer is. section 2.1 talks about hardware requirements. Section 2,2 says:

2.2. Features

[Tells people to read certain sectiosn if they want gui or radio, then says}:

Then build MPlayer:

./configure
make
make install


At this point, MPlayer is ready to use. Check if you have a codecs.conf file in your home directory at (~/.mplayer/codecs.conf) left from old MPlayer versions. If you find one, remove it.

----------------
Now, care to tell me WHERE it says that Mplayer was supposed to be installed into, or downloaded into, if not /opt (which stands for OPTional?)

Like I said. Piss poor instructions.

did you read ./configure --help

" --prefix=DIR prefix directory for installation [/usr/local]"

the default install is /use/local ( as with most linux code)
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/README
i use ./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-gui

Hi Moxie,
Here you go: in general when you compile something yourself the executables are put in /usr/local/bin
Try these two simple comands in a terminal:
since there may be a zillion files or folders called "mplayer" you can narrow the choice down by using
You'll never have to rant and rave about not finding something on your system again
You have to execute updatedb periodically or it won't find the files installed since the last time you ran it. simply enough?
cheers,
jdk