why compiling sucks for newbs

Micro420 · 10-19-2003, 07:26 PM

1) go to konsole

2) you type ./configure. You then get some output with a mumbo jumbo of text that streams by faster than the speed of sound and all you see is either "yes", "no", "error"

3) so you type make && install or make or make install or whatever and you get some error

4) then after you're done, you don't know what to run.

5) go back to GUI and delete file and pray that an RPM exists. lol

Qaz · 10-20-2003, 01:03 AM

experinced Linux users will smile at your post, newbies (me) will completely sympathize.

Micro420 · 10-20-2003, 01:10 AM

newbies unite!

dukeinlondon · 10-20-2003, 03:59 AM

With mandrake, you hardly should have to compile, except for the really unstable stuff or very important stuff (like kde, mozilla, open office.org.... which mandrake very rarely bothers packaging between releases)

quintar_51 · 10-20-2003, 08:37 AM

I say compile anyways!

learning is the best way!

I actually found that compiling worked for me more than trying to install using the GUI. I found that when running ./configure, it told me exactly which rpms I'm missing. It wouldn't always show that when trying to install it through GUI.

frieza · 10-20-2003, 08:56 AM

yup, as the saying goes, if at first you don't succede, try and try again, if not, try this
./confiugure 2> configerror.txt
make 2> makeerror.txt
make install 2> installerror.txt
then copy the contents of those files into a post in the programming sction of this board and ask what can be done to fix these errors...

acid_kewpie · 10-20-2003, 09:13 AM

4) then after you're done, you don't know what to run.

it's normally pretty obvious....

you download the "gaim" messenger... and so you type in "gaim" to run it
you download the "gimp" graphics package... and so you type in "gimp" to run it
you download the "giFTcurs" giFT client.. and so you type in "giFTcurs" to run it

i never understood why people don't get that.. i alwasys did....

whoots · 10-20-2003, 10:57 AM

Sheesh Micro420 don't ya just hate a smartie-pants like acid_kewpie? Although he makes a good point the problem is with compiling tar.gz files is that when you ./configure, make, make install there is still no guarantee it will work. The default "path" of compilement of source files is dependent upon the distro of Linux used to tarr the file. The inconsistances of "path" extraction after a compile between the distros is a major headache for us newbies. The is really compounded if the "readme" file is vague or poorly written.

mac_phil · 10-20-2003, 12:25 PM

If you want consistency and easy compiles, switch to Slackware. Harder to install/admin, easier to compile software on.

I've never had problems compiling on Mandrake, but I haven't installed much.

sandman · 10-20-2003, 04:38 PM

most packages have an "install" file to read and a "readme" file to read which usually people do not read. and then get errors. Also there is usually documentation on the website. Why would you want to just ./configure make and make install not knowing where it is going or what it is doing to your pc or setup? Reading may take a few minutes but you will know what needs to be done and what dependencies you need.

h1tman · 10-20-2003, 06:52 PM

the install files are usually the same, saying do ./configure, make and make install. rarely are they different.

sandman · 10-20-2003, 07:10 PM

right, but the "install" file might tell you that it needs to be configured, say, to be in the kde home directory. which, if you are using mandrake or redhat would be /usr where on slack and others it would be /opt/kde. It also might tell you that if you want this and that supported to add this flag or that flag. Which it is also good to do ./configure --help to see options. It always pays off to read instead of assuming it is the same as most.

Micro420 · 10-20-2003, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dukeinlondon
With mandrake, you hardly should have to compile, except for the really unstable stuff or very important stuff (like kde, mozilla, open office.org.... which mandrake very rarely bothers packaging between releases)

That may be true, but when you download cool things like free linux games that you would like to play, they don't come in RPM's. It's all compiling which never works for me.

Micro420 · 10-20-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by acid_kewpie
4) then after you're done, you don't know what to run.

it's normally pretty obvious....

you download the "gaim" messenger... and so you type in "gaim" to run it
you download the "gimp" graphics package... and so you type in "gimp" to run it
you download the "giFTcurs" giFT client.. and so you type in "giFTcurs" to run it

i never understood why people don't get that.. i alwasys did....

I wish it was obvious, but some files are not. The programs you picked are common.
The ones I download have weird file names with all these version numbers. Even the name of the program isn't even the command to get it running. For example, RealPlayer. It's not 'Real', it's not 'realplayer', it's realplay! lol. lame

Micro420 · 10-20-2003, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by whoots
Sheesh Micro420 don't ya just hate a smartie-pants like acid_kewpie? Although he makes a good point the problem is with compiling tar.gz files is that when you ./configure, make, make install there is still no guarantee it will work. The default "path" of compilement of source files is dependent upon the distro of Linux used to tarr the file. The inconsistances of "path" extraction after a compile between the distros is a major headache for us newbies. The is really compounded if the "readme" file is vague or poorly written.

Whoots - exactly! I do read the INSTALL or README text files and they are vague or just say: "Installing is typical and simple. Run ./configure, then make, then make install". Whoopty doo - too bad it doesn't work. Poorly written documentation! They assume you know what to do, what to get, and how to compile. I hate that and it frustrates me as a newbie