Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #207184 > unrolled thread

build vs install

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  build vs install Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-04-09 17:40 +0200
    Re: build vs install Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-04-09 18:20 +0200
      Re: build vs install Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-04-09 19:40 +0200
        Re: build vs install Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-04-09 20:30 +0200
          Re: build vs install Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-04-09 21:00 +0200
            Re: build vs install Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-04-09 23:00 +0200
              Re: build vs install Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-04-09 23:40 +0200
                Re: build vs install Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-04-10 10:20 +0200
              Re: build vs install David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-04-10 01:10 +0200
                Re: build vs install Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> - 2019-04-10 10:20 +0200
    Re: build vs install Michael Howard <mike@dewberryfields.co.uk> - 2019-04-09 19:00 +0200
      Re: build vs install Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-04-09 20:10 +0200
        Re: build vs install Michael Howard <mike@dewberryfields.co.uk> - 2019-04-09 23:20 +0200
          Re: build vs install Lee <ler762@gmail.com> - 2019-04-10 00:00 +0200

#207184 — build vs install

What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?

The latest example is ttcp
  http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
  https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4

If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before
installing an official package?

TIA
Lee

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#207189

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:35:05 -0400
Lee <ler762@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Lee,

>What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
>build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
>responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?

Mostly, it's time.  Also, you're responsible for installing any required
new dependencies, be they development packages or binaries.  Which,
again, comes down to time.  Such package requirements aren't always
immediately obvious, and may not even be mentioned in release notes.

For this reason, there's only one piece of software I compile and install
'by hand' as it were.

>The latest example is ttcp
>  http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
>  https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4

I was going to suggest adding stable-backports to your sources.list.
Assuming, of course, that you're running stable.  A quick check of
Debian packages shows that wouldn't help in this case.  A fact, no doubt
you're aware of, hence your query.

>If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
>software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before

Yes, made easier if the install mechanism creates a useful log and you
can later 'make --uninstall'.

>installing an official package?

I'd back up any config file(s) just in case anything 'blows up'.  That
is to say, if there's any incompatibility between Debian's way of writing
the config files, and the package creator's way of doing so.  The Debian
package installer may write the configs somewhere other than where the
creator does, for example.

-- 
 Regards  _
         / )           "The blindingly obvious is
        / _)rad        never immediately apparent"
I guess I shouldn't have strangled her to death
Ugly - The Stranglers

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207191

Hi Brad,

On 4/9/19, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:35:05 -0400
> Lee wrote:
>
> Hello Lee,
>
>>What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
>>build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
>>responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?
>
> Mostly, it's time.  Also, you're responsible for installing any required
> new dependencies, be they development packages or binaries.  Which,
> again, comes down to time.  Such package requirements aren't always
> immediately obvious, and may not even be mentioned in release notes.
>
> For this reason, there's only one piece of software I compile and install
> 'by hand' as it were.

Yes, building & installing yourself takes time.  Hopefully not much
after working the kinks out on the first build/install, but still..

>>The latest example is ttcp
>>  http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
>>  https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4
>
> I was going to suggest adding stable-backports to your sources.list.
> Assuming, of course, that you're running stable.  A quick check of
> Debian packages shows that wouldn't help in this case.  A fact, no doubt
> you're aware of, hence your query.

Yes.  gawk being the other package I'd like to have on the latest
version, but doesn't seem to be in backports :(

>>If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
>>software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before
>
> Yes, made easier if the install mechanism creates a useful log and you
> can later 'make --uninstall'.
>
>>installing an official package?
>
> I'd back up any config file(s) just in case anything 'blows up'.

Which raises another question, but I'll start another thread for that.

>  That
> is to say, if there's any incompatibility between Debian's way of writing
> the config files, and the package creator's way of doing so.  The Debian
> package installer may write the configs somewhere other than where the
> creator does, for example.

But they're still all text files - right?  There's nothing like MS
Windows registry that you might have to clean after uninstalling
something or installing in a different location?

Thank you!
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207198

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:30:45 -0400
Lee <ler762@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Lee,

>> package installer may write the configs somewhere other than where the
>> creator does, for example.  
>But they're still all text files - right?  There's nothing like MS

I'd hope so, yes.  IOW, I'd hope the Debian maintainers don't change
config styles.  Of course, there are several organisations that seem to
like SQLite for config files.  I'm not sure what, if any, advantage
SQLite offers over plain text though.

>Windows registry that you might have to clean after uninstalling
>something or installing in a different location?

Almost certainly not.  You should be awarethat distro maintained
packages usually put binaries in /usr/bin/, libraries in /usr/lib/ and
so on.  Self-compiled software most often puts stuff under
/usr/local/bin/, /usr/local/libs/ etc.  Occasionally, upon removal, some
stuff might get left behind, perhaps resulting in erratic behaviour.
Such things are rare, thankfully.

-- 
 Regards  _
         / )           "The blindingly obvious is
        / _)rad        never immediately apparent"
Gary don't need his eyes to see, Gary and his eyes have parted company
Gary Gilmore's Eyes - The Adverts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207203

On 4/9/19, Brad Rogers <brad@fineby.me.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:30:45 -0400
> Lee <ler762@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Lee,
>
>>> package installer may write the configs somewhere other than where the
>>> creator does, for example.
>>But they're still all text files - right?  There's nothing like MS
>
> I'd hope so, yes.  IOW, I'd hope the Debian maintainers don't change
> config styles.  Of course, there are several organisations that seem to
> like SQLite for config files.  I'm not sure what, if any, advantage
> SQLite offers over plain text though.
>
>>Windows registry that you might have to clean after uninstalling
>>something or installing in a different location?
>
> Almost certainly not.  You should be awarethat distro maintained
> packages usually put binaries in /usr/bin/, libraries in /usr/lib/ and
> so on.  Self-compiled software most often puts stuff under
> /usr/local/bin/, /usr/local/libs/ etc.  Occasionally, upon removal, some
> stuff might get left behind, perhaps resulting in erratic behaviour.
> Such things are rare, thankfully.

OK - good to know.  Somehow I'd got the impression that systemd was
moving to a windows registry type thing for config data instead of
keeping it in plain text files.

Thanks
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207218

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 14:58:22 -0400
Lee <ler762@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Lee,

>OK - good to know.  Somehow I'd got the impression that systemd was
>moving to a windows registry type thing for config data instead of

I've no idea about that.  I don't think systemd is really relevant to
the topic under discussion here, though.

>keeping it in plain text files.

For some years now, Grub (well, Grub2) has used a binary format for
configs.  Lilo has for done so for even longer, of course.  Mozilla
stores much of its application and config data in SQlite databases, as do
other organisations.  Ever more things are making use of XML in a
similar way.  Obviously, that's still human readable(1).

(1)  Well, that is to say, humans can view it in a text editor rather
than a binary file viewer/editor.  Whether the content makes any sense to
the reader is another matter entirely, of course.   :-)

-- 
 Regards  _
         / )           "The blindingly obvious is
        / _)rad        never immediately apparent"
Bet you thought you had it all worked out
Problem - Sex Pistols

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207222

On 4/9/19, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 14:58:22 -0400
> Lee wrote:
>
> Hello Lee,
>
>>OK - good to know.  Somehow I'd got the impression that systemd was
>>moving to a windows registry type thing for config data instead of
>
> I've no idea about that.  I don't think systemd is really relevant to
> the topic under discussion here, though.

I thought systemd was the new way to start services.  Having ttcp
automatically run as a service means I don't have to ssh into the
other machine & start the receiver manually.

But for things that don't run as a service, you're right - systemd
doesn't enter into the picture.  Maybe I can still use /etc/init.d or
/etc/services to get things started & keep systemd out of the picture?
 It's been a long time since I've had to do unix admin type stuff & it
seems like most everything I learned is out of date.

Regards,
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207229

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 17:35:50 -0400
Lee <ler762@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Lee,

>I thought systemd was the new way to start services.  Having ttcp

Oh, I see what you mean.  It's probably all that.  I just meant about
config files.  Lack of explanation on my part.

-- 
 Regards  _
         / )           "The blindingly obvious is
        / _)rad        never immediately apparent"
If Adolf Hitler flew in today, they'd send a limousine anyway
(White Man) In Hammersmith Palais - The Clash

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207224

On Tue 09 Apr 2019 at 20:25:20 (+0100), Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 14:58:22 -0400 Lee <ler762@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >OK - good to know.  Somehow I'd got the impression that systemd was
> >moving to a windows registry type thing for config data instead of
> 
> I've no idea about that.  I don't think systemd is really relevant to
> the topic under discussion here, though.
> 
> >keeping it in plain text files.
> 
> For some years now, Grub (well, Grub2) has used a binary format for
> configs.

Really, which ones? I can't find any.

> Lilo has for done so for even longer, of course.  Mozilla
> stores much of its application and config data in SQlite databases, as do
> other organisations.  Ever more things are making use of XML in a
> similar way.  Obviously, that's still human readable(1).
> 
> (1)  Well, that is to say, humans can view it in a text editor rather
> than a binary file viewer/editor.  Whether the content makes any sense to
> the reader is another matter entirely, of course.   :-)

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207228

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 18:05:42 -0500
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:

Hello David,

>On Tue 09 Apr 2019 at 20:25:20 (+0100), Brad Rogers wrote:
>> For some years now, Grub (well, Grub2) has used a binary format for
>> configs.  
>Really, which ones? I can't find any.

Muddled thinking my end.  Sorry.  It doesn't, of course.  Don't really
know where that thought came from.

-- 
 Regards  _
         / )           "The blindingly obvious is
        / _)rad        never immediately apparent"
An old custom to sell your daughter
Hong Kong Garden - Siouxsie & The Banshees

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207190

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 09/04/2019 16:35, Lee wrote:
> What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
> build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
> responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?
>
> The latest example is ttcp
>    http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
>    https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4
>
> If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
> software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before
> installing an official package?
>
> TIA
> Lee
>
You could build a debian package from the source and let apt take care 
of install/updates/uninstall. Admittedly, it could be a bit of work 
initially with versions so far apart as above but it is an option.

-- 
Mike Howard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207195

On 4/9/19, Michael Howard wrote:
> On 09/04/2019 16:35, Lee wrote:
>> What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
>> build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
>> responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?
>>
>> The latest example is ttcp
>>    http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
>>    https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4
>>
>> If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
>> software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before
>> installing an official package?
>>
>> TIA
>> Lee
>>
> You could build a debian package from the source and let apt take care
> of install/updates/uninstall. Admittedly, it could be a bit of work
> initially with versions so far apart as above but it is an option.

That's an interesting idea.  Get the debian stuff from
  https://packages.debian.org/stretch/nuttcp
and see which patches still apply to the current version of the software.

But I'm missing what letting apt take care of
install/updates/uninstall gets me since I'd be the one creating &
updating the home-built package.

Thanks,
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207221

On 09/04/2019 19:03, Lee wrote:
> On 4/9/19, Michael Howard wrote:
>> On 09/04/2019 16:35, Lee wrote:
>>> What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
>>> build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
>>> responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?
>>>
>>> The latest example is ttcp
>>>     http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
>>>     https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4
>>>
>>> If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
>>> software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before
>>> installing an official package?
>>>
>>> TIA
>>> Lee
>>>
>> You could build a debian package from the source and let apt take care
>> of install/updates/uninstall. Admittedly, it could be a bit of work
>> initially with versions so far apart as above but it is an option.
> That's an interesting idea.  Get the debian stuff from
>    https://packages.debian.org/stretch/nuttcp
> and see which patches still apply to the current version of the software.
>
> But I'm missing what letting apt take care of
> install/updates/uninstall gets me since I'd be the one creating &
> updating the home-built package.
>
It's simply a case that apt then knows that ttcp is installed and at 
what version in case of conflicts or security aspects etc. If you simply 
do a ./configure && make && make install or what not, apt has no idea 
what you've done.

-- 
Mike Howard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#207223

On 4/9/19, Michael Howard wrote:
> On 09/04/2019 19:03, Lee wrote:
>> On 4/9/19, Michael Howard wrote:
>>> On 09/04/2019 16:35, Lee wrote:
>>>> What are the downsides to getting the source code and doing the
>>>> build/install myself vs. using a pre-built package other than I'm
>>>> responsible for noticing the software needs to be updated?
>>>>
>>>> The latest example is ttcp
>>>>     http://nuttcp.net/nuttcp/latest/  has 8.1.4
>>>>     https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/nuttcp  has 6.1.2-4
>>>>
>>>> If I ever decide to go with the debian package I just uninstall the
>>>> software I built and .. anything else that needs to be done before
>>>> installing an official package?
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>> Lee
>>>>
>>> You could build a debian package from the source and let apt take care
>>> of install/updates/uninstall. Admittedly, it could be a bit of work
>>> initially with versions so far apart as above but it is an option.
>> That's an interesting idea.  Get the debian stuff from
>>    https://packages.debian.org/stretch/nuttcp
>> and see which patches still apply to the current version of the software.
>>
>> But I'm missing what letting apt take care of
>> install/updates/uninstall gets me since I'd be the one creating &
>> updating the home-built package.
>>
> It's simply a case that apt then knows that ttcp is installed and at
> what version in case of conflicts or security aspects etc. If you simply
> do a ./configure && make && make install or what not, apt has no idea
> what you've done.

hrmmm..  I'm still at the using synaptics stage of installing/updating
packages but I can see how that might be the better way to go.  I'll
take a look at how to make & install a home-built package & see if it
looks doable in a few hours.  Otherwise it goes on my ever-expanding
would-be-nice-to-do-someday list

Thanks
Lee

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web