2009/1/3 Michael S. Dunsavage <mikesd1@verizon.net>:

On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 01:21 -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

in most scenarios, rebuilding packages from source will not produce any noticeable benefit for you.

The only time I see compiling a necessity is if the binary needs to be compiled with a certain option.

It would still be nice to have as then if the precompiled rpm package is defunct, then a user can download the source and compile it specific to their system. If I were you, I would raise a Request for Enhancement jd. Regards Hylton -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

2009/1/3 Kai Ponte <kai@perfectreign.com>:

Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) wrote:

...

2009/1/3 Michael S. Dunsavage <mikesd1@verizon.net>:

...

On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 01:21 -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

...

in most scenarios, rebuilding packages from source will not produce any noticeable benefit for you.

The only time I see compiling a necessity is if the binary needs to be compiled with a certain option.

It would still be nice to have as then if the precompiled rpm package is defunct, then a user can download the source and compile it specific to their system.

If I were you, I would raise a Request for Enhancement jd.

Not sure what is being asked for here.

Kai, Whilst you and many other more experienced folk have learn't, sometimes painfully, what the CLI commands are to compile from source as well as how the whole process works, there are many ppl, myself included, who whilst they have been using Linux for a number of years via a window manager, have no idea or very little information on how to compile from source. The Fink project is giving users like me an interface to use to help us better understand how compiling from source operates, the dependencies needed, the location of source files and the location of compiled binaries etc etc. What is needed here, as stated by the OP, is an interface/GUI application similar to Fink for the Mac that assists users to build source code and use it correctly. Regards Hylton -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hylton Conacher (ZR1HPC) さんは書きました: | | What is needed here, as stated by the OP, is an interface/GUI | application similar to Fink for the Mac that assists users to build | source code and use it correctly. | What Fink did for me was to save time. That was (is) it's most significant advantage for me. I did not have to locate sources and then do a bunch of testing for deps and then track down anything missing. Fink did all that and then compiled and installed everything pretty much on it's own. Maybe it takes longer with Fink but it did it all by itself. if I had the time, I would not mind doing it all myself. == jd Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. ~ -- John F. Kennedy - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJX+XHhpL3F+HeDrIRArqYAJ0cVczd1X4o32ulmN5ZoDW2ggUc5QCeMxO5 8/MxLsFssYRv8SI6NWQjdr4= =sY5R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Carlos E. R. さんは書きました: | | I assume that the Mac people have a method defined so that all those | applications compile in the same way, a standard place to get the | sources, dependencies, etc. | | Or are they simply doing a rebuild rpm? Because that does exist in suse, | too. | The Fink project is separate from Apple. It is a way to (more or less) painlessly install open source apps on a Mac. It's practically a distribution itself. If you're interested in finding out more, it's at: http://www.finkproject.org/ Someone started a spinoff of Fink for Linux years ago but it never went past the "hey, that's a good idea!" stage. == jd God is real, unless declared integer. - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJYBLthpL3F+HeDrIRArE6AKCey8MhdtXdLXKgpyVhCT1KFtnEFACeIfJh 5H9AG7KMLd9cndmsBLhSdEo= =c2eA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, 2009-01-04 at 14:25 +0100, Philipp Thomas wrote:

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 23:33:23 +0100 (CET), you wrote:

...

Or are they simply doing a rebuild rpm? Because that does exist in suse, too.

No, AFAIK it's basically the old BSD ports system, so it is rather different from what we use.

Ah! I keep forgetting they are bsd based, not linux based. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAklhEawACgkQtTMYHG2NR9UjNgCeMYRSxxCjJE8OhoUnuXeJMMqm CNcAnjnzDmLaclX9LmB2ysrOjML08WLs =zy1W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 08:37:26 +0100, you wrote:

In my opinion building for source is the most useful when building a system with specific requirements or constraints (e.g. embedded system or old PC with limited memory and processing power). It is also a great learning process.

One thing it won't do is make sure the application doesn't install in directories that are forbidden by FHS/LSB. It also won't make sure the application uses system libraries instead of compiling their own versions. And these are only examples. Philipp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 21:17:39 +0200, you wrote:

What is needed here, as stated by the OP, is an interface/GUI application similar to Fink for the Mac that assists users to build source code and use it correctly.

As I said, use Gentoo and you have what you want. But IMNSHO this system makes you believe things are simple when they're not. It won't help you when problems with the the code arise or a library has changed. I still believe that either you understand what you are doing are a fairly low level or you keep your hands off. You probably wouldn't assemble a motor from it's parts but rather let your repair shop do it or buy it completely assembled, would you? Philipp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 16:30:33 +0000, you wrote:

Look at Nix package manager - it can be used alongside RPM/Yast on SUSE: http://www.linux.com/feature/155922

Yeah, wonderfull! Now you have two package management systems side by side that know nothing about each other. It's an interesting approach though there are a number of problems I see with the Nix approach that aren't easily solvable like there has to be *one* version of libgcc_s.so that *all* C++ binaries link to in order for exception handling to work properly. Or how do you find the configuration file you have to edit for one particular application ... Philipp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Cristian Rodríguez さんは書きました: | j debert escribió: |> Macs have Fink, Linux has nothing to build and install packages from |> source. | | SUSE distributions are binary based, in most scenarios, rebuilding | packages from source will not produce any noticeable benefit for you. | Yes, I am quite painfully aware that SuSE is a binary distro. It's rather evident given the slightly more than slight difficulty in obtaining sources that is getting slightly more difficult with each release. Ummm... How would you know whether or not building from source would have a noticeable benefit for me? That seems so...nevermind. Just curious. (Actually, I have had to rebuild quite a bit from source to replace SuSE binaries. It's a PITA.) == jd The First Commandment for Technicians: ~ Beware the lightning that lurketh in the undischarged capacitor, lest it cause thee to bounce upon thy buttocks in a most untechnician-like manner. - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJX5FvhpL3F+HeDrIRApYhAKCiC2yCUmYhjUE2KqhPI7Ap8sCQXACgk/yU 1AulszdDXYJND6mi4eKNRYE= =Umkj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Cristian Rodríguez さんは書きました: | j debert escribió: | |> Yes, I am quite painfully aware that SuSE is a binary distro. It's |> rather evident given the slightly more than slight difficulty in |> obtaining sources that is getting slightly more difficult with each |> release. | | do you think it is difficult to zypper source-install <package> ? Yes. It is certainly more difficult than using Fink. Since Fink will install binaries or build from source where there is no binary and deal with dependencies on it's own, and handle updates and upgrades elegantly it is much easier to use. | | Im in fact, sure it doesnt, except for some very specific components, | different compiler options and optimization levels have already being | tried with only a marginal _overall_ improvement. One clear benefit is actually having things work as they're expected or supposed to. That's quite a noticeable benefit. | |> (Actually, I have had to rebuild quite a bit from source to replace |> SuSE binaries. It's a PITA.) | | Why ? Because SuSE builds were broken or had missing and lost dependencies. so the short answer is that there is no Fink or Fink-alike for Linux? == jd Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist ought to have his head examined. ~ -- Samuel Goldwyn - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJX641hpL3F+HeDrIRAnDkAKCYf/hSnRNg3lgH0fBIQ/rQs9xVIgCgjcCR +y6x4lZ4bE68aThFyuVAAH0= =ruwn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, 2009-01-03 at 15:57 -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:

j debert escribió:

...

Because SuSE builds were broken or had missing and lost dependencies.

Ohh really ? I assume you opened bug reports to actually prove your statements right ?

If he is thinking of xine or mplayer, for example, many people would say they are broken, and no amount of Bugzillas will change that }:-P - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAklfu+4ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9V8kQCdF77aouzEDiPp6wqW7XwkwPDW haMAn2EMXeRynlI8Jeyc2w/Qpu0NHbhs =hGzd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

j debert wrote:

Ummm... How would you know whether or not building from source would have a noticeable benefit for me? That seems so...nevermind.

I've noticed that sort of thing in a few areas with SUSE. They seem to think they know what you want, better than you do. For the record, I have also on occasion built from source, as the binaries weren't available. One of the nice things about Linux has been the way it allows people who know what they're doing to do it. Now it seems some nanny is taking over, to make sure we don't fall down and scrape our knees. -- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Saturday 03 January 2009 14:45, James Knott wrote:

j debert wrote:

...

Ummm... How would you know whether or not building from source would have a noticeable benefit for me? That seems so...nevermind.

I've noticed that sort of thing in a few areas with SUSE. They seem to think they know what you want, better than you do.

I do not think this is a valid characterization. As a Linux distribution, openSUSE (and its commercial siblings) are large (very large) collections of software. Much of it is drawn from projects hosted outside Novell, of course, though very significant additions come from within. Naturally, when they put this distribution together, they must exercise judgement about what to include and how to configure the various options, often chosen from a large and complex complement of package configuration options that often entail extensive interdependencies on other projects, applications and libraries. It is unavoidable that tradeoffs arise and while it cannot be expected that everyone be fully satisfied, I believe the empirical success and longevity of the distribution is a strong indicator that they are exercising good judgment in this regard.

For the record, I have also on occasion built from source, as the binaries weren't available. One of the nice things about Linux has been the way it allows people who know what they're doing to do it. Now it seems some nanny is taking over, to make sure we don't fall down and scrape our knees.

I, too, have done this, though it's been something between rare and uncommon. More often I have to build a package from sources when that package is not included in the openSUSE distribution. Nonetheless, the state of the art in computing hardware and software has not reached the point (if such a point even exists) where a one-size-fits-all approach to very large, general-purpose systems is possible. And absent that, issues of judgement and economics (as in matters of the best use of limited resources) will apply. Everybody has different needs and criteria. Personally, I want to spend as little time as possible compiling and installing the software I use so that I can do what I do, which is write my own software. For my "money" (ha! — though I used to buy the SuSE Linux distributions), openSUSE is the best balance of comprehensiveness, user support and utility (the functionality subsumed under the YaST umbrella being the principal component of that support) and hardware coverage. Your mileage may vary. Randall Schulz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org