Joris - On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:40 PM commandline-be <commandl...@protonmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for this. > > No problem and my pleasure. > Basically I am pondering why I should use a packaged version and why not. > Why: I think there's an advantage to having a OS-based package that's readily available - it's certainly very convenient to say `sudo yum install basex` or `pkg install basex` or whatever your package management expression happens to be, and whammo! you have a system-wide BaseX installation. Why Not: * someone has to maintain the package! Keep it up to date with minor version bumps (one of the very nicest things about BaseX is how quickly Christian and Co. respond to bugs and errors - minor bug patches are infrequent but when there's an issue, there's a fix very quickly), and modifying the default file paths to match your OS' expectations. * do you really need it installed system-wide? I've found that, at least for my use-cases, an install to my home directory is sufficient - but I'm not doing anything complicated! It would be great to hear other user stories about this, which reminds me of a different email I need to send to this list! > I did use the most recent .jar to test and it works well but the what > about the server part etc. > > If you grab the ZIP archive, everything you'd want is included (http server, GUI, client/server). > Br > > Joris > > Best, Bridger > > > > > > -------- Oorspronkelijk bericht -------- > Aan 17 mrt. 2021 18:07, Bridger Dyson-Smith < bdysonsm...@gmail.com> > schreef: > > > Hi Joris, > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 5:39 AM commandline-be <commandl...@protonmail.com> > wrote: > >> ok, thanks. >> >> >> If i can i will try and figure out an upgrade approach or see if i can >> run a backport which does have the more recent version available. >> >> I've found that something like this following works very well for me > across several operating systems: > > ``` > cd ~/bin > mkdir basex-src basex-data > wget https://files.basex.org/releases/BaseX.zip > unzip BaseX.zip > rm -rf basex/src basex/data > ln -s ~/bin/basex-src ~/bin/basex/src; ln -s ~/bin/basex-data > ~/bin/basex-data > ``` > You can include the ~/bin/basex directory path in your environmental $PATH > and you're off to the races. > > Subsequent updates are basically grabbing the ZIP archive, unpacking it, > removing the default src and data directories, and recreating the symbolic > links. > All of your database info is kept separately from the defaults, so you > don't worry about overwriting in an upgrade. > > It's still manual and necessitates some steps, but it's been an easy > method for me across several different unix-like operating systems (Redhat, > Void, and FreeBSD) that don't have a package for installation. > > I know some other people have posted similar approaches here on the > mailing list, but I can't think of an easy search term to help locate them. > >> >> Essentialy, i dislike Ubuntu a lot and Arch well, i never got round to >> arch really. >> >> Best, >> >> Joris >> >> HTH > Best, > Bridger > > >> >> - - - >> mailto:commandl...@protonmail.com >> >> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ >> On Wednesday, 17 March 2021 10:35, Christian Grün < >> christian.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > Linux is eays, everything is a file. It are the specifics which make >> it hard, particularly configuration. >> > >> >> > Right. At the moment, there is no automatized process to get the >> > Debian/Ubuntu distribution updates automatized. >> > >> >> > > I think my issue with the Preferences panel may come from running the >> most recent basex and it overwriting configuration files since it writes a >> message to screen saying it overwrites the configuration file. >> > >> >> > Thanks for the insight. If you want to stick with the old version of >> > BaseX, you can delete the .basexgui file (which includes the GUI >> > configuration) to resolve the issue. >> >>
