[SLUG] An apt-get question.
If I have an application that I wish to install --- a crossword compiler in this case and I have the download on the desktop --- it's a .tgz file --- is there an apt-get command 9or variation) that will install it? William Bennett. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
wbenn...@turing.une.edu.au said: > If I have an application that I wish to install --- a crossword compiler > in this case and I have the download on the desktop --- it's a .tgz file > --- is there an apt-get command 9or variation) that will install it? Not really. The standard "./configure && make && make install" rules still apply. That said, you can do what I do and use a neat little utility called "checkinstall" in place of the "make install" step. Checkinstall calls "make install" in the background, and watches the files that get installed. It then creates a package with those files, which makes it super easy to uninstall later on. Much better than manually uninstalling the app if they couldn't be bothered enough to provide a "make uninstall" target. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
> in this case and I have the download on the desktop --- it's a .tgz file > --- is there an apt-get command 9or variation) that will install it? A .tgz is not a .deb. apt-get, even dpkg (lower level) work with .deb files. If you cannot find a .deb, even for a different debian variant (eg Ubuntu, etc), then the .tgz may be installable, or may be source code - do you know what it is? If it's installable, unzipping in / might do the job. But I would unzip into /tmp/blah/ or something first, and have a poke around, to see what's there. Then, if you do wish to install as is, install into /opt or /usr/local if the program allows. It might have an installer inside it. If it is source, it will have a README and/ or INSTALL file inside somewhere, with instructions, hopefully. "man tar" command will teach you about unzipping. "tar xvzf FILENAME.tgz" might be useful. Good luck Zen -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 23:45:29 +1100 wbenn...@turing.une.edu.au wrote: > If I have an application that I wish to install --- a crossword compiler > in this case and I have the download on the desktop --- it's a .tgz file > --- is there an apt-get command 9or variation) that will install it? A little off-topic, but since three others have answered the question directly I see no harm in a slight deviation -- the use of apt-get for software installation/upgrades is deprecated. aptitude has numerous advantages, including more advanced dependency handling and a curses-based interactive interface, and is generally considered (by Debian at least) to have replaced apt-get for everything except downloading source code. Ubuntu 10.10 has, highly frustratingly, removed aptitude from the installation CD, so if you're on a clean install of Maverick you need to do apt-get install aptitude before using it. signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
> -- the use of apt-get for > software installation/upgrades is deprecated. aptitude has numerous > advantages, including more advanced dependency handling and a OK, I wanted to know. HAD to know! Here's my googling results: This page: http://www.andrewault.net/2010/05/03/aptitude-vs-apt-get-comparison-2/ Has a nice chart comparison. aptitude [un]hold seems to be the primary remaining hold out advantage of aptitude over apt-get. http://pthree.org/2007/08/12/aptitude-vs-apt-get/ Says amongst other stuff: "Are we starting to see a pattern here? One command with different readable options (no unnecessary flags). And that’s just the tip of the ice berg. It gets better. For example, when searching for a package using aptitude, the results are sorted alphabetically (gee, imagine that) and justified in column width format. Heck, it will even tell you which one you have installed on your system already, instead of haphazardly listing the packages in some random, unreadable format, like apt-cache." >From http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/index.php?topic=3113775.0;wap2 Aptitude, if you use it exclusively for installing packages, will build and maintain a database of dependencies. Therefore, if you decide later to remove a package, aptitude will "remember" to also remove all dependencies that are not needed by some other package. http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude Note that you cannot achieve any benefit by alternating between apt-get and aptitude -- they both will work, but the aptitude database requires that you only use aptitude. But from that psychocats.net address above: Apparently the new version of apt-get in Edgy Eft (Ubuntu 6.10) has a function that allows you to remove unused dependencies when removing an application: sudo apt-get autoremove applicationname So the points outlined on this page about using aptitude over apt-get are largely irrelevant if you're using Edgy Eft (6.10), Feisty Fawn (7.04), or any future version of Ubuntu. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
On Monday 25 October 2010 09:00:04 slug-requ...@slug.org.au wrote: > > If I have an application that I wish to install --- a crossword compiler > > in this case and I have the download on the desktop --- it's a .tgz file > > --- is there an apt-get command 9or variation) that will install it? > > A little off-topic, but since three others have answered the question > directly I see no harm in a slight deviation -- the use of apt-get for > software installation/upgrades is deprecated. aptitude has numerous > advantages, including more advanced dependency handling and a > curses-based interactive interface, and is generally considered (by > Debian at least) to have replaced apt-get for everything except > downloading source code. > > Ubuntu 10.10 has, highly frustratingly, removed aptitude from the > installation CD, so if you're on a clean install of Maverick you need > to do apt-get install aptitude before using it. I avoid the (aptitude) tools (as point 2 will wax lyrical about) but I believe aptitude is depreciated and the apt-tools are the real deal. Will somebody confirm please. There are two approaches here: Magic Recipe: there have been numerous replies Understanding: you *can* ignore the package manager and do the make make install (as root or by sudo) That gives you the app and you can use it or you can make checkinstall but you should explore apt-cache search blazot to see how that works and you probably need apt-get install build-essential apt-get install checkinstall to do the above checkinstall installs your app, and creates a .deb file that allows you to use the package manager and manages that with the package manager allowing you (as posted) to do apt-get remove blazot blazot is just some arbitary name I feel (for me anyway) that short magic recipe answers are not helpful. ie give a man a fish vs teach him to go fishing All of the abouve apt-stuff can be achieved by synaptic, a gui package manager. James -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
> Magic Recipe: there have been numerous replies Where "man cmd-name" is a learn to fish kind of magic recipie :) -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
I don't understand this. I have the original download file from Freshmeat on my desktop. The file is CptCrosswords-1.2.Linix.x86.tgz I went to Freshmeat to see if there were any caveats on installation. I cannot find the .tgz file. I can only find CptCrosswords-1.2.Linix.x86.tar at http://freshmeat.net/projects/cpt-crosswords [I know I know. I can probably use this, but I'd still like to know which memory hole the .tgz file fell in.] I intend to use ./configure && make && make makeinstall Will the fact that its a tarball make any difference, or will I have to de-tar it first? Regards, William bennett. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
wbenn...@turing.une.edu.au said: > I cannot find the .tgz file. I can only find > CptCrosswords-1.2.Linix.x86.tar at > http://freshmeat.net/projects/cpt-crosswords Not sure what went wrong there. I clicked ‘Download’, and I got the .tgz file. I know Internet Explorer 7 likes to de-gzip tar files when you download them, but I doubt you’re using that. Ah, and now that you linked us to the actual software, I can see this is actually not normal tarballed software. It’s written in Java, and Java programmers have a horrible habit of reinventing the wheel everytime they do anything. What that means is this: > I intend to use > > ./configure && make && make makeinstall ...doesn’t apply. We’ll need to do it differently. In fact, I will show you how I got it going right after downloading the .tgz file to my desktop: $ sudo apt-get install openjdk-6-jre (the above line makes sure Java is installed) $ cd Desktop $ tar xvf CptCrosswords-1.2.Linux.x86.tgz $ cd cpt_xw12/ $ ./install (The graphical install wizard begins at this point, which looks a lot like a 1990s-era Windows installer) Note that despite the program using Java, it links 32-bit libraries, which means that if you have a 64-bit system (and thus 64-bit Java), the program won’t work. Here’s hoping you’re 32-bit. Hope this helps. P.S. The app is proprietary — doesn’t appear to be open source at all — so if you are still having lots of trouble with it, maybe it’s worth finding some free software to do the job instead. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
wbenn...@turing.une.edu.au writes: > I don't understand this. I have the original download file from Freshmeat > on my desktop. The file is CptCrosswords-1.2.Linix.x86.tgz [...] > [I know I know. I can probably use this, but I'd still like to know which > memory hole the .tgz file fell in.] At a guess your web browser and/or their web server colluded to notice that it was compressed, and to automagically decompress the gzip bit for you, with only the tar part left behind. (My next guess is that your web browser hates you deeply, and removed the gz extension without decompressing it. :) > I intend to use > ./configure && make && make makeinstall > > Will the fact that its a tarball make any difference, or will I have to > de-tar it first? Well, you need to extract the files from the tar archive, yes. Perhaps this will be made clearer with a little explanation, and please forgive me if this is obvious to you: A tar "file" is a single stream of bytes that holds a whole lot of files and their metadata (permissions, directory, etc), one after another. Unlike the zip format and other things popular on non-Unix platforms this is just the files - no compression or anything. To compress these for transmission most Unix folks use a compression "filter", which takes one stream of bytes (the tar file) and outputs another (the compressed tar file). gzip and bzip2 are popular here. So, a 'tgz', or 'tar.gz', file means: A set of files ... ...wrapped into a single stream using tar... ...fed through the 'gzip' compression filter... ...and handed to you. So, if something removed the gz part and left only the tar part you still need to unpack the tar bits. (In 'tar xfz foo.tar.gz' the 'x' means extract, the 'f' means from a file, and the 'z' means decompress the gzip part. Omit that, for only 'xf', and you will unpack a tar file that is not compressed.) Regards, Daniel -- ✣ Daniel Pittman✉ dan...@rimspace.net☎ +61 401 155 707 ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
Many thanks for that. I managed to install the app, although, like you I was disconcerted to find it a propriety product. I'll still try it. It may do the job. Again, thanks. William Bennett. > wbenn...@turing.une.edu.au said: >> I cannot find the .tgz file. I can only find >> CptCrosswords-1.2.Linix.x86.tar at >> http://freshmeat.net/projects/cpt-crosswords > > Not sure what went wrong there. I clicked Download, and I got the .tgz > file. I know Internet Explorer 7 likes to de-gzip tar files when you > download them, but I doubt youre using that. > > Ah, and now that you linked us to the actual software, I can see this is > actually not normal tarballed software. Its written in Java, and Java > programmers have a horrible habit of reinventing the wheel everytime > they do anything. > > What that means is this: > >> I intend to use >> >> ./configure && make && make makeinstall > > ...doesnt apply. Well need to do it differently. In fact, I will show > you how I got it going right after downloading the .tgz file to my > desktop: > > $ sudo apt-get install openjdk-6-jre > (the above line makes sure Java is installed) > $ cd Desktop > $ tar xvf CptCrosswords-1.2.Linux.x86.tgz > $ cd cpt_xw12/ > $ ./install > > (The graphical install wizard begins at this point, which looks a lot > like a 1990s-era Windows installer) > > Note that despite the program using Java, it links 32-bit libraries, > which means that if you have a 64-bit system (and thus 64-bit Java), the > program wont work. Heres hoping youre 32-bit. > > Hope this helps. > > P.S. The app is proprietary doesnt appear to be open source at all > so if you are still having lots of trouble with it, maybe its worth > finding some free software to do the job instead. > > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
Re: [SLUG] An apt-get question.
Well, I followed instructions and can report that the crossword compiler installed as expected. Pity it did not perform as expected. It is a propriety program and the bits disabled to reduce it to a `Demonstration Model' amount to strangulation. Just what it is doing on Freshmeat I do not know. Somebody on SLUG might benefit from my experience. For myself, I am now off to mooch about to find some freeware. William Bennett. > wbenn...@turing.une.edu.au said: >> I cannot find the .tgz file. I can only find >> CptCrosswords-1.2.Linix.x86.tar at >> http://freshmeat.net/projects/cpt-crosswords > > Not sure what went wrong there. I clicked Download, and I got the .tgz > file. I know Internet Explorer 7 likes to de-gzip tar files when you > download them, but I doubt youre using that. > > Ah, and now that you linked us to the actual software, I can see this is > actually not normal tarballed software. Its written in Java, and Java > programmers have a horrible habit of reinventing the wheel everytime > they do anything. > > What that means is this: > >> I intend to use >> >> ./configure && make && make makeinstall > > ...doesnt apply. Well need to do it differently. In fact, I will show > you how I got it going right after downloading the .tgz file to my > desktop: > > $ sudo apt-get install openjdk-6-jre > (the above line makes sure Java is installed) > $ cd Desktop > $ tar xvf CptCrosswords-1.2.Linux.x86.tgz > $ cd cpt_xw12/ > $ ./install > > (The graphical install wizard begins at this point, which looks a lot > like a 1990s-era Windows installer) > > Note that despite the program using Java, it links 32-bit libraries, > which means that if you have a 64-bit system (and thus 64-bit Java), the > program wont work. Heres hoping youre 32-bit. > > Hope this helps. > > P.S. The app is proprietary doesnt appear to be open source at all > so if you are still having lots of trouble with it, maybe its worth > finding some free software to do the job instead. > > -- > SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ > Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
