Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on June 24, 2005 06:23 AM
Can you elaborate on this? This is a rather questionable claim, based on my experience.
I'm not the parent poster. I'm a software developer and install non-packaged software all the time. Having said that I do prefer well-built (not half-assed) packages with accurate dependencies on my current distribution of choice (Debian/Ubuntu).
The main reason many people like packages is that installing non-packaged software, particularly large complex software like Festival, is dangerous.
Because non-packaged software is, almost by definition, non-standard for your system there is a much higher risk that files will get written to the wrong place, important files will get overwritten, the installation will be faulty and/or it will be painful and time consuming to uninstall.
In the case of Festival problems might be hooking into the audio device (/dev/audio,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio0,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp, symlinks in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/, esd, alsa, what?), where it is installed (/opt,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/, ~/, some disk with no space, what?), where the documentation is put (/usr/share/man,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/share/doc,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/info,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/doc, what?) whether the install is root or per-user, whether there are library version interdependencies, whether a system daemon with security implications is installed, where config files are put, where error log messages end up etc. etc.
When a software release is packaged all these questions are likely to have been reviewed by the package creator and reasonable defaults for the particular platform chosen. A package manager like Synaptic allows software and its dependencies to be installed and uninstalled in seconds, non-packaged software is simply more variable, risky and potentially time consuming.
For non-packaged software I'm reasonably happy if it installs everything in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/ with appropriate ownership and protections and documents in the topmost README what the system dependencies are (e.g.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio) so I can quickly check them manually if necessary.
It's when software installs start modifying things outside of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/local/ that I start to get antsy. Strictly speaking packages should be installed in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/ however the de facto standard on Linux is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/ and I'm happy to stay with that because libraries, documentation etc. have standard installation directories in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/ unlike in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:use a package
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 24, 2005 06:23 AMCan you elaborate on this? This is a rather questionable claim, based on my experience.
I'm not the parent poster. I'm a software developer and install non-packaged software all the time. Having said that I do prefer well-built (not half-assed) packages with accurate dependencies on my current distribution of choice (Debian/Ubuntu).
The main reason many people like packages is that installing non-packaged software, particularly large complex software like Festival, is dangerous.
Because non-packaged software is, almost by definition, non-standard for your system there is a much higher risk that files will get written to the wrong place, important files will get overwritten, the installation will be faulty and/or it will be painful and time consuming to uninstall.
In the case of Festival problems might be hooking into the audio device (/dev/audio,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio0,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/dsp, symlinks in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/, esd, alsa, what?), where it is installed (/opt,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/, ~/, some disk with no space, what?), where the documentation is put (/usr/share/man,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/share/doc,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/info,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/doc, what?) whether the install is root or per-user, whether there are library version interdependencies, whether a system daemon with security implications is installed, where config files are put, where error log messages end up etc. etc.
When a software release is packaged all these questions are likely to have been reviewed by the package creator and reasonable defaults for the particular platform chosen. A package manager like Synaptic allows software and its dependencies to be installed and uninstalled in seconds, non-packaged software is simply more variable, risky and potentially time consuming.
For non-packaged software I'm reasonably happy if it installs everything in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/ with appropriate ownership and protections and documents in the topmost README what the system dependencies are (e.g.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/audio) so I can quickly check them manually if necessary.
It's when software installs start modifying things outside of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/local/ that I start to get antsy. Strictly speaking packages should be installed in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/ however the de facto standard on Linux is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/ and I'm happy to stay with that because libraries, documentation etc. have standard installation directories in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/local/ unlike in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/opt/.
#