MOVED from Shout Box: Written By hkachkachi

[Open Source]

Hello,

It's me again...

I've read at http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sou...er/000533.html
about whether or not to install the build-essential on the desktop as a default.

I find this debate really outrageous...

When I switched from (many) other distros to ubuntu I had the hope that I'd be able to solve the only "secondary" problems (wlan connection, video DVD, etc) I had, and OF COURSE to be able to resume my primary work under linux. Now, if some guys think that linux should be some OS for playing music and watching DVD's, they are really mistaken, as there is the (painless) Windows for that!!!

I've been using (yes, I'm saying using) Linux for many years for my work, and I don't want to spend my time gleaning packages bit by bit on the internet. It's nice to make linux more friendly and Windows like, but the linux core should stay faithful to its mission in its own terrain, cause otherwise there is no reason to build a new distribution, and pretend that it's open-minded and call it "linux for human beings".

This situation reminds me of an anecdote: As kids we were told the story of the crow who in the beginning of times watched a pigeon walk, and got fascinated by his beautiful way. He decided then to copy the pigeon. After some time trying in vain, he decided to go back to his own. Unfortunately, he had forgotten, and in the end, the only possibility that was left to him was to jump.

Regards,
Hamid

[skoal]

Re: MOVED from Shout Box: Written By hkachkachi

I haven't read that thread, OS, and this is news to me.  I guess my worthless opinion would be that why install build-essential stuff by default when most people would never use it?  And I like to develop myself...

When I rebuilt my small block 350 and dropped 'er in my truck, I didn't go attaching accessories to the belt like an AC compressor, and for good reason - performance.  Of course, in this case, installing this package would be only akin to cluttering up your engine w/o a performance hit.  I can't think of one package dependent upon 'build-essential' immediately after an install anyways.  So, I say only build as you need, not tear down as you go...

Hell, it's included on teh install CD anyways, right? What's their fuss?

[Open Source]

Re: MOVED from Shout Box: Written By hkachkachi

I use build-essential, however with the package manager, its one simple step to install. I have formatted so many times now, I know exactly what I want to install and not install. For Hamid and developers like him, maybe there should be an option in the beginning of the install. For example along with "server", maybe their should be a "developer" install or "gamer" install, etc. For everyone else, pressing enter without typing anything should be sufficient. I don't know just a thought.

[thumper]

Re: MOVED from Shout Box: Written By hkachkachi

While I think the developer install has some merit, you may inadvertantly upset some people by not treating them as "developers" without installing almost every available language.

If for example you leave out ML or scheme are you saying that they are not developers?

However, that said, I think that including build-essential on install could be a good installer option.

[hkachkachi]

Re: MOVED from Shout Box: Written By hkachkachi

Hello,

Thank you for your replies.

The first thing I was surprised to notice during the installation process is that there was no question as to what packages I wanted to install.

I would suggest that during installation the user is presented with the list of packages to be installed or at least to be marked for later installation once the system is up, and ready to fetch the previously marked packages...

Another (related issue): I use the following example to illustrate it: I later installed LaTex, tetex, and all the related stuff (well I thought I had), and then I discovered that the latex didn't even recognize fundamental stuff (in latex) like greek letters!!! In fact, I discovered that the necessary fonts hadn't been installed, and I had first to figure out what packages contain them and then installed the fonts.
So, I'd like to know why installing a package (e.g. latex), using synaptic or apt, doesn't fetch all the necessary stuff. If there is a cleverer way, please tell me.

bye, Hamid

[skoal]

Re: MOVED from Shout Box: Written By hkachkachi

I like yalls ideas about including more installation options.  It's been awhile but I liked that flexibility back in the day when Redhat had the expandable package tree.

hkachkachi, I think the fonts got left out of your tetex install since they're not absolutely vital to using tetex.  If you use apt-get those packages which are left out (like that fonts package) will show up as "Recommended" instead.

...so in that sense, apt-get is like a redneck parent saying to his teenage son, "heres da keys to the Ford, boy. (kicking the steel rims sitting up on cinder blocks) You might wanner put some tires on 'er first..."