[CVALE] Installer for Linux

Wed Apr 5 14:34:11 PDT 2006

What about Autopackage - the universal package system? 
(http://autopackage.org/)  I know slashdot had stories about it a
while back, and it looks promising...  I haven't investigated it yet,
because at that time, I'd just switched to Mac.

Also, InstallShield now is available for Linux (I should know, I went
to LinuxWorld SF a few years back and got the st00pid T-Shirt).  I
haven't bothered to take a look at is as I don't do any packaging, but
at least there's a commercial app available.

Just my 2 cents worth.

--Ian...

On 4/5/06, Dennis Baker <mtbogre at gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I'm concerned almost every linux distribution has an effective and
> functional package manager.  A Package manager being a system that
> facilitates the installation,  upgrading, and removal of software on your
> system.  Microsoft has multiple ways of Installing software,  most of them
> are non-standardized (even within Microsoft),  put files all over your OS
> including in parts of the operating system that should be protected, and are
> completely incapable of effectively removing software once it has been
> installed.  I'll take the Linux way thanks.
>
> Third party software can be an issue because it typically ignores the
> package management system under Linux.  This is often solved simply by
> installing third party software into a discreet folder in either /opt or in
> /usr/local.  The beauty of Linux (and BSD for that matter) is that the scope
> of software included in the distributions is so vast that generally you
> don't need third party software so this isn't much of an issue.
>
> -- Dennis
>
>
>
> On 4/4/06, Landon Blake <lblake at ksninc.com> wrote:
> > Steve and Terry,
> >
> > Thank you for your responses. I hadn't looked at things that way, but I
> > have a better understanding now.
> >
> > You'll have to remember that I approach my Linux experience from a MS
> > Windows perspective. I'm not saying that MS Windows is better when I ask
> > these types of questions, I am just trying to understand how Linux is
> > different, and even more importantly, why it is different.
> >
> > You are correct, there are multiple installers for Windows software.
> > This includes at least two open source installers that I know of, WiX
> > and NSIS.
> >
> > This is what I like about software installation on MS Windows:
> >
> > I double click on a MSI or EXE file. I am then presented with a GUI
> > Wizard that walks me through the installation process step-by-step. This
> > includes reading and acceptance of the license, selecting of install
> > directories, and other installation configurations.
> >
> > The closest thing I've seen to this experience on Linux is a shell
> > script window that asks me some questions during the install. When you
> > boil it down the same thing is happening, I just think the MS Windows
> > approach is more user friendly.
> >
> > As a user I would like installers on Linux that present a prettier face.
> > As a developer I would like a standard way to create installers for
> > Linux applications. (Imagine being able to create an installer that
> > worked for both the RPM and DEB packaging system. Now were talking!)
> >
> > I'm not suggesting that I replace the package management system, but
> > rather build an application framework that allows graphical installers
> > for software that works with the package management system. I'm too busy
> > to work on such a project at this time, but I was curious about it and
> > wanted to ask some questions.
> >
> > I guess I just love my slow, bug-ridden GUI's and I'm still getting used
> > to that Bash command prompt. :] I must admit that I find software
> > installation the most challenging part of my Linux experience. (Well,
> > maybe behind plug and play hardware...)
> >
> > Thank again for the input.
> >
> > Landon
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cvale-bounces at lists.fire2wire.com
> > [mailto:cvale-bounces at lists.fire2wire.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve Bibayoff
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 3:02 PM
> > To: cvale at cvale.org
> > Subject: Re: [CVALE] Installer for Linux
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 4/4/06, Landon Blake <lblake at ksninc.com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > MS Windows has the Microsoft Installer that allows software developers
> > to
> > > take advantage of a standard way to install and uninstall software.
> >
> > So third party Windows installers don't exist? Aren't used? I'm not a
> > Windows developer, but I could name at least 4 different installers
> > for windows.
> >
> > > ... Why is
> > > there not an alternative installer for Linux platforms?
> >
> > Why an alternative? What's wrong w/ the rpm or deb package management
> > tools already?
> >
> > > ... Is it because of the
> > > different packaging systems used by the different distributions?
> >
> > There really is only 2 packages types(well 4 if you count lesser used
> > slack tar packages and Gentoo's portage)
> >
> > > ... If that is
> > > the case, why isn't their an installer framework for Linux distros
> > that
> > > share a package management system?
> >
> > It not the package management system that is the problem.It's the
> > packages themselves. One of the biggest problems is some packages are
> > built using different libraries than what is included on the distro.
> > Or the libraries are in a different location.
> >
> > [cliped a desciption of current package management systems]
> > > The only requirement for support of the installers would be
> > installation of
> > > the framework and the interpreted language. Wouldn't this make
> > software
> > > installation on Linux easier for both developers and users?
> >
> > No. The problem is the rapid advance/evolution of Open Source and Free
> > Software. Distro X came out their latest 4 months ago. But glibc and
> > many other libraries have gone a few revisions since then. Distro Y
> > wants to use new software, not software that is old. So packages that
> > are written for Distro X may or may not run(or run well(or even
> > install) on Distro Y.
> >
> > What is needed, is a package management system that understand
> > dependencies and more importantly conflicts(software A requires
> > libD.1.1 but Software B requires libD.1.2). And how to handle them.
> > You could have multiple versions of the same libraries installed(you
> > need to use ldconfig and edit /etc/ld.so.conf correctly).
> >
> > Most Windows programs get around this by just including the libraries
> > they need in with the installer, and just overwriting and newer or
> > order versions that are there. But this leads to what is refereed as
> > "DLL hell".(1)
> >
> >
> > m2c
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > 1) this last paragraph is based on talking with people who do
> > exclusive (or much) Windows development. SO it's quite possible that I
> > misunderstood what they described, or can't comprehend have Windows
> > software is written and distributed.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cvale mailing list
> > cvale at lists.fire2wire.com
> > http://lists.fire2wire.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/cvale
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cvale mailing list
> > cvale at lists.fire2wire.com
> > http://lists.fire2wire.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/cvale
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dennis Da-Ogre http://ogrehut.com
> _______________________________________________
> cvale mailing list
> cvale at lists.fire2wire.com
> http://lists.fire2wire.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/cvale
>
>
>