No installer for linux?

[Amiga5k]

I recently installed Linux for a test drive (Ubuntu 10.10 - So far, I REALLY like it!), and downloaded the Linux version of PB to give it a try. Whereas the Windows package installs in a few seconds and you're done, I was quite disappointed to find that everything is left up to the end user to manually install the required packages...Not even an installer script was supplied.

C'mon, guys, can't somethng be done about this?

[rant]
This is one of the main obstacles Linux has in general: There is a level of expertise that is assumed when it comes to installing and/or using a great percentage of programs, which is not really surprising considering Linux's roots. However, if it is to be accepted by the general public (that is not inclined to use the command line to install required files, for example), then the Linux community MUST keep this lay person in mind when designing programs, supporting libraries and so on.
Linux has come a LONG way in this regard over the years (The Ubuntu Software Center is totally awesome - As is the idea and implementation of repositories), but still has some distance to go.
[/rant]
Does PB have its own repository? This would let the OS get the required libraries and install everything for you! Sure would make life easier for the Linux newbie (and experienced users alike, actually). If it's accessible from the Software Center, that would be even better.

Sincerely,
Russell

[GBeebe]

Did you miss this? http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=26957

[ts-soft]

Here a installer for all dependencies

[dhouston]

C'mon, guys, can't somethng be done about this?

Which, of the 57,000 varieties of Linux do you recommend they support?

In addition to the assumption (which you noted) that everyone has a Ph. D. in computer science and dreams in C, nearly each distro has different requirements. It's quite a hassle whenever PB is upgraded or whenever there's a new release of a distro. I'm 70 years old so I'm not interested in becoming a Linux expert - but merely to test my PB created apps on a representative sample of distros (and tweak the appearance which differs from one to another). I've been running most of those listed in my sig for 4-5 years and, aside from Debian, none have made it from one major release to the next without major problems caused by some periodic update (which I let Update Manager or its equivalent handle). I have found it necessary to do clean installs at every new release and that necessitates a new install of PB. PB has been unable to compile under the last two releases of Fedora. I'm still looking for a fix for that.

BTW, I gave an earlier version of Ubuntu (about 3 years back) a 6 month test as my primary OS. I found there were thousands of help sources - each with its own unique suggested fix for any problem. I was very happy to go back to Windows. YMMV

[Amiga5k]

Did you miss this? http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=26957

Yeah, I guess I did Of course, no matter, since all of the links in that thread are defunct... (the original post was from 2007...)

But more to my point, this install script, wherever it is in cyberspace currently, should be part of the PureBasic installation process. BlitzMax for Linux has the same problem, but the dependencies script I found was part of the forum post itself, so all I had to do was copy and paste into gedit, save and run. Worked like a charm.

This is what I'm talking about. Why hasn't it occurred to anyone that it might be a good idea to do this automatically upon installation of PureBasic (or BlitzMax for that matter)? I'm not a big Windows fan, believe me, but they certainly are way ahead in this area.

A repository for PureBasic would certainly be more user friendly.

Russell

[Amiga5k]

C'mon, guys, can't somethng be done about this?

Which, of the 57,000 varieties of Linux do you recommend they support?

In addition to the assumption (which you noted) that everyone has a Ph. D. in computer science and dreams in C, nearly each distro has different requirements. It's quite a hassle whenever PB is upgraded or whenever there's a new release of a distro. I'm 70 years old so I'm not interested in becoming a Linux expert - but merely to test my PB created apps on a representative sample of distros (and tweak the appearance which differs from one to another). I've been running most of those listed in my sig for 4-5 years and, aside from Debian, none have made it from one major release to the next without major problems caused by some periodic update (which I let Update Manager or its equivalent handle). I have found it necessary to do clean installs at every new release and that necessitates a new install of PB. PB has been unable to compile under the last two releases of Fedora. I'm still looking for a fix for that.

BTW, I gave an earlier version of Ubuntu (about 3 years back) a 6 month test as my primary OS. I found there were thousands of help sources - each with its own unique suggested fix for any problem. I was very happy to go back to Windows. YMMV

57,000 may even be a conservative estimate

But that doesn't change the fact that there are scripts out there that check the dependencies and install what's needed. All I'm saying is, why is this script not part of the standard installation process? (The Linux installation script I found for BlitzMax supposedly works on most of the 'most popular' distros. Worked great for me). The ReadMe and Install documents that come with PureBasic-Linux say what is needed, and doesn't mention any distro-specific dependencies, so I'm not quite sure I understand your point on the different requirements for different distros as it relates to PureBasic.

To your other point, I agree! Linux needs to figure this one out before it can seriously compete with Windows.

Russell

[dhouston]

The ReadMe and Install documents that come with PureBasic-Linux say what is needed, and doesn't mention any distro-specific dependencies, so I'm not quite sure I understand your point on the different requirements for different distros as it relates to PureBasic.

See this thread...

• http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 15&t=36399

in which Freak said...

Maintaining a list of specific packages to install is simply impossible even for the major distributions only. There are simply too many of them and their release cycles are so short that just trying to keep up with the changes they make is a fulltime job.

While the dependencies are fundamentally the same, the file names and version numbers vary considerably so, while I am not an expert on scripts, I doubt a single script can handle it. There are significant variations even among the Debian, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu lineage.

Freak included a checkinstall script in the PB Linux package. I use it as a guide and then use whatever package manager a specific distro uses to find similarly named files. In a few cases I've had apt-get install command lines that work but not very often.

[IdeasVacuum]

....well, it teaches us Windoz Users to be more grateful for what we have. Not sure if Linus Torvalds has more than a passing interest in Linux these days, but if he still has the passion then it would serve the Linux cause if he could get all major parties together to thrash-out some proper standards.

[Amiga5k]

....well, it teaches us Windoz Users to be more grateful for what we have. Not sure if Linus Torvalds has more than a passing interest in Linux these days, but if he still has the passion then it would serve the Linux cause if he could get all major parties together to thrash-out some proper standards.

Agreed! However, there are some (many, actually) Linux programs out there that have no external dependencies whatsoever (statically linked libraries - if the licenses allow this) or include them as part of their packaging (This makes the file distribution considerably larger, but solves most, if not all, of the dependency issues). If this is not possible with PureBasic, then maybe the Linux fork of PB development should mirror the Amiga version - Open source it, but halt further development. I'm sure this would sadden a lot of people (including me!), but is it really worth the effort to continue support?

Russell

[Amiga5k]

Ok, so it's not possible to support every single distribution of Linux. Which distro is recommended? Which one is PB-Linux actually developed/tested on? I know that limiting Linux-PB to 'recommended distributions' would probably solve some issues, but then it would exclude those people who are using non-recommended distros (especially end-users, for those who develop commercial or shareware apps)... Seems there is no easy solution.

Indeed, this is a problem not so much for the PB community to solve, but for the Linux community to solve.

Until then, I will stick exclusively to the AmigaOS version... Just kidding. Windows and MacOSX (If I ever get my hands on a mac mini) will be my platform(s) of choice.

Russell

[dhouston]

.Not sure if Linus Torvalds has more than a passing interest in Linux these days.

I believe he's still involved but only with the kernel and it's not the kernel which is at issue as it's common to all distros (at least those that have been updated to the latest kernel).

[dhouston]

Ok, so it's not possible to support every single distribution of Linux. Which distro is recommended? Which one is PB-Linux actually developed/tested on?

Search through Freak's and Fred's posts to this forum - I believe this was discussed. IIRC, they use Ubuntu.

The problem is only (or mostly) with development. Compiled app's run OK (by and large) on distro's where development may be problematic. Here's another thread on the topic...

• http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtopic.php?p=301415

where freak said...

PureBasic itself doesn't need any installation anymore. You just unpack the archive and run the IDE thats all. The only thing left are the dependencies and here it gets tricky. Every distribution is different, even if you just focus on the deb package management and the distributions are updated so rapidly that it is hard to keep up. So we decided that no .deb package is better than a broken/outdated one.

Emphasis added

[Amiga5k]

Sounds like a royal pain in the a**, not only for Fantaisie Software and its user base but for Linux developers in general!

What do the "seasoned" Linux-PB developers here do? Mainly, I mean developers who do their primary or even exclusive developing on their Linux machine and have been doing it for some time (as opposed to me, who only in the last month or so decided to give Linux a try: First with a Fedora 14 LiveCD and then a Ubuntu LiveCD [because Ubuntu seemed to be the one almost everyone was using], which I decided to install in its own partition - Highly recommended!).

Although MacOSX is based on *nix, I doubt they have these problems, since pretty much every mac is going to have a standard set of libraries... Or do they? Any problems like these for the Mac-PB?

Anyway, maybe something will changed in the near future. If the rumors are true about Valve releasing Steam for Linux....

Russell

[dhouston]

Any problems like these for the Mac-PB?

All you need is the latest Apple SDK. However, despite what is said here...

• http://www.purebasic.com/introduction_macos.php

there are major problems with PowerPC versions and, so far, neither Fred nor freak have responded to posts on this issue.

[MachineCode]

Which, of the 57,000 varieties of Linux do you recommend they support?

And this is precisely why Windows will always be the dominant OS. Linux has too many cooks spoiling the broth.