SEARCH

Enter your search query in the box above ^, or use the forum search tool.

You are not logged in.

#1 2012-10-16 19:14:10

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Any reason to NOT compile?

I've seen where compiling programs in Debian is seen as a "dirty way to do things" in Debian.

Is there any reason for this logic? After I compile things in Debian apt sees it and I can remove the package that way if I want, so it doesn't seem like it just floats in the ether.

I'm just compiling programs (ex. Non-Daw from it's GIT repo) that I can't get from the repos or in the case of Qtractor the newest version, because Wheezy is now frozen.

Are there caveats of doing it this way that I'm just not considering? If I compile a newer version of something APT won't recognize it for a potential upgrade right?

Any insight or thought is greatly appreciated.


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

Be excellent to each other!

#2 2012-10-16 19:19:19

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,924

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Zen:Core wrote:

I've seen where compiling programs in Debian is seen as a "dirty way to do things" in Debian.


Got link??


/hugged

Offline

#3 2012-10-16 19:58:21

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

snowpine wrote:
Zen:Core wrote:

I've seen where compiling programs in Debian is seen as a "dirty way to do things" in Debian.


Got link??

Sorry, no. It was on the Debian user forums and it was one of those things that came back to mind when I was thinking about the new Qtractor and having to compile it from source. I always have to compile Non.


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

#4 2012-10-16 20:00:26

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,924

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Zen:Core wrote:

Sorry, no. It was on the Debian user forums...

Don't take anything you read on those forums too seriously--there are some seriously antisocial nut-jobs over there. smile


/hugged

Offline

#5 2012-10-16 20:06:33

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

It wasn't in response to me. It was something else I had googled and ran across that comment in the thread.

Are there any pitfalls to compiling on Debian? Should I use dpkg every time to make a deb file or something. Is make install just fine?


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

#6 2012-10-16 20:39:18

Unia
#! Octo-portal-pussy
From: The Netherlands
Registered: 2010-07-17
Posts: 4,058

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Personally I like to have my package manager track things I install. I don't know how this is accomplised on Debian, though. On Arch it's made really easy with makepkg big_smile


If you can't sit by a cozy fire with your code in hand enjoying its simplicity and clarity, it needs more work. --Carlos Torres
Github

I am a #! forum moderator. Feel free to send me a PM with any question you have!

Offline

#7 2012-10-16 20:47:26

el_koraco
#!/loony/bun
From: inside Ed
Registered: 2011-07-25
Posts: 4,749

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Unia wrote:

On Arch it's made really easy with makepkg big_smile

There he goes again.
@Zen, there's no reason not to compile really. You can use dpkg to build the package or cheskinstall, but I personally never bother. Any good program will uninstall cleanly with make uninstall.

Offline

#8 2012-10-16 20:58:27

Unia
#! Octo-portal-pussy
From: The Netherlands
Registered: 2010-07-17
Posts: 4,058

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

el_koraco wrote:
Unia wrote:

On Arch it's made really easy with makepkg big_smile

There he goes again.

I thought I'd say that myself before you would tongue


If you can't sit by a cozy fire with your code in hand enjoying its simplicity and clarity, it needs more work. --Carlos Torres
Github

I am a #! forum moderator. Feel free to send me a PM with any question you have!

Offline

#9 2012-10-16 21:57:11

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

@el_koraco & Unia Truth be told (leans in and whispers) I'm using Arch now.

However, I'm planning a #! and Ubuntu dual boot. Ubuntu (haven't used it in years) is just for Humble Bundle and the future Steam release. They're supposedly backporting video drivers, so I think it's worth a try. I can always change things later.

Another truth be told. I want to start developing a "personal" distro (ie not for public consumption unless I make something that actually works). Just something I can install quickly for my audio work. #! is a great starting point for that, I think. The band computer is chugging along really, really well with Wheezy installed, but I miss the "wow" I had years ago with #!. So, basically setting up new hardware is a chore and I want something more automated install wise and have the ability to transfer sessions easier (band room, the other guitarists pending workstation and the house). If that all makes sense.

I'm just curious if there was something I was missing/ not considering when I compile things. I'm reading the documentation to build Debian packages among other Docs. So, it's just a matter of time.

What's the differences between dpkg and makepkg? From my very very basic understanding of dpkg it makes a .deb out of something you compile right? In Arch; Packer will resolve dependencies, compile and make a package through the AUR, but I've never compiled a package on Arch.... Haven't had to.


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

#10 2012-10-16 22:04:56

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,924

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

I will confess I recently installed a well-known source-based distro, and first impression is the Debian way of using apt-get is so much easier! smile


/hugged

Offline

#11 2012-10-16 22:10:09

el_koraco
#!/loony/bun
From: inside Ed
Registered: 2011-07-25
Posts: 4,749

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Zen:Core wrote:

What's the differences between dpkg and makepkg?

Nothing really. dpkg-buildpackage is the same as makepgk, bu the recipes for creating Debian packages are somewhat more complicated. You can take a look at dh-make and pbuilder (pbuilder is what you'd be looking for if you want to create packages for use on multiple machines).

Offline

#12 2012-10-16 22:41:28

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Thanks all! cool

I'll look deeper into pbuilder and dh-make. I've got a boring Fall reading list as is, so time to brew some coffee and settle in. Too bad pesky things like a job get in the way of "nerding out" as my Wife so eloquently puts it... roll

I'm off to save the ever important Minecraft server files, re-partition and start installing!


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

#13 2012-10-17 11:26:06

rabidjoe
#! Member
From: Under My Hat
Registered: 2010-09-24
Posts: 78

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

If I have to compile from source I 'checkinstall -D make install' the sucker so I can remove it using apt....

Offline

#14 2012-10-18 03:01:08

mynis01
#! Die Hard
From: 127.0.0.1
Registered: 2010-07-02
Posts: 1,965

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

el_koraco wrote:
Zen:Core wrote:

What's the differences between dpkg and makepkg?

Nothing really. dpkg-buildpackage is the same as makepgk, bu the recipes for creating Debian packages are somewhat more complicated. You can take a look at dh-make and pbuilder (pbuilder is what you'd be looking for if you want to create packages for use on multiple machines).

I brought up the idea of creating a utility similar to the AUR for crunchbang/debian before but nobody really seemed to care (with the exception of kbmonkey) that just substituted debian mechanisms for arch ones where necessary (like dpkg-buildpackage vs makepgk). We could seriously just parse the source code for AUR helpers like yaourt or packer and replace parts with the debian equivalents and it would probably work out of the box. It would be awesome for the crunchbang distro as a whole, and would give BSD fanboys an easy way to transition to debian. If this came to fruition....I might start using crunchbang again. And I wouldn't have a problem investing time in it either; I could put it on a resume.

Offline

#15 2012-10-18 14:29:35

hinto
#! Windbag
From: Cary, NC
Registered: 2010-12-08
Posts: 1,418

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Call me crazy, but the whole reason I chose Debian (and #!) was
Debian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer. An operating system is the set of basic programs and utilities that make your computer run. Debian provides more than a pure OS: it comes with over 29000 packages, precompiled software bundled up in a nice format for easy installation on your machine.

If I wanted to compile, then I would have chosen a source based distro.  That being said, nothing precludes you from compiling, just like nothing prevents you from un-tarring Thunderbird/Firefox and using it instead of installing the .deb.

I just like to work "with" the system, rather than hoeing my own row.

-Hinto

Last edited by hinto (2012-10-18 14:30:02)


"Sometimes I wish I hadn't taken the red pill" -Me

Offline

#16 2012-10-18 18:52:50

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

@mynis01 I think something like a debian AUR would be cool, but when you break it down all Packer or yaourt does is give you a compiler with automated build scripts right? In my head that could all be bash scripted in Debian. You get the source, cd to the unpacked tar and type a script to automate the build. How to get around the build time deps and all that is another story. I'm planning on digging as time allows to see what can be done for my uses. I just need to learn the right way.

@hinto You is crazy! I fully get what you're saying and that's the allure of Debian. However, some things just aren't available main line. Like Compton or viewnior for example. Philip packages those for #!, but regular Debian doesn't have them. For music work, Rui Copela released a new sampler and synth that aren't yet in the repos. So, that's why I'm here. Regular apps I'm okay on. Debian has just what I need, it's just missing some obscure things that are awesome and useful.

I'm gonna figure out the packaging for Debian thing and go from there.


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

#17 2012-10-18 18:58:48

hinto
#! Windbag
From: Cary, NC
Registered: 2010-12-08
Posts: 1,418

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

^ I install #!, then track SID.
-Hinto


"Sometimes I wish I hadn't taken the red pill" -Me

Offline

#18 2012-10-18 19:13:26

mynis01
#! Die Hard
From: 127.0.0.1
Registered: 2010-07-02
Posts: 1,965

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

Zen:Core wrote:

@mynis01 I think something like a debian AUR would be cool, but when you break it down all Packer or yaourt does is give you a compiler with automated build scripts right? In my head that could all be bash scripted in Debian. You get the source, cd to the unpacked tar and type a script to automate the build. How to get around the build time deps and all that is another story. I'm planning on digging as time allows to see what can be done for my uses. I just need to learn the right way.
I'm gonna figure out the packaging for Debian thing and go from there.

You're correct to an extent, but essentially what they do is make the integration of binaries and source packages seamless. For example, when I go to install mixxx (which is a freaking pain in debian) all I have to do is open a terminal and type

packer -S mixxx1.11-bzr

and it pulls the binary dependencies from the arch repos, the mixxx source from mixxx.org, and starts building. That's it, just one command. It's also awesome for people that use proprietary software in Linux because of its ability to download stuff directly from different websites. For example, installing the closed jdk and nvidia drivers is abnormally easy. And keeping all your binaries and source packages up to date is as simple as

packer -Syu

. There's absolutely no reason the same type of thing couldn't be implemented in Debian. We could call it the debian user repository, and you could just type

dur-get packagename

Just food for thought though, I don't know if anyone else cares or not tongue

Last edited by mynis01 (2012-10-18 19:14:09)

Offline

#19 2012-10-18 19:15:45

Unia
#! Octo-portal-pussy
From: The Netherlands
Registered: 2010-07-17
Posts: 4,058

Re: Any reason to NOT compile?

FWIW, Packer is also just bash I believe.


If you can't sit by a cozy fire with your code in hand enjoying its simplicity and clarity, it needs more work. --Carlos Torres
Github

I am a #! forum moderator. Feel free to send me a PM with any question you have!

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

Copyright © 2012 CrunchBang Linux.
Proudly powered by Debian. Hosted by Linode.
Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc.

Debian Logo