Linux Group to Simplify Software Installation

[Nomad559]

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2078480,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594

Installing a new application on Linux can be challenging, even for experts. Now, the LSB (Linux Standard Base) project and its parent organization, the FSG (Free Standards Group), have a plan for how to make it easier for both users and developers.

Last month, key people in the Linux software packaging world and ISVs got together in Berlin to discuss the future of Linux application packaging.

The group decided to create a bridge between the various software package installment programs that the Linux distributions support and what the ISVs need to support Linux.

According to Ian Murdock, chief technology officer of the FSG and chair of the LSB, what ISVs want is "to treat Linux as a single platform, which means they want to offer a single package for Linux, much as they do for Windows."

[meldroc]

1. Definitely a good idea.

Let's hope that they base things on Debian's packaging system (also used by Ubuntu.) It is rather nice - automatic dependency handling (much better than RPM dependency hell,) some nice front ends, automatic downloading and upgrading of packages over the net, etc.

There are a few stubborn pieces of software that aren't packaged for Ubuntu, forcing me to build from source. Many source installations are fairly easy - just a matter of "./configure; make; sudo make install", but some older packages require you to edit makefiles or even C source code. You also have to make sure you have a whole bunch of library headers and development tools installed. It's a total pain in the neck when I encounter one of these packages, or decide I want to upgrade to a version of software that's newer than what's packaged for Ubuntu.

So, yeah, a standard packaging system, which every program out there uses, that works on just about every distro out there, would be nice.

[RoyGBiv]

2. The suggestion is RPM ...

...or at least that's what it was a year ago when they started to focus on this aspect a standard. This is one reason why it will be a hard sell and has been quite slow to develop beyond the proposal stage. This is essentially an idea that is being renewed (yet again).

Now having said that, the package management system, as it exists today, is not technically a make or break part of it as far as a standard is concerned. It's more about where things get placed and a standardized system for making the system "aware" of what is and is not installed, at least according to my understanding. The standard could conceivably be adopted to any package management system as long as the packages themselves follow the standard, again according to my understanding.

I will add here that my understanding, as implied, is based on reading proposals and discussions of proposals dating back at least a year. The meeting under discussion in this article didn't really add a lot that was new except the hope that the maintainers of apt and RPM are willing to seek a path to a standard that will work and be acceptable to both groups.

Anyway ... If this starts to go as planned, it's also good for Linux in the sense that it encourages software developers to develop software *for* Linux. A coherent standard (something other than "install from source") for software installation has been one of the biggest stumbling blocks for this. I have a popular game that a company ported to Linux, but I can't install the damn thing on my main system now because the installation routines expect certain files and libraries to be in certain locations, and they aren't there. I have to use an older version of SuSE or Red Hat to make it work. (It's a closed-source game, and I can't edit the things I'd need to edit nor get a list of "missing" things that would let me set up sym-links in order to make it work on my current system.)

[meldroc]

3. I'd prefer deb packaging,

though RPM can be made to work, so I would be able to work with it, provided something like yum was provided so users don't have to fight with dependency hell.

Your points are well made - sounds like an issue of packaging, as well as Linux Standard Base stuff - everything gets a standardized place to go in the system, and applications are set up to look in those standardized places for resources.

As far as your game, which game is it? I'm thinking that you might be able to make it work on a recent system by running it in a chroot jail, with the expected files put in place.