new to Linux

[Jeffrey Watts]

Sorry for the reply lag, I've been busy.  I've included all the threads
inline for brevity.

On Fri, 26 May 2000, Jason Fruge wrote:
> > Unless you know what you are doing, you should never use 'rpm -i', as you
> > can accidentaly install multiple versions of the same software.  'rpm -U'
> > is the proper way to install software.
> 
> The manpage says they both work
> 
> we are both right according to the manpage. =oP~

You are correct in _principle_, but in practice '-U' (or '-F') should be
used over '-i'.  The manpage needs to be updated to reflect this
preference, as it is a potential pitfall for newbies.  I believe the RPM
FAQ contains this tip.

Trust me, the quickest way to piss off a newbie is to get them in the
habit of using '-i'.  When they go to install that new version of Netscape
they'll get stuck.  Except for a couple of well-known exceptions, '-U'
works best, and is proper practice.

Since you seem to be a tarball guy, the proper analogy would be to tell
someone to use 'autoconf; ./configure; make install'.  People without
autoconf installed (or improperly installed or outdated version) will have
problems.  99% of the time, you want to use the supplied 'configure'.

> I am taking this as a flame, if you knew linux well, 80% of your
> installs would be from source. im looking forward to meeting you at
> linuxfest.

No, installs from source are foolish as a general policy.  Now, I install
from source for a few, specific packages that require customization, and
don't lead to packaging (they run out of their source tree or I'm actively
developing them), but in general, using packaged software (Slack tarballs
don't count) is _vastly_ superior and is preferable to installing all
software from source.

I don't want to bore the masses with a lengthy explanation, but suffice it
to say that the answers lie in verifiability, reliability, ease of
administration, and security.

I appreciate your desire for customized or "hands on" installation, but
the best way to do that is to build your own RPMs (or debs) -- that way
you have the benefits, without the disadvantages.

Cory Root wrote:
> Guys, I'm quitting the list.  I really can't see that I can offer
> anything that the "gurus" can't.  And I'm getting quite tired of the
> element in this group that can't answer a simple question without
> adding a snide little remark to make the person who asks it feel
> stupid (Watts) or blows the topic way out of proportion in a sad
> attempt to show off their technical virility (Bell).

Well, I don't see my writing style as "snide", but then again, it's easy
to have misunderstandings with one-dimensional conversations like we have
with email.  If my tone has been misunderstood as hostile, then I
apologize, but I do suggest that you develop a thicker skin.  The Internet
is wild and woolly, and the disadvantage (and advantage) of Free Speech is
that sometimes you'll hear things you don't like.  The trick is to find
the nugget of information hidden in the noise.

As for snide remarks, I find it ironic that you would direct one at me
accusing me of the same crime.

Jeffrey.

o-----------------------------------o
| Jeffrey Watts                     |
| watts at jayhawks.net         o-------------------------------------------o
| Systems Programmer         | "Is uniformity [of religion] attainable?  |
| Network Systems Management |  Millions of innocent men, women, and     |
| Sprint Communications      |  children, since the introduction of      |
o----------------------------|  Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, |
                             |  fined, imprisoned; yet we have not       |
                             |  advanced one inch towards uniformity.    |
                             |  -- Thomas Jefferson, "Notes on Virginia" |
                             o-------------------------------------------o