linux installers

**chopin1810** · 10-21-2005

I think this has been asked before, if people make pretty graphical installers for windows all the time then why the hell can't they do it for linux? I'm willing to bet that there are a lot of users who would like to use linux but don't want to deal with the difficult installation process that often doesn't work.

oz · 10-21-2005

I like the text installers, but thought suse had a graphical installer. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

**chopin1810** · 10-21-2005

No, no, no, no... you misunderstood everything I'm saying here... I'm talking about the installers for third party stuff you download to install on linux... it's always a headache to install even for me because I have to compile all this **** and deal with a bunch of errors shot back at me with you guys. It takes me an average of 3 hours to get some linux software installed... it's a hell of a lot easier in windows. This is a weak point in linux and we need to standardize something if we want less technically inclined users to come to linux as an easy to use and stable os.

**techieMoe** · 10-21-2005

The short answer: every MS Windows install comes with the exact same files/libraries/DLLs all in the exact same spot, so it's very easy to make an "all-in-one" type of installer for that OS. Linux is customizable in absolutely every way. The only guaranteed thing that will be installed on any two systems is the kernel. This makes it very hard for an installer to "assume" things will be there.

**bidi** · 10-21-2005

I still don't don't see how firing up Synaptic, searching for the program you want and marking it for install is harder than going to the store, looking for the programs you want, spending $ on it, and read the installation procedure. That's how I get everything installed in Debian, and from what I've heard, the RPM-based distros are just as easy.

**benjamin20** · 10-21-2005

eeven gentoo is almost as easy. actualy , i think its easier because there are no real versions of gentoo. you just emerge --sync and then emerge --deep --newuse --update world. to install antything its like any other linux system. linx is just a little harder because of what techei moe said, but because of gnu's autoconfig and makefiles compialing for the system is so much incredibley easier

**bigtomrodney** · 10-21-2005

YaST? YOU? There are other installers like lokiinstaller among others, but in order to install succcessfully the installer should really be dealing with the package database, RPM or DEB.

One argument might be that we should shift to one central installer/package manager but I'm not going to get into that one. Linus himself has stated he believes all distros should share the apt/deb system for consolidation.

IF you look at what Microsoft is doing they are shifting away from .exe installer which are quite dirty to .msi installers. MSI is closer to linux package management. It doesn't hack in its information, it is standardised and interfaces with the programs databse in Windows. This means you can see functionality like better automation, central deployment and removes the executable part. This makes it nicer to work with and slightly more secure.

Sound like any package management we have?

**jaboua** · 10-21-2005

In addition, you mentioned compiling: how many apps have you compiled in windows?

Thread Tools

Display

linux installers

Posting Permissions