PDA

View Full Version : compiling vs aptitude



timbosity
September 14th, 2010, 12:59 AM
Im only curious really but if someone with the know could comment on advantages/disadvantages of compiling programs from source vs simply installing from aptitude repos I would be most grateful.
Im looking for technical reasons more than ease of use and other useability issues (ie it is much simpler/easier to install things with apt-get).
What kinds of situations would make compiling from source be worth the trouble?

cheers

juancarlospaco
September 14th, 2010, 01:12 AM
Compiling got Placebo Effect

v1ad
September 14th, 2010, 01:18 AM
apt-get will also keep u updated.

timbosity
September 14th, 2010, 02:19 AM
so, its not usually advisable to compile things and it all comes down to aptitude management and updates etc...

snowpine
September 14th, 2010, 02:24 AM
A Linux distrubution is not just software; it is also community.

Ubuntu is a community of people who, for the most part, enjoy installing pre-compiled binaries. The tools and how-tos that have grown up around Ubuntu support this trend.

This does not mean you cannot compile from source in Ubuntu! :)

v1ad
September 14th, 2010, 02:25 AM
oh yes always advisable.

wojox
September 14th, 2010, 02:28 AM
I really only compile if I want different options or maybe there are patches.

wojox
September 14th, 2010, 02:30 AM
so, its not usually advisable to compile things and it all comes down to aptitude management and updates etc...

It's a lot easier, simpler and quicker. ;)

odiseo77
September 14th, 2010, 02:34 AM
There are some cases when people has to compile to add extra functionality for some application, some function not enabled by default, etc. Take for instance the kernel, in some cases people must compile in order to either add some extra functionality, or to add support for a given hardware. Other than that, it's preferable to install stuff directly from binary packages.

toupeiro
September 14th, 2010, 02:58 AM
FUD alert: Most open source projects with frequent updating have subversion checkout systems. Nothing wrong with compiling, its a matter of preference! Compiling is the most distribution agnostic way to distribute software.

oldos2er
September 14th, 2010, 03:49 AM
I started compiling because I wanted to learn how, and I'm still compiling and learning. Sometimes source code for a given version of a program is available long before a deb file of the same version is, so that's one reason you might want to compile something. You can use the app checkinstall to allow the package management system to keep track of your compiled and installed software. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CheckInstall

Ralob
September 14th, 2010, 05:06 AM
If I use the program often, I compile it from source merely to have the bleeding-edge version. If I encounter issues then I generate a report and give it to the devs. However, most repositories have have a recent enough version for apps and libs that I don't worry about getting the source. For apps I use daily and keep track of the source code, I compile when changes are introduced that I view as beneficial. At the moment, the main programs I compile from source are Calibre and XBMC along with some of the dependencies like ffmpeg, xvid, podofo, etc.