Why doesn't Ubuntu come with build-essential?

[Virogenesis]

I don't see how it's a security issue.

If someone comes on these forums saying, or nobody replies That idea's ludicrous. Anyone who wants to compile from source is told and sometimes get back the response

Why do you think smoothwall doesn't include a compiler? Because it could be considered a security risk.
Mac os doesn't include a compiler as default do people complain?
The fact of the matter is IF you don't know how to install the compiler then you shouldn't be using it its as simple as that really.

[Stormy Eyes]

Why do you think smoothwall doesn't include a compiler? Because it could be considered a security risk.

Is that the reason the Smoothwall people give? I thought Smoothwall didn't include a compiler because it was a specialized distro that didn't need a compiler. Personally, I don't give a damn if the compiler is installed by default or not, but I think this "security risk" argument is ********.

[aysiu]

Why do you think smoothwall doesn't include a compiler? Because it could be considered a security risk.

What's smoothwall?

Mac os doesn't include a compiler as default do people complain?

Mac OS doesn't include a compiler for two reasons:

1. Unlike Ubuntu, Mac has a lot of commercial binaries made for it. If Mac users want a program, they get a .dmg they can double-click. If Ubuntu users want obscure programs, they usually have to compile a .tar.gz from source.

2. Mac comes preinstalled with Mac-compatible hardware. Maybe if someone is trying to get a wireless device or dial-up modem working with Ubuntu, they might have to... compile something from scratch. If your Airport Extreme Wireless doesn't work with Mac OS X, something's wrong with your computer because it was designed to work with Mac OS X.

I just hope that the next time someone wants to ./configure make make install all the people in this thread who claim build-essential is a security risk tell that user, "Yeah, we could tell you the package that would help you install that, but it's a security risk. Don't install it until you're a more advanced user."

I'm just going to tell them, as I and others have always done,

sudo aptitude update && sudo aptitude install build-essential

and when they ask why it's not included, I'll tell them the truth: "I don't know why."

[Virogenesis]

What's smoothwall? Mac OS doesn't include a compiler for two reasons:

1. Unlike Ubuntu, Mac has a lot of commercial binaries made for it. If Mac users want a program, they get a .dmg they can double-click. If Ubuntu users want obscure programs, they usually have to compile a .tar.gz from source.

2. Mac comes preinstalled with Mac-compatible hardware. Maybe if someone is trying to get a wireless device or dial-up modem working with Ubuntu, they might have to... compile something from scratch. If your Airport Extreme Wireless doesn't work with Mac OS X, something's wrong with your computer because it was designed to work with Mac OS X.

I just hope that the next time someone wants to ./configure make make install all the people in this thread who claim build-essential is a security risk tell that user, "Yeah, we could tell you the package that would help you install that, but it's a security risk. Don't install it until you're a more advanced user."

I'm just going to tell them, as I and others have always done,

sudo aptitude update && sudo aptitude install build-essential

and when they ask why it's not included, I'll tell them the truth, "I don't know why."

1. maybe I wish to install some obscure program maybe I wish to run the latest version of apache

2. true but why not make it installer from a cd or dvd whats the problem with that.

aysiu why doesn't ubuntu come shipped with apache, mysql and ssh running they are useful to some.
Some might wish to run those without an internet connection.

Make it easier to install the build tools from the cd so its a win win solution.

Smoothwall 2 is a firewall designed around the linux kernel 2.4, its the firewall that was around before ipcop.
Its a cut down distro based upon security, it doesn't include wget, compilers or anything like that.
Its pretty tight security the gui is all perl scripts.

[az]

Personally, I don't give a damn if the compiler is installed by default or not, but I think this "security risk" argument is ********.

I'm not smart enough to say. Read the threzad and see what people who are that smart are saying and make up your own mind.

Aysiu: build-essential is already included. Included and installed are two different things.

[aysiu]

1. maybe I wish to install some obscure program maybe I wish to run the latest version of apache

Only goes to support my argument--a lot of people need build-essential.

2. true but why not make it installer from a cd or dvd whats the problem with that.

Because it's annoying. Why not make ubuntu-desktop on the CD but not installed?

aysiu why doesn't ubuntu come shipped with apache, mysql and ssh running they are useful to some.
Some might wish to run those without an internet connection.

Because those are programs by themselves. build-essential is a helper program that helps you install other programs. You might as well leave out dpkg or Synaptic.

Make it easier to install the build tools from the cd so its a win win solution.

That could work, but someone has to make it happen. I think what would be a good compromise would be leaving it out, but when you try to compile from source, instead of saying "make: command not found," you get a pop-up that says, "make: command not found--do you want to install the build-essential package that will help you compile from source?"

Even that I think is lame, but it would be better than the way it is now. Can someone make a real case for it being a security risk? I happen to have a great deal of respect for Stormy Eyes' technical expertise, and if he thinks it's BS, I really would like to hear someone substantiate the security risk side of things.

[John.Michael.Kane]

Don't really mater if someone substantiate the security risk side of things. or not. seems you three are the end all know it all on this, and any other subject. bottom line unless it comes from you three it will be classed as BS anyway so why should someone substantiate the security risk side of things.


Just My Thoughts.

[Virogenesis]

Only goes to support my argument--a lot of people need build-essential.

Because it's annoying. Why not make ubuntu-desktop on the CD but not installed?

Because those are programs by themselves. build-essential is a helper program that helps you install other programs. You might as well leave out dpkg or Synaptic.

That could work, but someone has to make it happen. I think what would be a good compromise would be leaving it out, but when you try to compile from source, instead of saying "make: command not found," you get a pop-up that says, "make: command not found--do you want to install the build-essential package that will help you compile from source?"

Even that I think is lame, but it would be better than the way it is now. Can someone make a real case for it being a security risk? I happen to have a great deal of respect for Stormy Eyes' technical expertise, and if he thinks it's BS, I really would like to hear someone substantiate the security risk side of things.

User breaks in, looks around decided to infect libjpeg with his own version compiles his own version, nice rootkit inside a lib file which no one would bother checking.

aysiu if you were an admin of a school would you want your students to be able to compile i know they cannot do make install but thats not the point.
Bottom line is let the user install it its not needed til its needed and until its needed no point in having it.

[aysiu]

Virogenesis, when a forum member wants to compile a program, what do you tell her?

A. I could give you the tool for this, but it's too dangerous.
B. Install build-essential

[az]

Virogenesis, when a forum member wants to compile a program, what do you tell her?

A. I could give you the tool for this, but it's too dangerous.
B. Install build-essential

A is ridiculous.

What is being discussed, however, is whether the risk is significant enought to warrant the inconvenience to about 1 percent of users who will have to install it from the cd before they use it instead of it being preinstalled on every ubuntu box.