From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nathan Clayton Subject: Re: Advice about packages Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 23:58:44 -0700 Sender: linux-newbie-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3F7BCCA4.4030900@daftwazzock.com> References: <002901c38861$8ef4d0c0$0da16389@hyperion2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <002901c38861$8ef4d0c0$0da16389@hyperion2> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="macroman"; format="flowed" To: linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org Phillip Ames wrote: >Hi, >I'm relatively new to using Linux on a daily basis and I was looking f= or >some information about what the "trends" are for production Linux >machines. I installed RedHat 9, and have mucked about with rpm and >thought that packages were the greatest thing since sliced bread. >However, in the course of my reading and playing I've noticed that man= y >places recommend that the binary executables actually be compiled by >your machine (with all its kernel options, etc.) which is sensible. >Everything is well when I ./configure them and then "make install" but >if there is an update to a particular product it seems very inconvenie= nt >to upgrade versions. An example is the Apache httpd server - 1.3.xx >stores its served files in /var/www/html/ and the actual httpd daemon = in >/usr/bin. Apache 2, however, sets the DocumentRoot as >/usr/local/apache2/htdocs/ and the binaries in /usr/local/apache2/bin/= =2E >I know it's just a simple matter of changing the DocumentRoot entry in >the httpd.conf file for served documents but is there a better/easier >way to go about upgrading the binaries? Or is the de facto standard t= o >simply run ./configure --with-prefix=3D/usr/bin? Any advice would be >appreciated. Thanks, > > >-Phil > > =20 > Ok, first off, are you using this for just a desktop? If that's the=20 case, you really don't need to compile everything for your computer.=20 While there will be a bit of a preformance hit, it really won't be too=20 large, and almost negligible when compared to the processing speeds of=20 modern computers. For the most part nowdays, you will only really need=20 to compile something if: your distribution doesn't support it and=20 there's no RPM/DEB files for it, there are some kernel modules which yo= u=20 need but aren't in your distribution's source tree, you want to try to=20 eke out the most preformance possible, or you need to dsable some=20 features for security reasons. My suggestion would be to just be lazy and let the package manager deal= =20 with the big stuff that can be a total pain (like X, KDE, or GNOME), an= d=20 just compile the little things that you need to customize your system=20 (i.e. the version of Xine with lib-decss support built in :). Granted=20 you won't be at the bleeding edge of things, but that's never stable,=20 and if this is your desktop or production system you can easily loose=20 data (I've had this happen, and it really sucks). Keep your system up t= o=20 date with whatever update tool Redhat provides (I can't remember, I use= =20 SuSE). Nathan --=20 "Man mu=DF nicht gro=DF sein, um gro=DF zu sein." http://www.claytondevelopment.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie"= in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs