Re: install udpxy.1.0.23

[Chris Bannister]

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:14:24AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> But maybe one should change the first statement in the package
> description:
>   https://packages.debian.org/sid/build-essential
> 
>   "If you do not plan to build Debian packages, you don't
>need this package."

If you want to do any compiling then you'll need this package.

> (It is so odd to have to assume GNU/Linux without C compiler
>  stuff. That's like having no shell. Semi-androidly.)

I think the reasoning is that installing it on servers is like having
a sophisticated locksmithing workshop in an unlocked garage outside your
locked home.

-- 
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing." --- Malcolm X

Re: install udpxy.1.0.23

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

i wrote:
> > (It is so odd to have to assume GNU/Linux without C compiler
> >  stuff. That's like having no shell. Semi-androidly.)

Chris Bannister wrote:

> I think the reasoning is that installing it on servers is like having
> a sophisticated locksmithing workshop in an unlocked garage outside your
> locked home.

Interesting aspect.
But i can easily pipe a binary from my workstation to a server
if i have a shell sccount there. Further i would be able to write
malware in shell code.
So if the preconditions for using a compiler suite are given,
i would also be able to do equivalent harm without compiler.

I assume it is rather that the substantial weight of the locksmith
shop might be in the way of the desktops with insane weight.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Re: install udpxy.1.0.23

[Alex Vong]

On 27/11/2015, Chris Bannister  wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 09:42:51PM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Nexttime please send mail to  instead of
>>  since the later list is mostly for
>> junior maintainers instead of users.
>
> Ummm, whenever anyone has a question about packaging and they ask on the
> debian-user list, they invariably get sent to the debian-mentor list
> eventually because that's where the expertise is.
>
> Is that wrong?
>
I think it depends on the difficulty of the question. If it is a
user-level question, ask debian-user. If it is something a normal user
doesn't know, ask debian-mentors. If it is even harder, ask
debian-devel. I think installing from source is sort of a user
question, so debian-user is probably more appropriate.

> --
> "If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
> who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
> oppressing." --- Malcolm X
>

Re: install udpxy.1.0.23

[Thomas Schmitt]

Hi,

linuxuser wrote on debian-ment...@lists.debian.org:
> > > Can you help me how to installed udpxy.1.0.23-0-prod.tar.gz
 
Alex Vong wrote:
> > Nexttime please send mail to 
> > instead of 
> >
> > [... helpful explanation of building from upstream tarball ...]

Chris Bannister wrote:
> Ummm, whenever anyone has a question about packaging and they ask on the
> debian-user list, they invariably get sent to the debian-mentor list

I first thought the message was from debian-user when i
saw it. Only after i had a look at the content of the
tarball i noticed that it was from debian-mentors (and thus
possibly about an aspect i didn't understand).

If it had been from debian-user, i had answered that one
needs packages "tar", "gcc", and "make" and should not get
distracted too much by the exotic build options on
  http://www.udpxy.com/howtos-en.html
Just "make". No CC=, no "make" target.
Execute where built, or run as superuser: make install

Creating a Debian package would be an adventure that is
more demanding.

(Note that the correct mail address for advise with packaging is
   debian-ment...@lists.debian.org
 i.e. "mentors" in plural, not "mentor" in singular.)


Alex Vong wrote:
> > $ apt-get install build-essential

I will try to memorize this one.
But maybe one should change the first statement in the package
description:
  https://packages.debian.org/sid/build-essential

  "If you do not plan to build Debian packages, you don't
   need this package."

(It is so odd to have to assume GNU/Linux without C compiler
 stuff. That's like having no shell. Semi-androidly.)


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

Re: install udpxy.1.0.23

[Alex Vong]

Hi,

Nexttime please send mail to  instead of
 since the later list is mostly for
junior maintainers instead of users.

According to 
someone had been tried to package udpxy, but did not make it, so it is
not in Debian right now.

So, we need to compile from source :)

First, we need to install the build tools (with root privilege):

$ apt-get install build-essential

After that, build with the following commands:

$ wget http://www.udpxy.com/download/1_23/udpxy.1.0.23-9-prod.tar.gz
$ tar zxvf udpxy.1.0.23-9-prod.tar.gz
$ make
$ su -c 'make install'

If you don't want to install, just don't run the last command and run
udpxy directly from the source tree using:

./udpxy

Feel free to ask if you don't understand any of the steps.

Cheers,
Alex

On 16/11/2015, linuxuser  wrote:
> hello
>
> Can you help me how to installed udpxy.1.0.23-0-prod.tar.gz
>  I uses Debian  8.2 ,I'm trying but it is impossible
>
>

Re: install udpxy.1.0.23

[Chris Bannister]

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 09:42:51PM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Nexttime please send mail to  instead of
>  since the later list is mostly for
> junior maintainers instead of users.

Ummm, whenever anyone has a question about packaging and they ask on the
debian-user list, they invariably get sent to the debian-mentor list
eventually because that's where the expertise is.

Is that wrong?

-- 
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing." --- Malcolm X