On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 09:45:16PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi > based on many favourable comments about ubuntu I decided to try it, ummm > quite > painfull:
Primarily because you chose the painful way to do it. To prove a point, perhaps? > I downloaded 6.06 server and installed. Downloading the desktop CD would have been much more efficient. Would have gotten you past the first few steps. > apt-get (can't remember name) install development-package build-essential? > apt-get qt3*, discard, app-get the relevant qt3 stuff, by cut and paste Run synaptic, point-n-click your way through it all. > apt-get install subversion > apt-get install lame*, discard, apt-get the lame libs > svn co mythtv modules > make > fails needing Xv libs (no lXv) You want the system to automatically know what you're going to do beforehand? For building a newer version of something that's already packaged, the chances are that running "apt-get build-dep <package>" will get you everything you need in one easy hit. The only exception to this is when the newer version has added some new stuff it needs to build -- but at least build-dep will get you most of the way there. > OK clearly this is painfull: Not painful (note spelling), just different. > How do you get a list of packages and meta-packages that you can apt-get? 1) apt-cache search . 2) cat /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Packages |grep '^Package: ' 3) Peer into synaptic > How do you find out WHAT is in a package. EG I got various lame bits before I > got the development libraries needed to build mythtv? (rpm -ql) dpkg -L === rpm -ql > How do I find (in rpm speak) whatprovides -lXv ? I just hit http://packages.{ubuntu.com,debian.org}/ and then type in the filename I want in the bottom-most (or thereabouts) search box. If you're on limited connectivity, you can also keep a copy of Contents-$arch around for looking in. The .deb format doesn't have a concept of providing individual files, though. I think it's better for it, as it's meant that you get really strict and well-adhered-to policies for naming library packages -- basically, you'll find the library you need in a package called lib<name><sover> at least 99.9% of the time, and the development headers in lib<name>-dev about the same amount of the time. On the odd occasion you'll need to "apt-cache search <name> dev" because the library you need is a sub-library of another one that it's been bundled into, but that's pretty uncommon. > All of the apt-get info that I found, I googled for, or apt-get a wildcard, > then decline the update, but scan the output for hints on names. Surely > there's a better way. Absolutely there is a better way. You're learning the system, it's new and different, so things aren't going to be obvious to you. Doesn't make it "painfull" -- just unfamiliar. > Oh by the way, I'm trying to build mythtv from svn. That was kinda obvious. I figured it wasn't worth asking why you're not just using the pre-built packages. - Matt -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
