Desktop Linux

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

There should be an additional and very optional repository called "Internet" or something like that (we'd have to formulate a name later) that contains a huge amount of the little Linux applications sitting out there on the Web, not in a mainstream repository like Packman or Guru.

That would be truly amazing.

I could potentially, when i got time, make some installers for these little apps all over the web like mine. Basically, if the app wasn't packaged by the author with a decent dependency checking script or installer, I could easily make one.

SamFisher47 · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:01 pm Post subject:

Yes, we could call it community or community-maintained or something similar! Great idea!
_________________
--SamFisher47

Watch our progress in LFS: http://desktop-linux.org/forum/lfs-project-status-monitor-t113.html

Interested in contributing to a developing Desktop Linux Project? Skilled in coding, developing Linux distributions, art, website design?
Tell us: http://desktop-linux.org/forum/how-can-you-help-t4.html

Siberian Fox · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:04 pm Post subject:

Yes, this looks great. A community maintained repository would work well, Ubuntu's is a good example.

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

Good name!

The repository system is great, but the advantage that Windows has here is the ability to install little utilities, scripts, and apps from all over the web made by the community - this would definitely fix that issue to some extent!

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

I use openSUSE and wasn't exactly aware of the Ubuntu community maintained repo - care to elaborate a bit?

Siberian Fox · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:09 pm Post subject:

Ubuntu has several repos from the official one with popular programs, to a larger community one with user submitted ones that are less official, more like user preference items.
Yes, Windows is known for that, but I plan on using a system similar to Opensuse's new 1 click install. See here http://news.opensuse.org/?p=133. It should work out nicely. Unlike opensuse though, it should be incorporated into the actual desktop, not just a web page.

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

So essentially, a one click install of community maintained apps.
That would be great. Definitely want to see all the nifty little apps out there packaged and categorized in some way.

Siberian Fox · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:12 pm Post subject:

Yes exactly. Community apps would be smaller usually and require less altering of system files, making a 1 click install easier and less of a security risk. We could put things submitted by users in there, as well as codecs, scripts, and mods (ie themes, alterations, etc).

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

Making one click installerw for a great deal of the apps out there on the Web would pose a daunting task, though - for example, my software doesn't even have an install script - it just runs with the java -jar command. How are you proposing to integrate all of the different install systems (or lack thereof) into one cohesive installer?

SamFisher47 · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:18 pm Post subject:

Yes, I think one of the main things keeping users away from Linux is package systems.

In Windows, you want a piece of software, you search for it on Google, you click the link, download it and double click. A setup wizard pops up walking you through.

In Linux, all software has been made easy to find through, for example, Ubuntu's Add/Remove feature, but the user will be asking what are all these dependency things? Where can I access my software once I have installed it? What do I do if what I need isn't there? How do I enable repositories? What ARE repositories???

So, in short, we need a package manager that installs as easily as if in Windows, but has the beauty of Linux where all/most software is waiting right in front of you for you to click it!
_________________
--SamFisher47

Watch our progress in LFS: http://desktop-linux.org/forum/lfs-project-status-monitor-t113.html

Interested in contributing to a developing Desktop Linux Project? Skilled in coding, developing Linux distributions, art, website design?
Tell us: http://desktop-linux.org/forum/how-can-you-help-t4.html

Siberian Fox · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:19 pm Post subject:

In all honesty, I can't answer that right now. At this point, we are still only brainstorming ideas, and just beginning to put together a blank Gnome system to fiddle with. I will be able to answer this more fully when we begin with the update system. That too will require an update server alone. Right now we are are just focusing on ideas and basics.

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

It could be as simple as giving the installer some arguments in a plain config file... for example, a app with an install script prepackaged could have this simple config file

Siberian Fox · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:30 pm Post subject:

Yes, this would work. We could have all the programs be submitted to a side server first to be checked and have arguments like that installed, then be transfered over.

AndrewTheArt · Alpha Project Joined: 29 Oct 2007 Posts: 26

Right.

When you think about it, there are several main methods used to install software in the Linux world...

Might as well start listing...

* Extracting a .tar.gz and placing a binary somewhere (needs dep check)
* Extracting a .tar.gz file and buliding from source (no additional dep check needed)
* Extracting some compressed folder, placing a jar file somewhere, and creating a script to launch the jar file (needs dep check for jre 1.5)
* Putting a script (python, bash, etc) somewhere, making it executable (needs dep check for both script interpreter and script dependencies)
* Running a Windows executable with Wine (no dep check neede except for Wine)

Anyone want to add to this list? Of course, there are more methods but eventually we will reach a singularity of sorts in which the vast majority of non repository software installer methods are covered.

Using this methodology, we could easily submit arguments to the client that specify how the software should be installed. This way, we don't need to make any actual modifications to the software itself (by adding unnecessary and cumbersome install scripts), so it stays untainted.

Siberian Fox · Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:40 pm Post subject:

When doing this, we should also choose an option that gets the software installed efficiently, but with less time. I have used many repositories where it checked off so many steps that it would have been easier to install the RPM manually.