Yes, usually configure, make, make install.
Most of these things can be found on github. So pull the github repo and everything you need to compile will be there.
Sometimes they have a binary for your architecture.
Most medium sized packages compile easily, but you may have to resolve some dependencies… the confugure step will tell you if some library needs to be installed.
The important thing is to install it in /usr/local… away from the package system. You can tell make where to install it.
I have one external package that has to be installed in /usr … it is printer drivers… I do that reluctantly… every time I upgrade to a new release it gets wiped and has to be reinstalled, because the package system does not know about it.
Hi Bill. That will be fast.
I have never tried Fedora, but what I read suggests it is more up to date than Debian. A number of my scientific colleagues use it.
I’ve been using Ubuntu 22.04 LTS almost since it came out. I did use Pop!_OS for about six months or so in there somewhere. When Ubuntu 24.04 LTS came out I switched to it and have used it since.
Stability, ease of use, hardware support, deb/snap/flatpak. All good for me.
I do use Plank and so I don’t use a Wayland session yet.
I don’t agree with this statement. Yes PPAs can damage your system but everything can damage in that sense. Developers create PPAs for users to be able to install their software with nice integration to the OS, and it has nice update mechanism just like distros provide us with their repos. In contrary, I could say to you “avoid all distros and their packaging system and do all the compilation yourself”. I think this is not practical. All these packaging systems are available to us, for not compiling everything. PPAs are just a little step forward. They may do wrong things to your system, but just like any other package installation.
Ubuntu has hardware enablement system (HWE) to support new hardwares (they provide newer linux kernels), which is very nice I think. It is new hardware support with stability by the distro. For newer nvidia drivers, there is a PPA for that. Even after this, if Ubuntu didn’t support my hardware, then I would go and try rolling distributions. Actually, I would first try to install manufacturer’s driver in ubuntu, if that doesn’t work then try rolling release distros.
Sorry rolling distro lovers, if my statements hurt. I did some time with Manjaro in the past. I really liked bleeding edge native packages (not flatpak etc), but I got burned. I need my workstation to be stable.
In the end, it is very nice that we have options in the linux world.
Note: After many years of using linux distros, I see Arch based distros as testing distros. I occasionally find solutions to my Ubuntu problems in Arch wiki or Arch-based community forums. This might sound selfish but its the way it is. I used Manjaro in the past and reported bugs etc, little contribution, but it’s enough for me.
I’m an Xfce fan too. I used it long time with Manjaro and Xubuntu. Very stable and fast. Its modularity is like heaven. If Ubuntu (and people/developers) supported as Gnome, I would pick it as my main DE. But, there are nice developments in Gnome world, with its graphical design language (clean) and new features with extensions. I’m just following what most people use and support, the easy way.
Gentoo does exactly that. Sure, It may be too demanding for most people, but it is not impossible.
That is true.
What matters is the quality and dedication of the people who manage package repos. You have to make a judgement on that… probably based on your own experiences
For example, Void Linux is rolling release and rather bleedin edge… but I have never had a package problem or an update problem with Void in nearly 5 years. I therefore respect and trust its maintainers.
If you can make that sort of judgement about Ubuntu (with or without PPA,'s) then you should be happy with it.
I did not know about that, thanks.
If it is like MXahs it is just a newer kernel with more up to date drivers.
I do that quite often . Arch and Ubuntu are the two best forums. Other good places are Stackexchange and Debian documentation. It is OK, the info is meant to be public.
I must say, I dont care what distro people choose… choice is an important aspect of Linux, both within and between distros. Ubuntu is a major distro… you cant really knock it… but it has moved in some strange directions lately and that has disturbed some people.
A good way to explore the benefits of several distros is to multi-boot. Have you tried that?
I do admire the way you can discuss things without bias.
All nice in theory.
What you have to watch out for is …
Say you have a PPA package X , and it requires version 11 of library Y. But your current OS uses version10 of library Y.
If you install the PPA X , it will upgrade library Y to version 11. Then if some other system packages require version 10 of library Y , they will break.
So you recognise installing the PPA X made a problem, and you remove it… but that does not downgrade library Y to version 10. So you are stuck with a broken package system, and it is very hard to debug.
Normally I am with Neville on most linux based replies, but I personally prefer to get my software tools from the repository offered by the linux version I am using. Same with my tablet and phone. That way i know its been tested and used by more.
Going to random sites with untested tools fills me with dread.
Only exception is google chrome, i always get that direct from google site. Mainly now as I have had issues with chromium and user accounts on google.
That is the safest strategy.
It is difficult to say which side of the line PPA’s fall on… yes they integrated but the quality of integration is open to question.
I prefer the old fashioned method of keeping exotic stuff outside the package system in /usr/local. BSD implements this approach strictly.
I think using only very few PPA’s and all from well known reputable developers is OK.
So don’t use tons of PPA’s, from a random “recipes” probably written 10 years ago. Personally I don’t see a problem using Mozilla’s PPA, but I would not recommend oibaf PPA or such (or just very-very carefully).
Solus, Gentoo, and Void are stable by default. I think all three have a policy of including only the latest stable releases of software in their repositories. I’ve used all of them and found them exceedingly stable.
Manjaro is basically Arch. You get to live on the bleeding edge with that and, yes, sometimes it’ll cut you.
Using Fedora 41 with an LXDE desktop is one of the smartest moves I’ve made. May be my daily driver indefinitely.
I use Fedora 41 too … with the default gnome … just being curious, why are you working with LXDE desktop?
Neville
Yes, usually configure , make , make install .
Most of these things can be found on github. So pull the github repo and everything you need to compile will be there.
Sometimes they have a binary for your architecture.
It is very interesting … according with my understanding is not a “good” practice apply that approach … I remember this because years ago in other network(s) I made some questions about how to update/upgrade a software … due this and other reasons was strongly suggested use apt/dnf according the OS
Most medium sized packages compile easily, but you may have to resolve some dependencies… the confugure step will tell you if some library needs to be installed.
That is other reason, resolve manually the dependencies
The important thing is to install it in /usr/local… away from the package system. You can tell make where to install it.
I believe you, what happens if that rule is not accomplished?
I have one external package that has to be installed in /usr … it is printer drivers… I do that reluctantly… every time I upgrade to a new release it gets wiped and has to be reinstalled, because the package system does not know about it.
LXDE has turned out to be what I have been customizing toward with all the other desktops. Ready to go, out of the box. Also, Fedora makes it easy to set up multiple desktops, reachable by just logging out, picking one, and logging back in.
Why would I pick a derivative distro rather than a foundation distro. Debian is the other one, and I’ll take a look at the next revision.
BTW, I’d never use Arch.
You should try MS Edge. It is also based on Chromium but I like it.
I’ve been using it quite a while now. Just today I accidentally got into Chrome and received a warning about the uBlock extension and wanting to remove it. No such warning in Edge. Use Edge and continue to use uBlock as you always have. Yay!
I know it was based on chromium, but not sure the changes made by microsoft, so gave it a miss
Never used it, what are the advantages ?
Basically I leave firefox on client machines as I have a few who like that. But always install chromium and chrome, 3 browsers is usually more than enough. Only do the 3 in case of an issue with one so they can keep working if i cannot fix quickly.
I agree with that. Firefox and Chromium are good choices. I figure Google can stay afloat without me.
Edge is nothing mind blowing. It works pretty much Chrome and other Chromium based browsers. It seems pretty quick. It supports the same extensions. As I mentioned I recently discovered it still supports uBlock even though Chrome doesn’t. That may stop at some point.
uBlock is quick and light weight. tdoes a good job of blocking ads without blocking things I want to see, for the most part. Nothing is perfect. It uses lists maintained by the community. You can create your own special block. It allows you to click on an area and preview what it would remove. Make it permanent or try again or tweak the filter manually. I like it.
Yes, good idea to have more then one browser.
In the past, I had problems with Firefox on some web pages. Try on Chrome and the page worked fine. It was a problem with entering data on the screen.
