[bt-devel] Some thoughts...

[Samuel Lucas Vaz de Mello]

Hi!

	Why compile it from the sources instead of use a binary package? 

	I agree that compile it from sources is too complicated, but this is not just 
with bibletime, its with all programs. Then, each linux distribution has 
developed some solution for this problem. In my Debian system, for exemple, i 
can simply open a package manager like KPackage or Synaptic, select the 
BibleTime package and click install. It will ask me the root password and 
then do all the instalation for me. I don't know how simple is to install a 
software package in another distro like RedHat, SuSE or Mandrake, but i think 
that it isn't much more complicated than this.
	The usage of a software management system (like deb or rpm) also help to 
avoid conflicts with others softwares. If we bundle sword with bibletime, for 
example, and the user already have another version of sword instaled (by 
GnomeSword, for example) this can cause problems to user.

	Why not have a option to use deb or RPM also for module instalation? Could be 
fine have DEBs or RPMs of the sword modules and manage it by the same way 
that i used to manage software (something like "apt-get install 
sword-module-kjv" sounds great to me ;-) ).

Att,

 - Samuel

Em Qua 04 Fev 2004 10:06, Brad escreveu:
> As a committed Christian, while I am supportive of what you are doing in
> trying to create some Bible software for Linux, I find that the install
> process is "typically Linux" ie there are 101 traps for the unwary,
> there are little quirks that need to be overcome, and documentation is
> cryptic at best for a newbie.
>
> In most Windows installations, the user gets a single executable that
> they double-click on and it does everything necessary to get the
> software working. Sometimes there may be an additional package, but
> mostly it all gets wrapped up in one installer and "just works". So many
> times I have tried to install a Linux package and then had to manually
> edit configuration files, ensure that such and such a utility or library
> is installed, some other setting is set correctly etc etc etc. This is
> very often way beyond the skills of a standard user, and hence Windows
> is the platform of choice for many.
>
> While I do understand some of the complexities of Linux, I do feel that
> many of these mundane tasks like editing config files etc could be
> automated and not require user input to get the system working. For
> example, would it be possible to bundle Sword with Bibletime, so
> everything gets installed together? And for the standard Linux install,
> why:
>
> *./configure --prefix=<your KDE directory>*
> *make*
> *make install*
>
>
> Would it be so difficult to run these in a script and wrap it in a GUI
> icon? One that would prompt you for a root password if required and then
> your desired install directory and let you browse for it? And a pretty
> progress bar? Surely this is pretty basic stuff compared to the
> complexity of Bibletime itself. And would it be so difficult for the
> installer to check to see if all the required libraries or any other
> requirements are present, and then prompt for locations for the missing
> ones? Or better still, have an intelligent installer that had everyting
> required to get it to run and just supplied the components that were
> missing?
>
> As the majority of the world of computer users is familiar with a
> point-and-click GUI, it seems amazing to me that you still insist that
> users go back to an arcane CIF and TYPE COMMANDS IN. This is VERY
> FOREIGN for Windows or new Linux users.
>
> I have been working professionally with computers since 1983 and with
> Linux since 1997, and I have not been able to easily get it to work.
> What chance a Windows-only user who wants to try Linux?
>
> It is exciting that Novell and Sun have seriously entered the desktop
> Linux space, as we may at last see a push (read: competition) for a
> user-friendly experience. Even Red Hat have now agreed to try and
> develop a Linux desktop. It's amazing what a little competition can do! :-)
>
> And I think that I can safely say that very soon installation procedures
> like the one above will have no place in a modern Linux distribution.
>
> Is this food for thought, or do you feel that with Linux we will always
> try and force users to use the CIF and try and find the missing software
> components on the WWW by themselves?
>
> Regards,
> Brad
> _______________________________________________
> bt-devel mailing list
> bt-devel@crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/bt-devel