Linux is for geeks only. Software installation in Linux is difficult. It is not for the faint-hearted. Let’s take, for example, installing a simple game of Hearts.

In Linux, you’ll have to download source code and have to compile it from source, and then you’ll run into dependency hell and have to track down all the individual dependencies yourself.

Here are some screenshots to show you just how difficult it is…

See? That was quite difficult, and I would not recommend that for the average user. People just want to click and go. They don’t want to have to run a lot of obscure commands just to play a game of Hearts.

It’s much easier in Windows. In Windows, all you have to do is search for the software you want, download it, click next-next-next-finish, and you’re done.

Let’s take a look at how much easier it is to install software in Windows…

See how easy that was? These Linux geeks have to stop pretending that Linux is ready for the average user. Windows is ready to go out of the box, and it’s just more user-friendly.

106 Responses to “Software installation in Linux is difficult”

  1. Adam Says:

    My sarcasm-dar just exploded.

  2. Tim Says:

    LOL. but don’t forget you can get a FREE virus/worm along with your randomly selected h4x0red version of hearts on windows

  3. AP Says:

    HA. This is great. When I show people Ubuntu, they can’t quite believe how easy software installation actually is. And like Tim says, I’d be much more likely to trust a version of Hearts from the Ubuntu repositories than a random “100% FREE!!!” .exe file for Windows.

  4. Bill Patient Says:

    But the windows game of hearts has pretty graphics of people. Surely that’s worth at least a 50% increase in the number of clicks to install? Right???

  5. st33med Says:



    On the bright side, Windows already has Hearts installed >.>

  6. Dim Says:

    It doesn’t seem like you’re running an antivirus in the background on your Windows, so a manual virus check of the downloaded file is also necessary.

  7. ubuntucat Says:

    Oh, you’re right. I guess the default Windows has Hearts already. The computer I borrowed for those screenshots didn’t have it installed.

    I did a similar (less sarcastic) post four years ago on installing Blender. I’m pretty sure that isn’t already installed in Windows.

  8. Mike Says:

    Brabo!!! clap, clap… :-)

  9. yaMatt Says:

    Business Lady: “Do I detect a note of sarcasm?”
    :looks at sarcasm detector:
    Dr. Frink: “No kidding, this thing is off the charts!”
    Comic Book Guy: “Oh a sarcasm detector, that’s a real useful invention.”
    :::Sarcasm detector explodes:::

  10. dracie Says:

    lol fail, I got all mad when I start reading. A friend pointed it it is sarcasm and i was very embarassed! I use linux on all my machines currently.

  11. jim Says:

    Yeah, but Ubuntu doesn’t have a fantastic free toolbar with its Hearts. I mean Jesus, Linux. Get with the times.

  12. Sam Says:

    Thanks for the smile! :)

    I’ve discussed all this with friends and family, but I never thought to illustrate it.

  13. dannybuntu Says:

    Hehehe. I must admit though that Removing stuff sometimes is just harder.

    $ sudo apt-get remove foo
    $ sudo apt-get purge foo

    In rare instances I have to do

    $ locate foo

    and manually delete them in different folders

  14. xuCGC002 Says:

    Haha- this made my day.

  15. Scott Says:

    you know you’ve been using Linux long enough when you forget Hearts has come with windows since like ’95 or so, maybe earlier.

  16. Chuck Says:

    Windows is plain ugly all over. Even it’s oh-so-free hearts game.

    Thanks for the laugh. :)

  17. Shane Says:

    I love this article. :D

  18. kyio Says:

    this point goes to linux. yeah baby!

  19. Chris Says:

    What is REALLY difficult for someone new to Linux is to set up a triple or quadruple boot machine. I have been looking, unsuccessfully, for links to a “How to” for installing Open Suse and Mandriva on a machine that is already running Windows and Ubuntu.

    I want to do that because a colleague who shares my machine wants to try Open Suse and Mandriva. I have no objection to these two OS being added to the machine but have no idea as to how to set about it. The links that I have seen are way too complicated for someone with my elementary knowledge. It appears that Suse can be added without any problems but that Mandriva could cause problems because it uses a different boot loaded from Ubuntu and Suse

    I wonder if Psychocat could be persuaded to do a tutorial on this subject (!!)

  20. norberto Says:

    The article is wrong. In GNU/Linux you must remember a security password. That’s the difficult part for M$ Windows users!!!.

  21. Mark Says:


    Virtualbox seems to work seamlessly these days; I’ve got a couple of distros installed from downloaded ISOs, and they work fine on my comparatively elderly machine. Otherwise, I haven’t dual/triple/n-booted for a good while but ISTR most distros will encourage GRUB to make additional entries to the boot menu without too much hassle. Backup and give it a try.

    One consequence of this article is that I’ve spent the last half hour playing Hearts.

  22. Adam Says:

    Aaaaaa the Repos are pure bliss. There’s nothing more satisfying than just being able to type ‘sudo apt-get install some-program’ then sit back for two seconds while it downloads and sets it all up for you. genius… Thinking back to my days using windows, trying to find freeware/shareware apps was such as a mission. And usually ends up with more broken PC’s due to the malware in those shareware windows programs.

    Linux for life Ha, even if it does involve occasionally spending far to long to get something ‘to just work’ it’s definitely the way forward. May the community continue to prosper.

  23. Me Says:

    This is a stupid comparison.
    You can’t compare a build in installer with having to search the internet for software.

    I could also create a one-click installer on windows if I wanted to.

    Why didn’t you try to download the exact same software?

    Try downloading an Exe on windows and an RPM on Ubuntu. Then see who finishes first ;)

  24. Benjie Gillam Says:

    I’ve been meaning to do something like this for ages, but just couldn’t face that specific hell they call Windows. You did a far better job of it than I would have done anyway – great show!

  25. The Open Sourcerer Says:


    You are so nearly right but the 2 commands you chose can be complicated more:

    sudo apt-get purge foo

    (purge = “Remove –purge”)


  26. Zuby (another cat) Says:

    Thank you for this. I haven’t laughed so hard since I successfully tripped one of my pink things (humans) as she was trying to go up the stairs!! :>

  27. Anon Linux Geek Says:

    Come on!

    Software installation is far more easier (and safer) on Linux than Windows. App installation would require you to enter a pwd, whilst Windows you would just click on ¨run¨ and the software install would start itself. With some Shell scripts these installation might undergo without you seeing it!

    With Linux, there are other ways on installing software. By using Synaptic Package manager it is simpler than what you think.

    System -> Administration -> Synaptic Package Manager

    The system would ask for your pwd, and go search for the app you need. Click ¨Mark for installation¨ and click ¨Apply¨ the software would be DLed and installed. You would now find the app under Applications ->

  28. Guimaster Says:

    I prefer to use my mac…

  29. Marco Says:

    just when you dont need to use MAKE/MAKE INSTALL ¬¬

  30. Ted Says:

    Wanna know what’s REALLY sick about this? Most of y’all think this comparison is sarcastic slap at ‘Winders’ and its quaint software management scheme…

    The thing is, it’s not actually sarcastic — it’s a succinct (if a wee bit overdrawn) illustration of how Ubuntu has “done it right” in comparison to a (wee bit beyond typical) experience of the insane miasma that passes for “software management” on Windoze.

    Only, we have become so inured and conditioned by MicroSlop to just “accept” what is an almost openly hostile method of managing basic resources of an “essential home appliance” that it never occurs to us that we’re being made to drive (and hand repair — by ourselves) Model T’s in the 21st century.

    The experience of Home Computing has become the “frog in a pot”, and WE are the frog. MicroSoft has been slowly turning up the heat under us for years, and we haven’t noticed that the water’s boiling… We’ve been brainwashed (or had our arms twisted) into simply accepting this as though it were “just a normal part of having a computer”.

    Take out the Ubuntu part, tone it down a tad, and what’s presented above wouldn’t raise an eyebrow in the long-suffering WinDoh!s crowd. Other than to cause more of the typical, “Oh, no, do I have to go through this AGAIN? Aaaargh!” reaction. That reflexive cramp in the gut that comes with realizing that you’re going to have to “fight the battle with your PC” once again to get it to do something entertaining or useful.

    Time once again to throw the hammer through Big Brother on the Big Screen… Only the hammer is now being wielded by a penguin, not a blonde in a track suit.

    (Helpful insight for those who are still having a hard time telling the difference between Macintosh and Ubuntu: Apple built a well-designed computing system that’s easy to use around a *nix operating system and charges many times what Microsoft charges for Windows.. and makes you buy the hardware from them, too. Canonical built a well-designed computing system that’s easy to use around a *nix operating system and charges.. well, nothing for it. And you can use any computer that’s handy and still draws power.)

  31. Ted Says:

    @Chris, @Mark:

    I started out with the dual-boot “solution” — then tried to evangelize Ubuntu on the strategy that one could always reboot back to Windows as a security blanket. Not only did I find it a pain, but that strategy died on the vine for everyone else, for that reason.

    Here’s what bears a good tutorial, because it WORKS like.. well, like Ubuntu: VMware. I’ve not used VirtualBox, but I can wholeheartedly vouch for VMWare’s (free) product line for running other operating systems within the safe confines of Ubuntu’s OS, including multiple “guest OS’s” simultaneously.

    I recommend VMware Player, which is a free download from for 32- or 64-bit Linux. Here’s what the marketeers at VMware should be telling you, but don’t: The ‘.bundle’ packages are what are needed for Ubuntu; they’re scripts; and you need to set the ‘execution permission’ on them and run them from a terminal window. (Why they don’t get with the program and make a launch-able package, I dunno…) That will bring up a GUI and it’s clear sailing from there.

    You can then make a custom launcher that will start VMware, startup a virtual machine (i.e., boot your OS-within-an-OS), and go full-screen, all from a menu pick. Then put it in its own workspace and you can go ::click:: to jump from one OS to another.

    Rock solid. Free convert-Windows-into-a-virtual machine converter. Copy-and-paste from one OS to another. Intelligent focus capture. Low overhead / high performance. Excellent pass-through control of all kinds of hardware devices. Fully compatible with VNC sessions.

    (I’ve watched videos in MS Media Player on Windows XP inside VMware Player running on Ubuntu, piped over a VNC session that was tunneled through SSH while sitting at another Ubuntu PC 120 miles away. And it was smoooooth… Like, wow.)

    Here’s the best reason why it should have a tutorial (and prominent billing): This has worked WONDERS at getting people to give Ubuntu a solid try. (Once they try it, they like it!)

    For example, my 71-year-old mother wouldn’t do the dual-boot thing, and simply stopped using Ubuntu before she found out much about it. I installed Ubuntu on her machine (side-by-side), “sucked in” her Windows install into a virtual hard drive, installed VMware Player, and set it up so that one menu pick would launch her (same, familiar) Windows machine. Looked & acted just as before, only now she could ::click:: between Ubuntu and Windows.

    That did it! More and more experimentation with Ubuntu, less and less running back to the familiar “devil you do know” of Windows, and within 3 weeks she was preferring Ubuntu for most things. A couple of months ago she told me she no longer uses Windows for anything.

    Wanna change the world from Windows to Ubuntu? I think this strategy can do it.

    So if Ubuntucat wants to do a tutorial on this, I’m willing to pitch in… :^)

  32. Federico Says:

    Ok, now let’s try this one: try to install the latest version of firefox (just to say a random software) on some-month-old-linux-distro and windows XP.

    Then make some laugh at that.

    Linux is nice if you keep updating the distro. If you just like the one you have, it’s completely impossibile (for non-geek people) to install anything recent.

    Or to put in a different way, if you want the lastest Gaim version you are forced to update all your os and software.

    That’s completely unfeasible for the vast majority of computer users, and that’s the most important reason why I can’t suggest linux to “normal” people.

  33. allano Says:

    hi guys,
    this post is very expositive >)

    i think i’ll do an italian same post for my friend who don’t undestard english :D

    if it’s ok with the author, off course

  34. ubuntucat Says:

    Federico, if you can give me some evidence that the vast majority of computer users cannot wait six months for the next version of Firefox (provided security updates are still patched within a few days), I’d love to see it.

    In my experience, every “normal” user I’ve encountered (I consider “normal” users those who tend to ask for computer help more than give it and “power” users those who tend to give computer help more than ask for it) never updates software. I’ve seen people running Firefox 1.5 or I’ve seen people still using Windows 98.

    In fact, I see a hell of a lot of Windows users not even installing Windows updates when prompted! Why do you think Conficker was able to infect millions of computers? Microsoft had released a patch for it a month prior to the most recent outbreak.

    As far as I’ve seen, only power users jump at the chance to install updated versions of software the day it comes out.

    These W3C browser stats back me up on this. Firefox 3 came out in June 2008. During July, only 48% of Firefox users were using Firefox 3, 49% were still using Firefox 2, and almost 2% were still using Firefox 1.5. It took about four or five months for the Firefox 2 use to trickle down to single digit percentages.

  35. Martin Says:

    It’s when what ever you are looking for isn’t located in the package manager it gets annoying.

    In my case:
    Installing the Creative X-Fi extreme gamer drivers and get them to work with ALSA or the latest OSS.
    Installing my ATI 2900HD graphics card with good performance in both games and cool compiz / beryl UI.
    And some software not packaged for Ubuntu.

    If it had not been for this I would have run Ubuntu instead of Windows 7 RC1.

  36. daniele Says:

    @federico: uh? you evidently never used a DEB based software distribution system right?

    the apt-get command, Synaptic (an idiot-proof GUI for apt-get) , the builtin Ubuntu Add/Remove software (a super-idiot proof GUI for apt-get), all of them are able to update all, I repeat, __ALL__ of the software (or even the distribution) required in order to install the newest firefox (or anything else).

    with 2 clicks.

    apt-get never broke on my ubuntu box.

    go try it.

    then speak.

  37. Kevin Says:

    And what about programs that don’t have a distribution?

    I should never, EVER have to use a command line to install software. I should never, EVER have to edit a config file.

  38. Felis silvestris Says:


    I should never, EVER, have to tweak a registry key. On Linux I don’t have to.

  39. Ted Says:

    @Kevin: I agree with you… Only it’s the ‘fault’ of the distributor of software packages that force users into using command lines or hand-edit config files. (Case in point: VMware for Ubuntu, as noted earlier.)

    Shame on these distributors, but that in NO WAY maligns Ubuntu/Linux! Ubuntu happily allows all your software to be installed with (more than one) GUI installers.

    Suppose you have a fancy new plays-it-all DVD player and you go out and buy a VCR tape to watch — should you be criticizing the maker of the DVD player for your predicament? But you are…

    Perhaps your movie is only available on tape NOW, but that could change, you know. In fact, that’s exactly what DID happen in the movie industry — they took old films that went to VCR and started putting them on DVD when it became obvious that DVDs were going to become “the going thing”. What happens as Ubuntu gains mare & more attention in the industry (as Microsoft pushes more & more of the market in its direction)?

    So go lobby the software distributors to:
    1.) Make their software available for Linux.
    2.) Package their software to be immediately installable via the available Linux GUI tools.

    Finally, here’s why you should be praising Linux instead of complaining: At least there are things you can do to get your program installed; you can even install & run it if it’s Windows software (in many cases: WINE).

    If the same were to happen to you in Windoze, you may end up kicking the ox-goad… (Gonna write your own OS patch for Vista? ::shudder::)

  40. Simon Says:

    He missed the bit about “You need to be Administrator” to install this software, these “amateurs” who runs with privileged accounts in Windows all the time.

    Now Windows XP is like 8 years old — he should so a fair comparison and use Vista — I’m assuming he isn’t by the lack of aero. When he’ll no doubt have an extra privilege dialog or two, and the option to have Hearts crash if he picks a version written for earlier versions of windows which are less picky about apps spewing all over the disk.

  41. Aldo "xoen" Giambelluca Says:

    You rock :)!

    Of course GNU/Linux usability is nothing in front of windows usability, microsoft invested many hours/money in R&D and the results are great and thanks to this billions avarege users can now install software, virus, spywares, keyloggers, dialers with just few clicks :D.

  42. Goobi Says:

    Problem with this Linux crap is that Hearts (and friends) is all you’re going to install. For real work, you need a proper OS (in my case Mac OS X, and in case of those who like to suffer, Windows).

  43. Ted Says:


    I believe your argument is not one of choice of operating system… I think you’re arguing against Linux on the basis of available “useful” applications.

    This conclusion follows, in part, because both Mac and Linux are “proper” operating systems — they’re both Unix derivatives with a desktop-model GUI interface. Really not that different.. Open an ‘Xterm’ window on your Mac, and you’ll be able to type in many of the same commands I can run in a terminal window on my Ubuntu machine.

    (Windows fans can proffer their NT-based OSes, and they’ll have some good points, but the execution of these, and their poisoning by the “traditions” of that glorified monitor program, DOS/Win3x/Win9x, can’t surmount the sad fact that Windows is a shockingly sorry [hostile] product backed by masterful marketing prowess — and threats.)

    The most visible, and significant differences for the end user / prospective buyer between Mac and Linux boil down to: Cost of the OS, and re-use of existing WinTel platforms / cost of obtaining new (compatible) hardware. We don’t want to go there, do we? Yeah… Mac will end up looking like Mr PC in those commercials, won’t it? (Ouch!)

    So you’re really lambasting Linux for lack of applications, as compared to Mac…

    Last time I looked, there were on the order of 23,000 software packages available for Debian Linux-based systems — of which Ubuntu is the obvious leading candidate to replace Windows as the operating system for “Mom & Pop Desktop PCs” world-wide. [Caveat: I don't think all 23,000 are end-use applications; some are support libraries.]

    I don’t know how many are available for Mac.. (I leave it to you to fill us in on that.)

    I have the opposite perception that you have, one of “There are so many applications available for Linux, how can I efficiently learn what’s out there / search for what I might want to use?” It’s a cornucopia, growing monthly.

    I’ll toss you one sop on this issue, familiar to VERY many Linux users:


    There. [Adobe: Get with the future, dudes!]

    Further, my Ubuntu system runs Windows applications: Some natively (via WINE), others in a Virtual (aka “throwaway”) Machine hosting a pared-to-the-bone Windows OS (as we’re not the type who “like to suffer”).

    Yes, your Mac can run Parallels to do the same thing.. For $80 (vs $0). How about sans virtualization software? I’m not sure if Mac supports WINE; certainly won’t on non-Intel Macs, we do know that… (Man, why does doing something on a Mac always seem to bring us back to having to buy more EXPENSIVE hardware?? Oy!)

    Ah, then there’s the “real work” point you make. Well, at my “real work”, I have a Mac, a few WinXP boxes, and quite a number of Linux machines. We develop custom software the runs on our Linux machines, and I do nearly all of my other “real work” on my Linux box, too — even though I have a Mac in my office. Gathering dust most of the time.

    It’s just that I have yet to find anything I need to do that *requires* a Mac, and 100% of anything that I need to run to get “real work” done that can’t be done in Linux forces me to Windows — against my will.

    Otherwise, I like the “look and feel” of Linux; Mac just seems… a wee bit ‘out of phase’ when I use it. (Hate the damn keyboard, too, BTW.)

    How about “not real work”? Of course we mean games. We’re pretty much *both* out of luck, aren’t we? “All the good games are on Windows.” Well so it seems… But what doesn’t run in my virtual machine, I can reboot to native Windows, enjoy full 3D graphics card support, etc, and do all the hard-core gaming I wish. Can Mac do that?

    Oh, and much as I’ve come to respect and enjoy Ubuntu… Macs aren’t crap. (Go Steve, go Apple! Take market share away from Ballmer’s Boys!) Yet a dollar is a dollar… So please, take care to heap your derision only on products that actually *deserve* it. :^)

  44. AAA Says:

    Non ha senso un paragone cosi, sono a favore di linux, (uso Debian da anni) ma vantiamocene per altri vantaggi… questo dell’installazione dei programmi è proprio una buffonata!
    Quando qualcuno si trova in difficoltà per installare il software è dovuto alla compilazione dei sorgenti.
    make install

  45. Ted Says:

    Well, when you *do* need to compile something for Linux, it’s a LOT easier (and you don’t have to purchase anything) compared to compiling something for Windows.

    I think I’ve had to compile something for Ubuntu.. twice.

    One of those was compiling & installing kernel modules (!) and that *failed*. With a little effort, I found the source of the problem, rebuilt a zipped install package, and re-ran the build script — and it worked.

    It wasn’t traumatic, it was just annoying.

    But think about it: You can DO this in Linux. You can make stuff work. Heck, you can even modify and recompile parts of the OS to suit your software or some oddball need… (And if you don’t have the expertise, you can *find* it.)

    You are NOT going to be able to do that on Mac or Windows machine — you don’t have any source code to fix in those cases. If it doesn’t work properly in Windows, you’re STUCK, expert or not. (Have fun with tech support!)

  46. grog Says:

    uhm lol? you just tried to install something that already was included in windows, surfing randomly on the net, good move.
    let’s say.. I need autocad or photoshop, wait.. there’s no repository containing it! oh crap, let’s hope no one asks us to show how simply is to install it now.

    This article summarizes the everyday bullshit about the os war, instead of making people reflect on what you wanted to point out (which is absolutely right), you just appear as many others troll in the web.
    You could have chosen a better example like installing openoffice which is a more useful software than hearts and comes from a virus free site and is packed in various formats including .deb and .exe and you’d have certainly made your point anyway, just in a more professional way.


  47. david_e Says:

    You made my day!

  48. Ted Says:


    There IS a “simple” way to install both AutoCAD and Photoshop on your Ubuntu system:

    * Download & install VMware (or any other suitable virtualization tool).

    * Create a virtual machine (web tools exist to do this for free).

    * Install Windows in the VM (best done w/ no Internet access!).

    * Install AutoCAD and Photoshop in Windows.

    Then do all your work in Ubuntu, and click over to your Windows VM when you need to run AutoCAD and/or Photoshop (et al).

    Cost to you: Same as if you were running only Windows.

    Benefits: Robust, secure, reliable, malware-resistant computing, and no need to expose Windows to the Internet.

    Plus, ease in backing up & rebuilding your Windows system (when it gets borked up) — you only need delete & copy back a directory in the Ubuntu file system to save you 2 hours, 3 days, and 47 beers worth of pain and hassle rebuilding a Windows system from scratch.

  49. Francesco Laruina Says:

    Great! You’re right: winzozz relly works out-of-the-box!
    With Ubuntu, it’s not easy to get viruses (what a stupid OS)

  50. giambrox Says:

    LOL you’re a genius :-D

  51. grog Says:

    Ted, your method is obviously the most efficient one to get those sw run on Ubuntu too by now, but do not forget that:
    1- you need to have a, preferably virus-free, copy of windows. Hence I’m not saying it must be original.
    2- you do need to install both the vm sw and the windows os before you could install, not run, the sw you want to use.
    Merely based on the message this article wanted to spread, if I got it rigth, it would be easier and faster to install sw on windows then.

    Do not lose focus on my point, all I wanted to highlight was: the article is surely good, but bad-written. It’s undoubtely easy to install sw on Ubuntu (but even on other distros), but using a better example to get people reflect on this, like as I said installing openoffice, would have been better.

    When someone wants to deliver a message about Linux in general, it shouldn’t be centered on “Look how doing this is better and cooler than on your crappy $os” but “Look that achieveing this goal is just as simple if not simplier”

    Hope I made me clear. :)


    And ps: I appreciate the professionality of your comment, other people would have just gone for the “stfu, fanboy” reply.

  52. Ted Says:


    Yes, you came through nice & clear, point taken, and I appreciate your explanation. And thanks for the comment, too. I’m generally against flaming other posters, though it’s obvious I’m not above taking shots at poor engineering. Regardless of which side is taken, I think the valid points in most posters’ comments merit a measured response — if not for the writers, then for other readers who are looking for information and insights. (Of course, an argument should be a valid argument; an ‘ad hominem’ attack doesn’t qualify as a reason for or against anything.)

    I also think the current state of “computing” is so pathetic, it’s worth making the effort to shine some light in the direction of “things that work as they should”. I see little use in trying to persuade the fanboys with mere words. When things become a religious issue, pushing only meets resistance. Nor would I want to risk turning off people who might consider a change. I’d rather offer reasons, and do so respectfully so that they’ll be considered. Or, better yet, put to the test.

    It would be nice to see Windows fanboys re-focus their passion and loyalty, and do so for good reasons — reasons they arrive at internally. I think their loyalty is misplaced when there are alternatives that offer fewer headaches, greater productivity, and more enjoyment — without the need to lose the use of treasured applications, something I see as one of the key issues that can make or break an OS switch. In other words, I don’t see Ubuntu as being any sort of threat to their Windows investments, hence no reason to attack Linux.

    Sure, this thread is sarcasm, with the most likely audience being those who already have switched from being regular Windows users to Ubuntu users. We can have a good laugh at what we’ve escaped from having to deal with. But I doubt it was intended to convince those on the fence; it’s more like an inside joke. I agree with you that if that were the point, a better demonstration could easily be made. And should be done coupled with comparisons involving other important aspects of an OS, not just app installation.

    Still, it’s hard not to take shots at Windows, for at least two reasons: It’s got the majority of mankind enthralled with its fatally-flawed design and irresponsibly insecure execution, and there are other examples out there that prove to the world that it is NOT inherently impossible to “do it right” when it comes to making a modern computer operating system. The latter insults me as a professional in that industry, while the former insults me as a human being and a user.

    I support Ubuntu because Canonical and the developers out there are “doing it right” and are dedicated to continuous improvement. Ubuntu is oriented towards making computing a fun, productive experience, not a stressful, time-consuming battle to get something done. It deserves attention. And with that it can sell itself. IF it’s presented in certain ways…

    So, to me, that’s the bigger goal: finding an effective means of making people aware of what/why “things Ubuntu”, while enabling them to take a “long-term test drive”. And, to my mind, that *requires* being able to retain, maintain, and continue using one’s investment in Windows, side-by-side. It wouldn’t be enough for every Windows application to be perfectly ported to Linux; no one but the most adventuresome will just up & jump into a new OS, even if they can bring over all their document files & use the same apps. It’s just not..natural to do that. There needs to be a graduated transition.

    I see VMware (or equivalent virtualization apps) as a means to satisfy BOTH needs, and do it fairly elegantly and robustly. It’s a very workable way to run essential or valued applications that aren’t yet ported to Linux (NO compatibility issues). And many Windows users will understandably be reluctant to consider anything else if they would have to give up their favorite Win-only applications. Since dual-booting doesn’t work to get someone interested in test-driving (it’s too much of a hassle & interruption) and very few will get a second PC to run side-by-side, virtualization is KEY for Ubuntu to gain traction in the marketplace because it neatly allows running both OS’s simultaneously.

    So, given the value/interest in running Ubuntu, and the need for certain Windows applications, we should be playing up the fact that there’s a solution that lets us have both –at the same time– rather than having to choose one or the other. If you don’t have to choose, you don’t have to make a religious issue out of anything. Have the best of both, as you define it.

    To answer your points: Installation of Ubuntu and VMware is an hour or so investment each, slightly longer if you want a Linux platform with Windows in the Virtual Machine. Another option is to install Ubuntu in a VM hosted in one’s existing Windows — but there are distinct advantages to doing it the other way around, even if you plan to run Windows for nearly everything. Obviously, people will get nervous over the “will it work?” thing… But it doesn’t just *work*, it works cleanly and reliably. (I LIKE that!)

    Another issue is the “Will I have to re-install Windows? Ugh!” thing. There’s a tool in VMware that can convert an existing Windows installation into an equivalent VM in situ; with Ubuntu installed for dual-booting, you’re there in one afternoon — with your existing Windows untouched. Or if you put Ubuntu in a VM in Windows, you’re talking maybe half an hour instead. That’s all rather reasonable, I think.

    If you’re happy with your current Windows install, there’s no issue. If not, you have a Windows CD, and that’s malware-free. Most people who “test drive” and eventually convert to Ubuntu/Linux will start from a history of using Windows on an Intel-based PC. And if they’re anywhere near typical, their system has “problems” (malware, configuration, disorganized file system, etc.) So going the “next step” of rebuilding their PC with native Ubuntu provides the perfect excuse to go ahead and do the “yearly Windows rebuild” they probably need to do anyway, but have been putting off. So rebuild Windows from scratch, but do it this time in a virtual machine running in Ubuntu.

    Since all virtual machines are a directory tree of files, that could be the last time you’d ever have to re-install Windows — even if you do pick up a virus now & then. Simply delete the VM and copy over your backup, and you’ve rebuild Windows, customized it with your favorite apps, and gotten it set up the way you like it in all of 15 minutes, not 15 *hours*.

    Now THAT’s the way to install, isn’t it? :^)

  53. nolihc Says:

    i do think ubuntu needs a marketplace/appstore instead of ad remove software. Or some advertising: “Yes, we also have an appstore”. Windows bashing is lame…

  54. grog Says:


    I do agree, in fact by now, and I imagine for a long time on, the best solution to keep high productivity and decrease costs is virtualization, on any os, for the reasons you wrote and to which I do not think I could add anything else.

    And yes, maybe I read at the article not in the funny way :)

  55. Ted Says:


    Yup, we might soon go from hearing “What operating system do you use?” to “What OS’s are you using these days?”

    Wait… I can see it coming…

    The fanboy fights are going to turn into “Your virtualization app sucks!! Mine’s better!!” :^D

  56. Madhav Says:

    hi, i need to know how to voice chat using yahoo. i have searched a lot and never found any info about installing yahoo..

  57. Jason Says:

    Now do “Change your screen resolution”:
    (this is from the last time I tried Linux
    1. Right-click on desktop, choose Properties.
    2. Go to settings tab.
    3. Move slider.
    4. Click OK
    5. You’re done!
    1. Look in the manual. Surprise, there isn’t one.
    2. Look through all the menus you can find. Nope, nothing there either.
    3. Ask online. Response: “RTFM, newbie!!!”
    4. Attempt to RTFM. Read 20 man pages that were written with Comp Sci majors in mind. Try changing something, find that it doesn’t hold after the reboot.
    5. Ask your brother, who advises you to read “The Joy of X”. Find that document online and attempt to make sense of it. Puzzle over instructions that include the line “Next, recompile your kernel.”
    6. Make another change to a file that is just rows of numbers.
    7. Now the screen doesn’t come up at all!
    8. Wipe the hard drive.
    9. Install Windows.
    10. Right-click on desktop, choose Properties.
    11. Go to settings tab.
    12. Move slider.
    13. Click OK
    14. You’re done!

  58. ubuntucat Says:

    this is from the last time I tried Linux

    So 2003, I take it.

  59. madamos Says:

    I use linux every day and I love the installer that debian based distros have. I didn’t even mind using Gentoo’s system.

    However, (and I may have missed this) but to install hearts in windows (if its not there) is about the same. Control panel, add remove programs, add windows component, games, hearts. Tadaaa!

    For many applications its not that easy, sure there’s a lot of stuff in the repositories. Doesn’t make it easier or harder.

    Windows has the edge in hardware support because that’s where the vendors put the driver development.

    Both Windows and Linxus based os’s have their place and people should use what makes them happiest on a day to day basis. For me right now its XP on my desktop, Windows 7 on my netbook and Unbuntu on my server.

  60. Adam Says:

    Change screen resolution? That’s funny, on Ubuntu it is right there System>Preferences>Display

  61. T Man Says:

    Ha, ha, very funny. Of course, if you actually were to download a legitimate application, half of the steps you described would have been removed. But then, it wouldn’t have been much of a story, now would it have been?

  62. Nigel D Says:

    @Jason I don’t know how long ago you used Linux, but on my machine the following is the menu sequence for changing the screen resolution.

    Go to menu and then > System > Preferences > Screen Resolution

    Change resolution and click OK > Thats it!

  63. Jason Says:

    @Nigel- that’s good to know. The next time I’m in the mood for adventure I’ll try another whack at it. Though as demonstrated, M$ made it easier to play Hearts, and it hasn’t quite sent a lot of Linux folks back to Windows.

  64. Jason Says:

    PS I would note that the issue was that on my hardware (a Dell 17″ monitor) the Mandrake installer determined that it could run in two modes, 640×480, or some ridiculous resolution that was not in that monitor’s wildest dreams. So it may have been that Mandrake didn’t let me use a slider bar because there were only two settings as far as it was concerned. What I wanted to do was reinstall it as a “default SVGA monitor” that would hopefully have 800×600 or 1024×768. I apologize if this caused any confusion.

  65. Ted Says:


    It may also matter what video card you have. Nvidia seems to be much more Linux-friendly than ATI products. (Many have posted that the ATI drivers don’t perform as well and have more issues.) Other vendors’ boards may or may not be as well-supported as these two. Also, you monitor would need to support the EIDE standards to have the OS read & automatically configure to its supported resolutions.

    The good news is that the display model in Linux is very powerful and flexible. Your video configuration can be hand-edited to explicitly state what your card and/or monitor can display, even if they can’t be automatically detected (properly). I use Nvidia boards in all my systems; there’s a very nice GUI you can install from the Ubuntu repositories that will do all the configuration, set up for multiple monitors, etc. with just a few mouse clicks.

    I have no experience with Mandrake, but the consensus seems to be that Ubuntu Linux is more user-friendly than other distros, needing less hand-configuration and use of the command line, while and providing more GUI tools to do things.

    Download an Ubuntu LiveCD and give it a spin — you’ll be pleasantly surprised to see how far Linux has advanced in the last few years…

  66. Yfrwlf Says:

    Funny, a good post, totally agree, however making an “easy program installation launcher”-type deal of course can be done in Windows. Steam for example makes it quite easy to install games in Windows, and if Steam were ported to Linux of course it’d be easy there too.

    However, while your point is good, you have missed the point many users have about trouble with Linux, which IS something that all Linux users, which includes myself, should be concerned about. It’s the problem with installing *software outside the repository*.

    Essentially, Windows doesn’t come with a “repository system” like Steam by default, while Linux does. But what happens when you try to find software outside of those walled gardens on the net? Since Windows unfortunately has a bigger presence, there is quite a bit of software for it, but the amount for Windows, and the amount that is easy to obtain and use since it’s open source, is fairly big too. However, the snag right now is that most of it isn’t offered in easy-to-install binary packages like Windows has. The binary installers are out there, there are several of them, but they don’t get the kind of use they should. Often what this means is that users are stuck with the software their Linux repositories provide, and are not free to easily try brand new versions of their favorite apps, or apps which aren’t their repository for whatever reason. I can’t tell you all the times I’ve encountered only having a source package as my only download option.

    This causes Linux users to feel left in the cold, because freedom should also include the freedom to *easily install and use programs*, and unfortunately right now with Linux vs. Windows on the internet, outside walled gardens (repositories), that’s the way things are. I hope this changes quickly, as I want to see Linux do better on the desktop, and do better with program sharing, installing, and using. That’s what most users care about, *using* their programs ASAP.

  67. Eric the Linux cat Says:

    I’ve always been suspicious of Windows software that shouts that it’s “100% free!” since, back in the days when I used Windows (Win ME, I think), I downloaded a small “free” utility that infected my PC with adware and spyware crap. Search engines and download sites are not necessarily your friends.

    Got Linux’ed after that and never looked back.

    It’s funny how Windows people fight to the end to defend their OS, in an argument – for example about software installation – that they are so obviously going to lose.

  68. Josh Reiter Says:

    Heh, Now show me the screenshot comparisons for installing a wireless driver on a Dell Latitude D600 under Ubuntu vs. WinXP.

  69. Woohoo Winders! Says:

    What about the steps necessary to get Firefox installed? Let’s not short-change the Windows eXPerience!

  70. ubuntucat Says:

    Now show me the screenshot comparisons for installing a wireless driver on a Dell Latitude D600 under Ubuntu vs. WinXP.

    I don’t have a Dell Latitude D600. It appears to use a Broadcom wireless card. Broadcom is notoriously Linux-unfriendly.

    Still, I have a Broadcom wireless card in my HP Mini, and to get it working in Ubuntu 9.04 I had to do nothing. Ubuntu immediately knew to install the proprietary driver for Broadcom, and it worked out of the box. Try that in Windows. If there’s one thing I don’t miss from Windows, it’s installing driver after driver.

  71. Ted Says:

    If there’s one thing I don’t miss from Windows it’s SEARCHING and SEARCHING for driver after driver… All those products and websites and model numbers and versions and patches and … conflicts.

    Oh, and let’s not forget finding, upgrading, and installing those few other “minor things” THAT ARE MISSING from Windows…

    Such as: A web browser, a PDF viewer, CD/DVD burning software, a webcam app, a decent calculator, file compression/encryption software, bit-torrent app, SS/WP/PPT (Office) tools, file transfer software, image manipulation software, …

    You know — All those things that make a computer, like, usable. The I-don’t-want-to-think-about-it-I-just-want-to-use-it stuff. The things that Ubuntu also installs automatically as part of its half-hour build from scratch…

  72. nevyn Says:

    Shouldn’t you have used IE rather than firefox? Loads of those screen shots have an open source piece of software to blame! *snigger*

  73. revati Says:

    hey..i was suppose to install ubuntu..what should i do??..m pretty confused..!

  74. Adam Hunt Says:

    It seems that at least one writer thinks we have a problem with installing software on Linux, Free Software Magazine’s Tony Mobily: “2009: software installation in GNU/Linux is still broken — and a path to fixing it”

    Personally I don’t agree with him, but it is an interesting argument

  75. heinrich5991 Says:

    good, *clap* *clap*

  76. Fernando Kosh Says:

    Hello revati and all good people,

    Here 2 howtos about installing Ubuntu 9.04, step-by-step installation guide with screenshots:

    Very nice!

  77. Anon2 Says:

    I agree that it’s funny, but it’s grossly inaccurate. Windows comes with Hearts installed by default on consumer installs, although whomever installed the OS may have explicitly skipped it. It’s more properly installed through Add/Remove Windows components (named/located diferently depending on the version).

    You’ve compared installing from a community repository to installing 3rd party software. Installing software that’s not in the Ubuntu repos is almost as complicated, but the level of understanding required is far higher. Obviously unequal scenarios do no one any good. Leave the FUD to Microsoft, sir, and be honest and complete in your comparisons. I’ll have none of it.

  78. ubuntucat Says:

    I think it’s been well established that Hearts was a bad example. Sorry for not knowing it comes with Windows (it wasn’t on the computer I used to do the screenshots).

    Nevertheless, the principle still holds.

    The most common practice for installing software in Windows is to search the web for random .exe files to download.

    And the most common practice for installing software in Linux is to use centralized software repositories.

    Those are the typical scenarios, and in the typical scenario, it’s far simpler (and safer) to install software in Linux than in Windows.

    In the atypical scenario, obviously it’s more difficult to install software in Linux, but a lot of pro-Microsoft anti-Linux FUD makes it sound as if compiling from source is the typical scenario for installing software in Linux, and it is not.

  79. Andrew Says:

    @ubuntucat: Depends. A D600 with a “Centrino” sticker on it comes with an Intel wireless card that works great out of the box due to the Intel-led open-source driver project. A D600 with only a “Pentium M” sticker on it has a Broadcom (branded as Dell TrueMobile) card that will make your life hell. :)

  80. Duncan Says:

    I think this is a little unfair. You’re comparing the best case scenario in Linux with the worst case scenario in Windows. While I agree that for anything in the repositories, Linux and especially Ubuntu is easier than anything Windows has, installing from a .deb package is about the same. The windows example you give *pales* in comparison to the misery and grief of trying to compile from source or install via .rpm without proper dependencies.

  81. Ted Says:

    If anything about it is unfair, it’s that the “common” Windows scenario is ‘go to the store or go on-line, search for the best price for the software you need, PAY for it, wait a week (if you save a few $ buying online), then deal with installation issues and having to upgrade drivers, hardware, or your OS to run it…’ (And worse if you need to uninstall it completely.)

    For Linux, it’s ‘go to the repository, search for the best option of what you need, download/install it, and RUN it’ — a few minutes later.

    It’s MUCH less usual to have to search the internet for Linux software — unless you need something that’s esoteric. But if that’s the case, it’s also likely that you’re a technical person and “already know what you need to do”.

    I’ve used Ubuntu since 6.10 (and RedHat before that), and the only software I’ve ever used regularly that’s not in the repositories are VMware (has a GUI installer), Skype (it’s a ‘.deb’ package & installs with a click) and a VERY cool HP-15C calculator simulator which requires a manual install (the tricky part being a TT font install).

  82. Dark-Mind Says:


    I was always wondering why every windows version comes with hearts…

    I think I know why now :P

  83. Domingo Says:



    try to install photoshop, autocad or some game like Crysis

  84. ubuntucat Says:

    “try to install photoshop, autocad or some game like Crysis”

    I’ll do that after you try to install GarageBand on Windows or try to install OneNote on Mac OS X.

  85. Bruno Scopel Says:


  86. Ivonne Says:

    What “me” says is true. You can’t do that comparison. It’s not fair.

  87. Abhishek Dev Says:

    Ever tried a Mac? Software installation is as simple as a drag-n-drop and so is the uninstall procedure.

    What happens to Ubuntu (Linux) users in countries with NO Internet Access or with snail slow Internet Connections!

    And then again when you format your system (every software has to be downloaded again).

    Dont want to be so web-centric.

  88. Ted Says:

    Ubuntu installs most of the apps that most users need ‘out of the box’. No pressing need for the web. Canonical will even mail you an install CD for free if you have no net connection. I doubt either Apple or MS will be that generous…

    What Ubuntu users do when they ‘format their system’ is to re-install anything they’ve added/updated using a CD or DVD that contains their additions. They can quickly & easily create such a backup disk using a nifty utility called ‘aptOnCD’. No need for the web to restore either.

    And yes, I’ve tried a Mac; had one on my desk at work. I replaced it with a Win-Tel laptop…and installed Ubuntu on it. :^)

  89. Aussiedude Says:

    I’m sorry? Is this one of these examples of how easy it is to install software on Ubuntu? Just tried again recently to install Linux since it’s supposively so much more user friendly now. I’ll let you know when I eventually get through compiling all the software I need to get windows drivers to work so I can connect to the internet.

    (Don’t get me wrong, I hate Windows, and I love Linux, but there is weight to the claims that Linux isn’t user friendly.)

  90. ubuntucat Says:

    Is this one of these examples of how easy it is to install software on Ubuntu?

    It’s not an example.

    All the assertions about Linux software being difficult to install involve obscure atypical examples. ndiswrapper is a last-resort workaround. I’ve never had to use it (and that’s on five different computers), and a lot of other people haven’t had to either.

    Even though Hearts was a terrible example because apparently it comes with Windows, the typical example for Windows is still the same procedure: search the web, hope the download isn’t dodgy, click a whole bunch of times, maybe reboot.

    I’m comparing typical to typical. You want to compare typical to obscure. If you’re having trouble with wireless, get a different wireless card (I’d recommend Intel) and sell your old one. Though, I’m using a Broadcom wireless card (notoriously Linux-unfriendly), and all I had to do was go to System > Administration > Hardware Drivers and click Activate to install the drivers needed. I’ve certainly had much more difficulty over the years finding Windows drivers than finding Linux ones. To each her own. If you like Windows and it works for you, you don’t have to use Linux. Just don’t pretend Linux is difficult for everyone or even most people. I used DOS and then Windows for decades before Linux, so I feel I’m in a good position to critique Windows. I’ve used Linux for only four and a half years. I’m no Linux expert.

  91. Aeschylus Says:

    I think a better example would be perhaps opening an .iso. In Linux, this is a right-click menu thing (under “extract”). On my Debian box it’s as simple as double-clicking on it. Boom, there it is. On the command line, it’s equally easy –

    sudo mount -o loop example.iso /mnt/example

    What about copying a cd to an .iso and verifying it?

    dd if=/dev/cdrom of=myCD.iso && isovfy myCD.iso

    On Windows? Windows doesn’t even have the ability to mount any file in a looping fashion. So, you have to browse on the internet a good while. Now, you have a few choices, one of the most popular being Daemon Tools (Another being Alcohol 120). Daemon Tools limits you to how many isos you can have open at any one time, as does Alcohol. Not only that, but Alcohol comes with a adware toolbar, and they both have to seat themselves deep inside your system to actually function.

    Even worse, to copy certain CD’s on Windows, you must use Alcohol 120 and Daemon tools to rootkit your system. Yes, you just had to rootkit your system to copy a CD.

    sudo mount -o loop example.iso /mnt/example
    is looking a little better now, isn’t it?

  92. wolfmongoose Says:

    I was waiting for the BSoD in the second one lol!

  93. Goober Says:

    Only a Linux geek (neck-beard unix asshole?) would go to that much trouble to download a game that is installed on Windows by default.

    The first 18 steps, BTW, haven nothing whatsoever to do with installing programs on Windows. OK, Mozilla sucks, and the internet is broken sometime, but that’s not an installation problem.

  94. Moi Says:


    Yeah right, in Microsof Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, Safari or whatever it would be easier?

    It’s still the same internet so your whole argument is invalid..

  95. Ohshi Says:

    Oh, two-click Ubuntu’s GUI is difficult for you?
    Try Gentoo.
    And also: there are a lot more steps in your windows example :D

  96. Ohshi Says:

    And yeah, you are not compiling from source here, its fukken binary packages. Try Gentoo.

  97. Evidex Says:

    Oh that was brilliant :)

    Cheers for the laugh :)

  98. Emanuel Says:

    LOL ahahah
    It’s a funny truth, but it’s not totally truth, because for beginners it’s not that easy to understand terminal and that codes and some people give up Linux for that reason. Would be better if the installation of .tar programs was like next-next-next…

  99. Ola Says:

    Hehe, first i thought you were kinda stupid. Then realized that the post was not only funny, but also sadly true. Maby in 10-15 years, the windows users will be convinced..

  100. Diseño Web Says:

    I think this is a little unfair. You’re comparing the best case scenario in Linux with the worst case scenario in Windows. While I agree that for anything in the repositories, Linux and especially Ubuntu is easier than anything Windows has, installing from a .deb package is about the same. The windows example you give *pales* in comparison to the misery and grief of trying to compile from source or install via .rpm without proper dependencies.

  101. opsc05 Says:

    I see much debate on which OS is better. I want to share my experience using ubuntu. I made the live cd easily. I installed ubuntu using the cds gui. The software gave my tv an invalid format error. I unistall and install a few times until I get the drivers right. I am using the OS daily for about two weeks. Thus far I cannot find my disk or usb drives. When I want to open a file, the OS tells me I do not have permission. I’m the only user. Running a file I either get no response, need permission, and/or not executable. Packages are never found after following Ubuntu’s help pages. I HATE typing gibberish to get the files I want. Nothing works with Linux-school, work, or games. I get errors that make absolutely no sense. How the am I suppose to know where these packages live? I’m not a repository index. Programs take so long to open I wonder if I clicked “open”. Firefox, home folder, software center, and others are at about 15-20 seconds on average just to highlight that icon, then five more seconds to open. The system isn’t feasible if you want to get anything accomplished quickly. Just to load a movie player it was passwords 2x’s, lines of command, questions to continue, accept, then find where the program went, then another password entry, finally after the popcorn had been eaten and a party of bored kids the player had an error, force quit, on to connecting another PC to run WMP for them. Click play on file in windows voila the movie played. I know this OS is probably awesome for people whom like to tinker. I don’t want to program anything. I just want to click, click, boom, done. GUI 100% is my dream. I don’t want to go back to oregon trail days looking at a terminal on dos/grub. Windows and MAC does not give me problems. I may not be on the top of the security list, but I don’t keep info I’d hate to share on the pc. I can’t tell you the last time I ran command on Mac or Windows. Linux every other minute,nothing but a hassle. Now that I have uninstalled linux my pc will not accept the Windows bootdisk. I wish I hadn’t listened about using Linux…”it’s free, it’s lightweight, no viruses, easy to use now for beginners”.
    My PC is 4GB of RAM 3GHZ Processor brand. I know it can handle a good OS.

  102. Varun Says:

    Hmmmm… I don’t know why this pathetic attempt of sarcasm was needed by the author of this article. Well I am a developer. I have only one question. Why don’t you try to install something not present in your repository. Like a build (or rpm or tar.gz or bla bla bla) made by any random person. It is obviously apparent that it is, indeed, Difficult to install software in Linux. I am not a supporter of windows, but I can “FREELY” say that windows gives its user the comfort Linux has never able to achieve till date. Why have dependencies? Why can’t you provide one single package with everything. Why is user expected to configure s/w after installing – which btw is an absolute pain in the a**. Take my words, Don’t waste your time making non-sense article like this. Instead, try to find the real cause of this “user-friendliness” if Linux and give your contribution – I think the code is “FREE”. I’ve wasted enough time of my life struggling with this unplanned s/w but today, after reading this kiddish article, I could not help my self wasting a few more minutes. Grow up guys.


  103. Vrai Says:

    Software installation in Linux is difficult

    +1 for ubuntucat

  104. Thomas Loveland Says:

    Thank you for that comment. I have been trying to find a book or some reference to help me in the installation of ubuntu/fedora/linux etc. I believe that if one could find a simple easy to read book then linux/ubuntu/fedora would seriously compete with windows. Apple seems to have no problem why then ubuntu/etc/ seems to.Or have a simple one line command so that self extract will work. I am sure there are many options out there then why not a forum or something for the new users.

  105. Leandro Says:

    Yea if this seems easy to you..

    Installation of kdesvn ¶
    This page describes installation from source. For installation of binary packages consult documentation for your system.


    At least kde 3.4 and not higher then 3.5.x for kdesvn 1.0.x, kde 4.1 for kdesvn 1.2.x or newer. Kde 4.0.x is NOT supported.
    subversion >= 1.2. Earlier version are not longer supported.
    cmake 2.4 (building from source)
    apr-devel, kdelibs-devel, subversion-devel and qt-devel (including uic tool) when building from source.
    SuSE 9.3

    SuSE 9.3 may find required stuff in Apache project ftp for SuSE.

    RedHat Enterprise / CentOS 4/5

    Try out kde-redhat and Rpmforge RPMs for kde 3.5 and subversion 1.4 for both systems.

    I don’t know why but RHEL/CentOS comes without cmake, so keep care installing it. You may find it for centos 5 on atrpms site. With this deps I had build packages for CentOS – them should work for RHEL, too.

    I don’t know if there is kde 4.1.x for CentOS or RHEL so I only tested it with kde 3.5 and kdesvn 1.0.x.

    Build instructions

    Note for failed linking
    Seems that on some systems linking fails due missing references. You may
    solve it with
    . /etc/profile.d/
    export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include
    before running cmake.
    On some systems cmake doesn’t detect that it is a threaded qt-version. So you should
    before running cmake.
    (Or give it as parameter to cmake with -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS=”-DQT_THREAD_SUPPORT”)
    Prepare install
    You require at least cmake 2.4, kde 4.2 and subversion 1.4. In source-tree-build are mostly unwanted, so
    make a subdir called “kdesvn-build” and change to it.
    Basic installation
    Change to your builddirectory and call cmake with the path to kdesvn. E.g.,
    when your build-folder is “kdesvn-build” within source-tree, so change to it
    and type “cmake ../”.
    Now your system get checked if it is able compiling kdesvn and cmake generates
    the Makefiles.
    Important parameters to cmake:
    may current one of “Debug”, “Release”, “ReleaseWithDebInfo”
    Default to “/usr/local”
    Where is subversion-lib installed. Default check in /usr and /usr/local
    Extra flags for the c++ compiler for your system required.
    Mostly for 64bit systems, there suffix may be 64 so libs will installed
    in /usr/lib64 and not /usr/lib for instance.
    After calling cmake just type
    and build begins. When more output is wanted call
    make VERBOSE=1
    After make type “make install” and install begins.
    You may install to a temporary-root with
    make install DESTDIR=
    If you want to uninstall kdesvn again type “make uninstall” from within the
    build directory.
    Extra cflags and linker flags
    If you require extra flags for compiler and linker you may give them via environment variables
    “CXXFLAGS” (c++ compiler)
    “LDFLAGS” (for linker)
    “CFLAGS” (for c-compiler, not needed in kdesvn build)
    eg., it may usefull on 64bit systems “-m64″ to CXXFLAGS and LDFLAGS.


  106. Killer Says:

    At least with ubuntu I don’t get viruses and fu**ing toolbar and adware when I install a software. F*** windows! :D

Leave a Reply