[Techtalk] Quirks of RH8 (was: Re: RH8--no gcc??)

[Telsa Gwynne]

On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 01:53:15AM -0400 or thereabouts, lain iwakura wrote:
> Mandi, Carla et al...
> Thanks a bunch for helping--because of your comments I figured out what
> went wrong during installation.  I just want to post this in case there
> are other newbies like me who 'kinda' need the development tools and who
> also uses RH.

I fear this is going to sound rude, but it's really not meant that
way. If you're a newbie, it is often a good idea to read the 
installation documentation fairly carefully. You get it if you 
buy a boxed set; or it's all on the web (along with some of the
manuals you only get if you buy the most expensive boxed sets:
this is worth knowing about!)

http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-8.0-Manual/install-guide/

It does specifically mention that development tools come with 
the workstation install.

> In RH 8 they actually added one more option to the list of 'types of
> installation'.  Options include a web server, a database server,
> workstation...etc.  The option that got me in trouble was the Personal
> Desktop.  If you ever, EVER, need to use any gnu compilers, DON'T install
> the Personal Desktop mode (or choose custom install, sugg. by Carla). 
> Installing Workstation mode did the trick.  Frankly I find that a bit
> strange...I suppose RH is assuming that most people who install in
> Personal Desktop are not into development and therefore are just going to
> use .rpms to install most programs.  

Yes. 

  Which installation class is best for you?
  http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-8.0-Manual/install-guide/s1-steps-type.html

  ...
  Personal Desktop

  A personal desktop installation is most appropriate if you are 
  new to the world of Linux, and would like to give it a try. This 
  installation will create a system for your home, laptop, or desktop 
  use. A graphical environment will be installed.

  Workstation

  A workstation installation is most appropriate if you would like a 
  graphical desktop environment, as well as software development tools. 
  ...

  For what it's worth, unless I'm having a fit of beta-testing,
  I always do the custom install. I wan bits and pieces from all
  over the distro, and don't mind spending an extra 20 minutes 
  adding them at the start to save time later.


> Correct me if I'm wrong...but aren't there programs out there that is not
> available in .rpm form?  What would be the procedure for users to do if

Lots.

> they needed GNU but can't just reformat (like I did) and start all over? 

"needed GNU"? Typo for needed gcc? 

> I went to the GNU website and found that gcc only provides source code,

That's GNU policy: source tarballs are the preferred form of
distribution. 

> no rpms...how can the user compile the source code to get the compiler
> when he has no compiler?  I tried 'up2date gcc' initially before I

(a) compile it on another box of the same architecture and install the
result.
(b) "cross-compile it" on another box of a different architecture,
telling it, "Build a compiler which will work on my architecture",
and install the result.
(c) find the binary for your architecture in the first place and
install that. 

However: the sort of user the Personal Desktop install is aimed
at will (hopefully) read the Getting Started Guide
(http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-8.0-Manual/getting-started-guide/)
and find the section about Updating And Adding Packages. Part of
this is about adding programs you forgot from the install CDs: 
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-8.0-Manual/getting-started-guide/s1-updating-pkgs-cdrom.html

> reinstalled everything but the only thing they found that needed updating
> was my kernel and programs other than gcc.

up2date is only for updating copies of programs you already have
(in rpm format). Otherwise when you type it, you'd download new 
versions of packages you don't have: and if you've ever tried to 
download OpenOffice or tetex on a modem, you'll know exactly how 
large some of these packages can be. 
 
> But at any rate, i now have gcc thanks to you...:) Cheers,

Two more things to know, if you are planning to use gcc:

  (a) If you start ./configure and it says: "Checking for foo... No"
and exits, and you know foo is on the box in rpm format, find the 
matching foo-devel package and put that on, too.

  (b) Mixing and matching package-managed apps and compiled-from-
source apps can cause confusion down the line later. rpm won't
know that stuff you compiled locally is there, unless you
compiled it from a source rpm using the rpmbuild command. Don't
fall for anyone who tells you that you can munge the rpmdb to
think it knows about packages that aren't really in rpm format:
this trick will work, but it will also break something impressively
eventually: generally a year later when you've forgotten you did that
at all, and definitely can't remember how to undo it.

Telsa