Weblog Archive

Compiling source—howto, but why not to

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 at 15:03 • Chyetanya Kunte • Filed under Linux, Noteworthy, Self

If you’re a normal linux user like me, then downloading software source code, and then compiling it yourself is generally a bad idea—even if you’re feeling extra geeky over the weekend. Instead of attempting to explain the why, I’d prefer pointing you to Mark Pilgrim’s rather entertaining post:

It totally sucks having one-off standalone installations of software. Why? Because when some *ucker finds a security hole in the version you compiled yourself, it’ll be up to you to recompile and reconfigure your software. Yourself. Oh, and the *ucker won’t tell you that you need to do it.

If you still can’t resist the urge for that one application, and you cannot find it in the Synaptic Package Manager, then here’s how—assuming there are no dependencies1:

  1. $ tar xzvf musthaveapp-x.x.x.tar.gz
  2. $ cd musthaveapp-x.x.x
  3. $ make
  4. # make install
  5.  
  6. Download this example: /inputfiles/compile-source.txt

(The above is in the following order: Unzip→Go to source directory→Compile.)

Be forewarned though that the software you compile will not be updated automatically (not even with security updates) via Ubuntu's software updates notification because you compiled this yourself, silly.2

A gentle note to users
If you love an open source application that is not included in the repositories, lobby for its inclusion3—send a kind note and some money (if they accept donations) to the developers, ask them to get their apps included in the repositories.
A gentle note to developers
If you’re a developer of an open source software, and would love to see people use it, then please do get your app included in the repositories—in case you haven’t done yet.
  1. Check the documentation for the app; if it says you’ll need such and such a pack, try installing it via the Synaptic Package Manager or via sudo apt-get install packname. []
  2. This post is a reminder to resist the thought, whenever I get the urge to download and compile. []
  3. An inclusion would mean it’s safer, well tested, integrated well with the OS, and updates guaranteed. []

[ Ads ]

Related posts

Following list is auto-generated, based on this post's context as possibly related. You may, however, occasionally find some in this list unrelated, but nevertheless, we sincerely hope that you'll enjoy them too.

2 responses to “Compiling source—howto, but why not to”

  1. Ankit said:

    I usually try to find a third-party repository for the ‘must-have-software’, and and it to my sources.list, before trying to compile it myself. If somebody else has bothered to package it, they’ll probably keep it up-to-date as well.

  2. Chetan said:

    Ankit, good point. Thanks.