* UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES
@ Michael Weaver
` John
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michael Weaver @ UTC (permalink / raw)
To: blinux-list
Is Linux much tidier when uninstalling applications?
I ask this question because I sometimes find windows can be untidy when
installing applications because it seems to leave things behind under
control pannel. I ask this because I wonder if I should go over to a Linux
only system which might keep things tidier for me.
Hope someone can clear this up for me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES Michael Weaver @ ` John ` Darrell Shandrow ` Christian Schoepplein 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: John @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Michael Weaver wrote: > Is Linux much tidier when uninstalling applications? > I ask this question because I sometimes find windows can be untidy when > installing applications because it seems to leave things behind under > control pannel. I ask this because I wonder if I should go over to a Linux > only system which might keep things tidier for me. > Hope someone can clear this up for me. I've never been much of a Windows user, but from what I hear, in this regard Windows is Hell and Linux Heaven. Installing Windows applications can and sometimes does replace system libraries with the author's pet version because the standard ones on his system "are not good enough." A result can be previously-installed applications begin to crash. What happens when you remove the new application I hate to imagine. There's room for speculation about what might happen when you upgrade the pet version with the latest Microsoft service pack or hot-fix. In contrast, on Linux I've never seen this happen. If an rpm package contains files that conflict with existing files then rpm complains, and you need to use strong words (aka --force or some such) to install the new package. Of course, removing such a package doesn't magically reinstall the old files (though that may be changed in Red Hat Linux 8.0). Removing a package often leaves a few files around, but those are reported on and, except for the disk space they use, harmless. Additionally, if the author wants some pet version of a library, that can usually be accomodated by having two (or more) versions installed together. And, you can also run the command "rpm -Va" to report on _all_ files not in their original condition. I've not used Debian enough to know about that. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES Michael Weaver ` John @ ` Darrell Shandrow ` Janina Sajka ` Christian Schoepplein 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Darrell Shandrow @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list Hi Michael, Well, if you're using a distro like Red Hat, you could use the rpm utility to uninstall any packages that were originally installed using rpm. Otherwise, for any packages you manually build and install on the box, you would need to manually remove everything associated with the package in order to uninstall. Nevertheless, I'd say that uninstallation on Linux would be much cleaner than Windows, especially if you must manually uninstall something, since you easily have the opportunity to understand exactly where everything gets installed in the first place. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Weaver" <drwho1@btinternet.com> To: <blinux-list@redhat.com> Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 11:10 AM Subject: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES > Is Linux much tidier when uninstalling applications? > I ask this question because I sometimes find windows can be untidy when > installing applications because it seems to leave things behind under > control pannel. I ask this because I wonder if I should go over to a Linux > only system which might keep things tidier for me. > Hope someone can clear this up for me. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Blinux-list mailing list > Blinux-list@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` Darrell Shandrow @ ` Janina Sajka ` Darrell Shandrow ` John 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Janina Sajka @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list Darrell: Correct for rpm. The command being rpm -e [package name] But, incorrect for "manual install," by which I believe you're referring to the usual ./configure, make, make install procedure? You can usually do make uninstall. Tidy, huh? Darrell Shandrow writes: > From: "Darrell Shandrow" <nu7i@azboss.net> > > Hi Michael, > > Well, if you're using a distro like Red Hat, you could use the rpm utility > to uninstall any packages that were originally installed using rpm. > Otherwise, for any packages you manually build and install on the box, you > would need to manually remove everything associated with the package in > order to uninstall. Nevertheless, I'd say that uninstallation on Linux > would be much cleaner than Windows, especially if you must manually > uninstall something, since you easily have the opportunity to understand > exactly where everything gets installed in the first place. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Weaver" <drwho1@btinternet.com> > To: <blinux-list@redhat.com> > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 11:10 AM > Subject: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES > > > > Is Linux much tidier when uninstalling applications? > > I ask this question because I sometimes find windows can be untidy when > > installing applications because it seems to leave things behind under > > control pannel. I ask this because I wonder if I should go over to a > Linux > > only system which might keep things tidier for me. > > Hope someone can clear this up for me. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Blinux-list mailing list > > Blinux-list@redhat.com > > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > > > > _______________________________________________ > Blinux-list mailing list > Blinux-list@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list -- Janina Sajka, Director Technology Research and Development Governmental Relations Group American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` Janina Sajka @ ` Darrell Shandrow ` Sacha Chua ` John 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Darrell Shandrow @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list Hi Janina, Yes, true, thanks for the reminder about make uninstall. But, still, you're pretty much at the mercy of the package's developer as to whether make uninstall is implemented, and it is not always available. At least, if one must manually uninstall something on a UNIX box, it is much easier and safer to do so than on Windows, where you very likely may break your system removing the myriad shared component files! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net> To: <blinux-list@redhat.com> Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 6:28 PM Subject: Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES > Darrell: > > Correct for rpm. The command being rpm -e [package name] > > But, incorrect for "manual install," by which I believe you're referring > to the usual ./configure, make, make install procedure? You can usually > do make uninstall. > > Tidy, huh? > > Darrell Shandrow writes: > > From: "Darrell Shandrow" <nu7i@azboss.net> > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > Well, if you're using a distro like Red Hat, you could use the rpm utility > > to uninstall any packages that were originally installed using rpm. > > Otherwise, for any packages you manually build and install on the box, you > > would need to manually remove everything associated with the package in > > order to uninstall. Nevertheless, I'd say that uninstallation on Linux > > would be much cleaner than Windows, especially if you must manually > > uninstall something, since you easily have the opportunity to understand > > exactly where everything gets installed in the first place. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Michael Weaver" <drwho1@btinternet.com> > > To: <blinux-list@redhat.com> > > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 11:10 AM > > Subject: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES > > > > > > > Is Linux much tidier when uninstalling applications? > > > I ask this question because I sometimes find windows can be untidy when > > > installing applications because it seems to leave things behind under > > > control pannel. I ask this because I wonder if I should go over to a > > Linux > > > only system which might keep things tidier for me. > > > Hope someone can clear this up for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Blinux-list mailing list > > > Blinux-list@redhat.com > > > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Blinux-list mailing list > > Blinux-list@redhat.com > > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > > -- > > Janina Sajka, Director > Technology Research and Development > Governmental Relations Group > American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) > > Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Blinux-list mailing list > Blinux-list@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` Darrell Shandrow @ ` Sacha Chua 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sacha Chua @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list "Darrell Shandrow" <nu7i@azboss.net> writes: > Yes, true, thanks for the reminder about make uninstall. But, still, you're > pretty much at the mercy of the package's developer as to whether make A tool called "checkinstall" can keep track of installed files and remove them upon uninstallation. Haven't really tried it out because I use Debian, which has the best package management system I've encountered so far. -- Sacha Chua <sacha@free.net.ph> - 4 BS CS Ateneo geekette interests: emacs, linux, wearables, teaching compsci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` Janina Sajka ` Darrell Shandrow @ ` John ` Mike Gorse ` Lee Maschmeyer 1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: John @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Janina Sajka wrote: > Darrell: > > Correct for rpm. The command being rpm -e [package name] > > But, incorrect for "manual install," by which I believe you're referring > to the usual ./configure, make, make install procedure? You can usually > do make uninstall. > I'm not sure that "usually" is correct, but it presupposes you keep the build tree in place, and I don't think many people would. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` John @ ` Mike Gorse ` Lee Maschmeyer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Mike Gorse @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list There are some programs out there designed to monitor what a package installs so that its contents can easily be removed later. I believe one of them is called installwatch or something like that. It could be useful when building a program from source. -- Michael Gorse / AIM:linvortex / http://mgorse.home.dhs.org -- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` John ` Mike Gorse @ ` Lee Maschmeyer ` John 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Lee Maschmeyer @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list Hello! Facing reality, folks: If you ask this group to compare Windows and Linux at any time for any purpose in any version whatsoever, guess who's gonna win! This isn't surprising since the members of this group generally know Linux better than Windows. People feel better about and are more comfortable with things they know well. Moreover, since Linux is an inherently simpler system and tries to do less for you, things are likely to be more straightforward. However: Uninstall _programs_ are _programs_. Just like any other programs they can have bugs, and the emotional investment of programmers being what it is, it's highly likely uninstall programs receive relatively little testing. Further, anyone who doesn't know an operating system very well is likely to attribute to it ills that people more familiar with it will wish to correct. I, for example, know Windows much better than Linux at this point, so I may have erred here. On the other hand, someone said people will replace Windows libraries with their own versions because the standard ones are deemed not good enough. While it's possible to program just about anything if you try hard enough (and I can think of at least one instance where this has been alleged though not pin-pointed the last I heard), I can't see why Linux would prohibit people from doing the same thing. Personally, I've always liked the Windows model of putting the whole component (aside from shared system libraries) in one tree; executable, libraries, help files, manuals, DLLs etc. are more than likely all in the same place. Delete that tree, you delete everything. In Unix, though (and I assume Linux), you've got binaries under some flavor of /bin or /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin, manuals under /usr/man or related (or unrelated) entities, libraries under /lib or /lib/share or whatever ... An uninstall package that remembers to grab all of these will uninstall everything; a package that forgets something, or a user who forgets something, will leave stuff behind. Bottom line: The uninstall is as good as the uninstaller, not as good as the operating system. -- Lee Maschmeyer lee_maschmeyer@wayne.edu "Now I've reached the awkward age of man: Too old for Castoria and too young for Serutan." --Homer & Jethro ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` Lee Maschmeyer @ ` John ` L. C. Robinson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: John @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Lee Maschmeyer wrote: > Hello! > > Facing reality, folks: > > If you ask this group to compare Windows and Linux at any time for any > purpose in any version whatsoever, guess who's gonna win! > > This isn't surprising since the members of this group generally know Linux > better than Windows. People feel better about and are more comfortable with > things they know well. Moreover, since Linux is an inherently simpler system > and tries to do less for you, things are likely to be more straightforward. > > However: > > Uninstall _programs_ are _programs_. Just like any other programs they can > have bugs, and the emotional investment of programmers being what it is, > it's highly likely uninstall programs receive relatively little testing. > Further, anyone who doesn't know an operating system very well is likely to > attribute to it ills that people more familiar with it will wish to correct. > I, for example, know Windows much better than Linux at this point, so I may > have erred here. On the other hand, someone said people will replace Windows > libraries with their own versions because the standard ones are deemed not Here is a true story that illustrates the problem. It actually happened on OS/2, but it could equally-well happen on Windows. I had a system with a Diamond Stealth video card, and it came with OS/2 drivers and an install routine. In my case the install routine didn't actually do anything, but in researching it I discovered other versions for other Diamond Multimedia products did delightful things such as: Unconditionally patch the kernel. The patch was correct for one level of OS/2 2.1, but it would also apply the same patch to OS/2 3.0 where it was decidedly wrong. Unconditionally replace a kernel module. Again, it worked for one level of OS/2 but no other. This is the kind of thing I was thinking of for Windows. I used IBM's Visual Age C compiler, and if I distributed software, I was explicitly allowed to distribute some components of it. I was expected to rename those components, but if _I_ didn't and _you_ didn't, and Barbara installed your product and mine, and you and I distributed different versions of those shared libraries, guess what happens? Probably, one of our applications works (assuming it's bug free), and likely the other doesn't. On Linux, this doesn't happen. For starters, people simply do not distribute components of other packages with their product; at least, I've never seen it happen. They _may_ distribute the entire component as a convenience. If you are using a package manager such as rpm, then a) It will not replace files from another package unless you explicitly instruct it to do so; b) It will not install a package if the correct versions of packages it requires are not installed, unless you explicitly instruct it to do so. > Personally, I've always liked the Windows model of putting the whole > component (aside from shared system libraries) in one tree; executable, > libraries, help files, manuals, DLLs etc. are more than likely all in the > same place. Delete that tree, you delete everything. In Unix, though (and I OS/2 does that. The path was getting extraordinarily long when I switched to Linux, and long paths are bad for performance. Ditto libpath (used for DLLs). > assume Linux), you've got binaries under some flavor of /bin or /usr/bin or > /usr/local/bin, manuals under /usr/man or related (or unrelated) entities, > libraries under /lib or /lib/share or whatever ... An uninstall package that > remembers to grab all of these will uninstall everything; a package that > forgets something, or a user who forgets something, will leave stuff behind. > > Bottom line: The uninstall is as good as the uninstaller, not as good as the > operating system. Most Linux distributions use either rpm or dpkg. rpm and dpkg have a database of packages and the files they contain. That's how they can prevent new packages from overwriting old ones, and how the can remove complete packages correctly every time. There _are_ no separate uninstall programs because they're not needed. > > -- > > Lee Maschmeyer > lee_maschmeyer@wayne.edu > > "Now I've reached the awkward age of man: > Too old for Castoria and too young for Serutan." > --Homer & Jethro > > > > _______________________________________________ > Blinux-list mailing list > Blinux-list@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES ` John @ ` L. C. Robinson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: L. C. Robinson @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, John wrote: > On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Lee Maschmeyer wrote: > > If you ask this group to compare Windows and Linux > > at any time for any purpose in any version > > whatsoever, guess who's gonna win! And for good reason! <grin> > > This isn't surprising since the members of this > > group generally know Linux better than Windows. There are some very experienced admins on this list who deal with largish heterogenous networks. > > People feel better about and are more comfortable > > with things they know well. True, and in spite of this, the movement of the IT industry to Linux is so far the most rapid in history, but it still takes time. > > Moreover, since Linux is an inherently simpler > > system and tries to do less for you, things are > > likely to be more straightforward. Humm.... One of the common criticisms of linux and other *ix type systems is the difficulty of learning it all, and the lack of GUI menu utilities that can handle all the extensive configuration possibilities (which can be reached through plain text based configuration files). But this is in large part because of the sheer power and vast number of configuration combinations. Try to buy a M$ system with all the utilities, development tools, communications server daemons, and clients, languages, and many other things, that come standard with a linux system, and it would cost you many thousands of dollars. But you can't have all this power and configurability, and choice, without a certain degree of complexity: there is, in fact so much there, that a fully functional GUI front end to all of it would be a massive, unnavigable maze, and impossibly expensive to boot (many attempts have been made to build fully comprehensive GUI front ends to *ix type systems, and all have failed). This is not to say that there are not some very nice front ends to all of the common, routine things. But no one person can reasonably hope to learn the entire rich toolset that comes with a major linux distribution in a lifetime; you just take what you need, and learn how to look up things in the extensive reference documentation when needed. > > Uninstall _programs_ are _programs_. Just like any > > other programs they can have bugs, and the > > emotional investment of programmers being what it > > is, it's highly likely uninstall programs receive > > relatively little testing. As other posters have pointed out in some detail, this is overcome very nicely by switching to a completely different, more capable paradigm of package maintenance, which does both the installation and removal, along with a whole bunch of other system monitoring, logging, package integrity, and consistency checking functions. M$ installation schemes are generally primitive by comparison. > > ... Personally, I've always liked the Windows > > model of putting the whole component (aside from > > shared system libraries) in one tree; executable, > > libraries, help files, manuals, DLLs etc. are more > > than likely all in the same place. Delete that > > tree, you delete everything. Vendors who want to use this format may use the /opt directory hierarchy, which is a defined filesystem standard for this purpose. Some distributors use this extensively, some very little, if at all: probably because with a decent package management system, such primitive methods just tend to make things harder to track and find, except in very special cases. But the method you mention may make proprietary license management easier on some networks with shared filesystems: many of us aren't very comfortable with such hassles. > > In Unix, though (and I assume Linux), you've got > > binaries under some flavor of /bin or /usr/bin or > > /usr/local/bin, manuals under /usr/man or related > > (or unrelated) entities, libraries under /lib or > > ... There is also a special area for locally installed stuff (/usr/local/*), and a special area for stuff which can readily be shared on a network, which is loaded with stuff -- manuals and other documentation, along with icons, text support files, help systems, etc, are now kept in /usr/share (such as /usr/share/man). LCR -- L. C. Robinson reply to no_spam+munged_lcr@onewest.net.invalid People buy MicroShaft for compatibility, but get incompatibility and instability instead. This is award winning "innovation". Find out how MS holds your data hostage with "The *Lens*"; see "CyberSnare" at http://www.netaction.org/msoft/cybersnare.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES Michael Weaver ` John ` Darrell Shandrow @ ` Christian Schoepplein 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Christian Schoepplein @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: blinux-list Hello! On Sam, Dez 07, 2002 at 06:10:44 -0000, Michael Weaver wrote: > Is Linux much tidier when uninstalling applications? Yes, I think so. > I ask this question because I sometimes find windows can be untidy when > installing applications because it seems to leave things behind under > control pannel. I ask this because I wonder if I should go over to a Linux > only system which might keep things tidier for me. > Hope someone can clear this up for me. Most distros using rpm to install or uninstall packages and this packagemanager works much better then the install / uninstallroutines on windowssystems. Also on debian, that uses apt and the own .deb-format, installing and removing packages is much better handled than in windows. But if you installing packages on your own and your not using a packagemanager, it depends on the makefile of the programm if you can remove all installed things... Best regards, Schoeppi -- Christian Schoepplein | Bbest Rockband in the world:http://www.lily-rockt.de mail@schoeppi.net | Linux for the blind: http://www.blinux.suse.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES
@ James R. Van Zandt
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: James R. Van Zandt @ UTC (permalink / raw)
To: blinux-list
Lee -
As I understand it, Windows shared libraries are not versioned, in the
sense that you can only have one version of a given library installed
at a time. If you have two programs that require different versions
of a library, then one of them will be broken. In Linux, you can have
several versions of a library installed, and the loader will link each
program with the appropriate one.
Of course, a programmer can still make an incompatible change to a
library and neglect to update the version number, but at least the
system does provide the mechanisms to "do the right thing".
- Jim Van Zandt
>From: Lee Maschmeyer <lee_maschmeyer@wayne.edu>
>Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 21:15:37 -0500
>
>Hello!
>
>Facing reality, folks:
>
>If you ask this group to compare Windows and Linux at any time for any
>purpose in any version whatsoever, guess who's gonna win!
>
>This isn't surprising since the members of this group generally know Linux
>better than Windows. People feel better about and are more comfortable with
>things they know well. Moreover, since Linux is an inherently simpler system
>and tries to do less for you, things are likely to be more straightforward.
>
>However:
>
>Uninstall _programs_ are _programs_. Just like any other programs they can
>have bugs, and the emotional investment of programmers being what it is,
>it's highly likely uninstall programs receive relatively little testing.
>Further, anyone who doesn't know an operating system very well is likely to
>attribute to it ills that people more familiar with it will wish to correct.
>I, for example, know Windows much better than Linux at this point, so I may
>have erred here. On the other hand, someone said people will replace Windows
>libraries with their own versions because the standard ones are deemed not
>good enough. While it's possible to program just about anything if you try
>hard enough (and I can think of at least one instance where this has been
>alleged though not pin-pointed the last I heard), I can't see why Linux
>would prohibit people from doing the same thing.
>
>Personally, I've always liked the Windows model of putting the whole
>component (aside from shared system libraries) in one tree; executable,
>libraries, help files, manuals, DLLs etc. are more than likely all in the
>same place. Delete that tree, you delete everything. In Unix, though (and I
>assume Linux), you've got binaries under some flavor of /bin or /usr/bin or
>/usr/local/bin, manuals under /usr/man or related (or unrelated) entities,
>libraries under /lib or /lib/share or whatever ... An uninstall package that
>remembers to grab all of these will uninstall everything; a package that
>forgets something, or a user who forgets something, will leave stuff behind.
>
>Bottom line: The uninstall is as good as the uninstaller, not as good as the
>operating system.
>
>--
>
>Lee Maschmeyer
>lee_maschmeyer@wayne.edu
>
>"Now I've reached the awkward age of man:
>Too old for Castoria and too young for Serutan."
> --Homer & Jethro
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in threadend of thread, other threads:[~ UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
UNINSTALLING LINUX PACKAGES Michael Weaver
` John
` Darrell Shandrow
` Janina Sajka
` Darrell Shandrow
` Sacha Chua
` John
` Mike Gorse
` Lee Maschmeyer
` John
` L. C. Robinson
` Christian Schoepplein
James R. Van Zandt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).