On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 14:59 +0100, delir!um wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I would like to know what RPM is? I wanted to download Java Console and > I had the possibility to choose between RPM packages and normal > packages. What is the difference? RPM originally stood for Red-Hat Package Management. Now I think it's one of those--what do you call 'em--regressive names: "RPM Package Management." It is the preferred way to distribute packages of already- built programs, or "binaries," in Red Hat-style distros, like Fedora Core, RHEL, Mandrake, and a host of others. If Java is calling something a "normal" package, they probably mean a *tar ball.* That's a package that has a configuration script and a *makefile* that uses the "make" command to compile, link, and then install the program on your system. If you're using Fedora Core--as I assume you are--then RPM packages will work. To find out how, open up a terminal window and type "man rpm." Typically you run "rpm -U such-and-such.rpm" to install something. (You can use the -i flag if you are absolutely sure that no such package exists on your system when you start. If you're not sure, or if you know you're actually upgrading, use the -U. It works every time. You can also add "v" for "verbose" and "h" for "hash marks" if you want an ASCII- artful display of how far along you are in the installation. The full form of the command would then be "rpm -Uvh such-and-such.rpm".) To *remove* an RPM-based package, type "rpm -e such-and-such". To ask the system which version of the package you have on board, type "rpm -q such-and-such". I can't decide, personally, which is better: RPM or tar balls. Tar balls require a bit more effort to install, because after you unpack them (typically as "tar -xf such-and-such.tar" or "tar -zxf such-and- such.tar.gz"), you have to issue three separate commands, and to do it you have to change to the new directory that the unpack operation creates. These three commands are: ./configure (because the current working directory is *not* part of your executable path, unlike some other less-secure OS's which shall remain nameless). If this command returns any errors, then you need to figure out how to address the deficiencies that you see reported. But if it doesn't report any errors, then you run these other two commands: make make install And if you want to take a tar-based program off your system, go back to this directory (and hope you haven't removed it) and type: make clean And then you can, in theory, wipe everything out by typing make distclean The composition of makefiles and configure scripts is not your responsibility. The developer needs to do that. I use an IDE that writes all those scripts whenever I modify my program in any way. > Any idea whether there are drivers for my graphic card - ATI Mobility > Radeon 9700? Or any idea where I could find it out, so I can quit > bothering you? Try my favorite gambit: search Google (http://www.google.com/) with the search phrase "ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 Linux" and see what pops up. Google is generally pretty good about sorting pages with the most relevant finds first. I use Mozilla (haven't switched to Firefox yet), and the version I use has a Search function that uses Google for its searching. (The Fedora Core I version of Mozilla uses Netscape Search. Kudos to the Mozilla Foundation for figuring out when someone else does a better job. That's the beauty of open-source development: software developed *by* users *for* users. No kickbacks, no sweetheart deals, and the bundling, if any, is what makes sense *for you.*) FYI, I have an ATI Radeon 7200 on my system, and Fedora Core 2 had the drivers for it and installed it straight out-of-the-box. If that's not true of the Mobility Radeon 9700, then I return to my previous suggestion: search for it. If anyone has a separate driver for that card, and they offer it on the Web, Google will find it. That's another beauty of Linux: maybe you have to search a hundred places to find the drivers for *your* particular components, but at least you *can* find them. With Windows, if M$ hasn't signed the appropriate "co-marketing agreements" with the vendor of any particular video card, you're out of luck. But with Linux--well, if it's not available now, it will become available soon enough. Only rarely have I seen this fail. -- Temlakos <temlakos@xxxxxxxxxxx>
