Question

1

tar.bz2 files -- compile or simply copy into /usr/bin?

rated 0 times [ 1] [ 0] / answers: 1 / hits: 462 / 2 Years ago, fri, november 18, 2022, 7:53:58

I have seen seemingly contradictory advice on installing software downloaded from the internet. On the one hand, people install software using the ./configure make make install combo (such as this question. On the other hand, I have followed other advice to just download the package, unarchive, then copy into /usr/bin (which worked for PhantomJS).

Why do we have different ways to do this?

Another related question is, for the second method of copying files into /usr/bin, sometimes people create a link to the files in /usr/local. What's the difference from directly copying in to /usr/bin?

Answers

Only authorized users can answer the question. Please sign in first, or register a free account.

ditery

Add To Favorites

Follow

Total Points: 9

Total Questions: 116

Total Answers: 119

Location: Grenada

Member since Sun, Dec 20, 2020

3 Years ago

ditery questions

1 Flameshot does not work properly on Ubuntu 22.04.1 LTS

Sat, Oct 1, 22, 06:26, 2 Years ago

1 What is xserver-xorg-input-all and its purpose?

Thu, Jun 24, 21, 02:55, 3 Years ago

1 How to turn off laptop screen when lid is closed and connected to external monitor

Sat, Nov 20, 21, 01:34, 3 Years ago

1 What are my options to replace Gnome 3's Nautilus in the least intrusive way?

Mon, Dec 5, 22, 19:50, 1 Year ago

1 How can I clear apt-mark remove list?

Tue, May 31, 22, 01:21, 2 Years ago

View All

answered 1 Year ago poous · Accepted Answer

The FHS says this:

/opt is for third-party applications that don't rely on any dependencies outside the scope of that package.

/usr/local is for packages installed on the machine outside the scope of the distribution package manager.

/usr/bin/: Non-essential command binaries (not needed in single user mode); for all users.

Why do we have different ways to do this?

Because Linux is all about choice. Thing is... iinstalling software like this probably means it is intended for another operating system. So the installation method is probably the one adviced for that operating system.

Another related question is, for the second method of copying files into /usr/bin, sometimes people create a link to the files in /usr/local. What's the difference from directly copying in to /usr/bin?

Copying the file to /usr/bin/ would have you have 2 files instead of 1. So an admin needs to keep track of 2 versions of that executable. And since that is unneeded.

And who is going to decide what name everyone gets to use when putting commands in /usr/bin/?

How do you know where the file in /usr/bin/ is comming from in 1 year time? If you link there is a clear connection.