I have the 3.0.1 version of Alex installed on my /usr/bin. I think the Haskell Platform originally put it there (although I'm not 100% sure...).
Unfortunately, version 3.0.1 is bugged so I need to upgrade it to 3.0.5. I tried using cabal to install the latest version of Alex but cabal install alex-3.0.5 it installed the executable on .cabal/bin over on my home folder instead of on /usr/bin
Do I just manually copy the executable to /usr/bin? (that sound like a lot of trouble to do all the time)
Do I change my PATH environment variable so that .cabal/bin comes before /usr/bin? (I'm afraid that an "ls" executable or similar over on the cabal folder might end up messing up my system)
Or is there a simpler way to go at it in general?
I want to first point out the layout that works well for me, and then suggest how you might proceed in your particular situation.
What works well for me
In general, I think that a better layout is to have the following search path:
directories with important non-Haskell related binaries
directory that cabal install installs to
directory that binaries from the Haskell platform are in
This way, you can use cabal install to update binaries from the Haskell platform, but they cannot accidently shadow some non-Haskell related binary.
(On my Windows machine, this layout is easy to achieve, because the binaries from the Haskell platform are installed in a separate directory by default. So I just manually adapt the search path and that's it. I don't know how to achieve it on other platforms).
Suggestion for your particular situation
In your specific situation with the Haskell platform binaries already installed together with the non-Haskell related binaries, maybe you can use the following layout for the search path:
directory containing links to some of the binaries in 3
directory with important non-Haskell related binaries and Haskell platform binaries
directory that cabal install installs to.
This way, binaries from cabal install cannot accidently shadow the important stuff in 2. But if you decide you want to shadow something form the Haskell platform, you can manually add a link to 1. If it's a soft link, I think you only have to do that once per program name, and then you can call cabal install for that program to update it. You could even look up what executables are bundled with the Haskell platform and do that once and for all.
On second though, putting /.cabal/bin in front of /usr/bin in the PATH is simpler and is what most people do already.
Its also not a big deal since only cabal will put files in .cabal/bin so it should be predictable and with little risk of overwriting stuff.
Related
I want to develop my ReactJs and Nodejs application on my BeagleBone Green card using cloud9 so I had this error every time I install nodejs or execute a command using npm.
https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ie095.png
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Your node executable has been built to require newer versions of libstdc++ (the GNU standard C++ library) and libc (the GNU standard C library) than the ones that are installed on your BeagleBone.
To fix, you'll need to download newer versions of those libraries and make them available to node. From the information at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/abi.html it appears that you need at least libstdc++.so.6.0.20 and at least libc-2.16.
There's some risk involved in changing the system libraries on a running system. The way to do it is to put the new libraries next to the old ones (do not delete or rename the old ones) and then remake the existing libstdc++.so.6 and libc.so.6 symlinks to point to the new libraries. The symlinks are what programs follow to get to the actual libraries. (If you look at those symlinks you'll see that right now they point to the old libraries.) You have to remake the symlinks in one command, and if remaking the libc symlink fails then you'll be in deep trouble.
If you can get the newer libraries from properly-built packages then that should be a safer approach than trying to do it manually, because the packages should take care of the relinking for you.
Alternatively you can put the new libraries in some directory separate from the system libraries, make new libstdc++.so.6 and libc.so.6 symlinks in that directory, and then use the LD_LIBRARY_PATH environment variable to cause node and npm to look for them in that location. That's much safer, but a little ugly.
I recently downloaded the Haskell Platform from the Haskell website. Under the suggestion of the newer answers in this, I blindly ran brew install ghc cabal-install and cabal install cabal cabal-install. Did I install two versions of Haskell on my machine? What should I do to fix any problems?
It doesn't necessarily lead to problems to have multiple versions (I think I have three different versions installed). If you need the disk space uninstall one of the two (instructions for the brew one, for the packaged platform it seems you should be able to use the command sudo uninstall-hs but check it yourself first). If you don't mind the lost disk space, you only have to make sure you have your PATH set up correctly, with the directory containing the ghc binary you want to use in your PATH, before the directory of the other one.
Also, cabal install cabal-install (which you might need to run to update cabal) tends to install cabal in a different place than the platform/brew do, so there, again, you need to make sure your PATH is appropriately set. Normally cabal installs executables in ~/.cabal/bin (local installs) or /usr/local/bin (global installs). The directory containing cabal should go before the others, because an old version of cabal might stick around and you want the new one to be found first.
You probably know this but you can use which ghc and which cabal to check the location of the executable actually being used.
To make things even more complicated, lately it's popular to use Stack, which can also install ghc for you (I find this very convenient, everything is kept in a very controlled environment). So depending on your experience/use case this might be worth looking at as well (but if you just want to try Haskell I recommend you stick with the platform or the brew installation).
I want to recompile a Ubuntu package to use it on Debian
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hollywood
how can I do that please ? I'm a beginner
You need the original tar-ball for the package, and the "debian" tarball which contains the scripts and patches needed to build the package. Finding those on Ubuntu's website is really the hard part.
Given those, you could use dpkg-buildpackage (on a system comparable to your target, of course), which expects the latter untar'd in the current directory, along with the original tar-ball.
(I build my own packages with a script which stages things into this arrangement; Debian packagers use a different scheme).
I'm looking into trying to find an easy way to manage packages compiled from source so that when it comes time to upgrade, I'm not in a huge mess trying to uninstall/install the new package.
I found a utility called CheckInstall, but it seems to be quite old, and I was wondering if this a reliable solution before I begin using it?
http://www.asic-linux.com.mx/~izto/checkinstall/
Also would simply likely to know any other methods/utilities that you use to handle these installations from source?
Whatever you do, make sure that you eventually go through your distribution's package management system (e.g. rpm for Fedora/Mandriva/RH/SuSE, dpkg for Debian/Ubuntu etc). Otherwise your package manager will not know anything about the packages you installed by hand and you will have unsatisfied dependencies at best, or the mother of all messes at worst.
If you don't have a package manager, then get one and stick with it!
I would suggest that you learn to make your own packages. You can start by having a look at the source packages of your distribution. In fact, if all you want to do is upgrade to version 1.2.3 of MyPackage, your distribution's source package for 1.2.2 can usually be adapted with a simple version change (unless there are patches, but that's another story...).
Unless you want distribution-quality packages (e.g. split library/application/debugging packages, multiple-architecture support etc) it is usually easy to convert your typical configure & make & make install scenario into a proper source package. If you can convince your package to install into a directory rather than /, you are usually done.
As for checkinstall, I have used it in the past, and it worked for a couple of simple packages, but I did not like the fact that it actually let the package install itself onto my system before creating the rpm/deb package. It just tracked which files got installed so that it would package them, which did not protect against unwelcome changes. Oh, and it needed root prilileges to work, which is another main sticking point for me. And lets not go into what happens with statically linked core utilities...
Most tools of the kind seem to work that way, so I simply learnt to build my own packages The Right Way (TM) and let checkinstall and friends mess around elsewhere. If you are still interested, however, there is a list of similar programs here:
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/automating-destdir.html
PS: BTW checkinstall was updated at the end of 2009, which probably means that it's still adequately current.
EDIT:
In my opinion, the easiest way to perform an upgrade to the latest version of a package if it is not readily available in a repository is to alter the source package of the latest version in your distribution. E.g. for Centos the source packages for the latest version are here:
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5.5/os/SRPMS/
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5.5/updates/SRPMS/
...
If you want to upgrade e.g. php, you get the latest SRPM for your distrbution e.g. php-5.1.6-27.el5.src.rpm. Then you do:
rpm -hiv php-5.1.6-27.el5.src.rpm
which installs the source package (just the sources - it does not compile anything). Then you go to the rpm build directory (on my mandriva system its /usr/src/rpm), you copy the latest php source tarball to the SOURCES subdirectory and you make sure it's compressed in the same way as the tarball that just got installed there. Afterwards you edit the php.spec file in the SPECS directory to change the package version and build the binary package with something like:
rpmbuild -ba php.spec
In many cases that's all it will take for a new package. In others things might get a bit more complicated - if there are patches or if there are some major changes in the package you might have to do more.
I suggest you read up on the rpm and rpmbuild commands (their manpages are quite good, in a bit extensive) and check up the documentation on writing spec files. Even if you decide to rely on official backport repositories, it is useful to know how to build your own packages. See also:
http://www.rpm.org/wiki/Docs
EDIT 2:
If you are already installing packages from source, using rpm will actually simplify the building process in the long term, apart from maintaining the integrity of your system. The reason for this is that you won't have to remember the quirks of each package on your own ("oooh, right, now I remember, foo needs me to add -lbar to its CFLAGS"), as the build process will be in the .spec file, which you could imagine as a somewhat structured build script.
As far as upgrading goes, if you already have a .spec file for a previous version of the package, there are two main issues that you may encounter, but both exist whether you use rpm to build your package or not:
A patch that was applied to the previous version by the distribution does not apply any more. In many cases the patch has already been applied to the upstream package, so you can simply drop it. In others you may have to edit it - or I suppose if you deem it unimportant you can drop it too.
The package changed in some major way which affected e.g. the layout of the files it installs. You do read the release notes notes for each new version, don't you?
Other than these two issues, upgrading often boils down to just changing a version number in the spec file and running rpmbuild - even easier than installing from a tarball.
I would suggest that you have a look at the tutorials or at the source package for some simple piece of software such as:
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5.5/os/SRPMS/ipv6calc-0.61-1.src.rpm
http://mirror.centos.org/centos/5.5/os/SRPMS/libevent-1.4.13-1.src.rpm
If you have experience in buildling packages from a tarball, using rpm to build software is not much of a leap really. It will never be as simple as installing a premade binary package, however.
I use checkinstall on Debian. It should not be so different on CentOS. I use it like that:
./configure
make
sudo checkinstall make install # fakeroot in place of sudo works usally for more security
# install the package generated
I'm trying to build a Win32 DLL from an audio-DSP related Linux library (http://breakfastquay.com/rubberband/). There are makefiles and config scripts for Linux, but no help for Windows. The author provides a Win32 binary of a sample app using the library, and I see a number of "#ifdef MSVC" and "#ifdef WIN32" scattered around, so I don't think I'm starting completely from scratch but I'm stuck nevertheless.
As my programming knowledge in either platform is rather limited, I'd appreciate any help.
First of all, what is the right way to get started here? Visual Studio? Cygwin? Initially I started off creating a Win32 DLL project in Visual Studio, adding the source files, thinking about adding a .def file, etc, but at some point I felt like this was going nowhere.
As for Cygwin, this was the first time using it, and I don't even know if this is the sort of thing that Cygwin is designed for. Is it?
On Cygwin, I ran ./configure and got stuck at something like this:
"checking for SRC... configure: error: Package requirements (samplerate) were not met: No package 'samplerate' found"
After looking through the log, it appears that pkg-config is looking for samplerate.pc. How do I handle packages in Windows? libsamplerate is just an open source library, and I have source and a DLL for this. But I'm not sure how to use them to satisfy the dependency requirements for librubberband (which is what I'm trying to build)
I'm completely lost at this point and if anyone can give me a nudge in the right direction... and, is there an easier way to do this?
Many thanks in advance.
If you're still stuck on this I can throw a little light.
You may have to build everything from sources (or have the libraries installed in your environment). You're using Cygwin, I would recommend MinGW and MSYS too, but sometimes it's just not possible to use this combination to build the program or library.
So if using Cygwin, first ensure that you have a proper environment installed. This is that you have the correct development headers installed.
Then download libsndfile. Extract the sources to a directory and from the Cygwin bash shell navigate to that directory. There perform:
./configure
make
make install prefix=/cygdrive/c/cygwin
Notice that I use a prefix, that prefix should point to the directory Cygwin is installed in order to correctly install the libraries (the same happens to MinGW and MSYS, the prefix should point to the MinGW installation directory). Maybe using the usr directory in the prefix works too, I've never tried it.
Now download FFTW, as it will be needed for libsamplerate and rubberband. Same procedure as with libsndfile: extract, configure, make & make install using the prefix. Now copy the header files of FFTW (in the example they'd be in /cygdrive/c/cygwin/include) to the include directory in the usr directory (in the example /cygdrive/c/cygwin/usr/include).
Next SRC (libsamplerate), same procedure.
Then the Vamp plugin SDK. In order to compile the it you may need to edit the file src\vamp-hostsdk\PluginLoader.cpp, deleting RTLD_LOCAL from a dlopen() call (it's safe, it's already the default behaviour).
Also, you may need to install it by hand (in my experiences it didn't like the prefix). Or set the environmental variable PKG_CONFIG_PATH pointing to the paths of pkgconfig, e.g.:
set PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/cygdrive/c/cygwin/lib/pkgconfig:/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig
Now, create a file called ladspa.h in the include directory with the contents of the LADSPA header
Finally, configure and build rubberband, it should find everything it needs.
To build in MSYS using MinGW follow the same procedure, using the according prefix. Using Visual Studio is another alternative, but you may need to use some of the pre-built libraries (for example for libsndfile) as building Linux libraries natively in Windows may be complicated or even impossible (without hacking the source code) in VS.
Anyway, the autor of rubberband provides binaries; I think you should consider use them instead of going through all of this.
Linux to w32 is mostly a tricky thing.
For each of your dependencies, download the source and:
./configure
make
sudo make install
Also, I recommend you to use MinGW + msys in place of CygWin (as the latter produces executables that depend on its libraries). However in your situtation, use the VS approach -- 't will save you a lot of time.