Why? As you see it just causes troubles and confusion to have software installed outside of the packet managers. I mean ... It's OK if you know what you do. But if you don't it will be a rather frustrating experience. With your level of knowledge you'd be better off to only use software that is in the repos. At least for now.Vic wrote: Downloaded Firefox 2.0.0.5 into /home/Vic/firefox
Installing Java-got it to work, but don't understand
Forum rules
There are no such things as "stupid" questions. However if you think your question is a bit stupid, then this is the right place for you to post it. Stick to easy to-the-point questions that you feel people can answer fast. For long and complicated questions use the other forums in the support section.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
There are no such things as "stupid" questions. However if you think your question is a bit stupid, then this is the right place for you to post it. Stick to easy to-the-point questions that you feel people can answer fast. For long and complicated questions use the other forums in the support section.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
Re: Installing Java-got it to work, but don't understand
Last edited by LockBot on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
Reason: Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
And so? It will be there as soon as the people making the packages are done with finishing the package, doing their final tests, and so on. There is no need to hurry with upgrading "or else ...." .... This isn't WindowsVic wrote: I couldn't use the package managers because the current version of Firefox is not on them
Don't get me wrong ... it's just that if you take on a too big of a challenge you might soon be frustrated. One step after the other.Vic wrote: I understand your "with your level of knowledge" comment, but this is precisely the issue I'm trying to learn about.
/usr/lib is for libraries (in Windows you'd call that *.DLL's ...) and some software packages create their sub-directories in there. So by that logic /usr/lib/mozilla would be the libraries owned and used by the (classic) Mozilla web-suite which emerged out of the ancient Netscape Communicator browser suite -- often plugins will install into that location (/usr/lib/mozilla) because many other browsers that can use Mozilla's plugins will search for suitable plugins in that directory. Typical candidates: Opera and Konqueror. So /usr/lib/mozilla is there for compatibility purposes. And /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox would be the libs owned by the Firefox stand-alone web browser which emerged out of the Mozilla web suite. I think you already have one version of Firefox installed on your system and that's why those directories are there.Vic wrote: /usr/lib/
I saw in your other posting that you manipulated some of that stuff e.g. via symbolic links. I'd be cautious with that. Chances are that a future update will manipulate those things again and then things might all of a sudden stop to work.
Piece of advice: Either stick with the package manager and let it handle the software installations. It's not necessary to always and immediately have the absolutely newest browser release ... it will be in the repos when it's ready. Patience is your friend. If you nontheless want to have software installed that lives outside of the package manager (= the package manager has no knowledge and no control over it) then please really make sure that all the stuff installed via the package manager doesn't collide with the stuff you installed manually and vice versa --- stuff installed manually should not mess with things that were installed via the package manager.
So if you install a new browser into your /home directory --- which is perfectly OK -- then please don't meddle with the browser installation already on the system. As for plugins: You have a .mozilla directory inside your /home ... inside of that directory there should also be a plugins directory. This means you can also install plugins and other stuff locally inside your /home ... without getting into conflict with the things installed by the package manager.
Also you should be aware that programs installed locally into your /home are only available to your user account and not to any other user account. To have things available system-wide (so that e.g. your wife could use those things too when she's logged in into her own account) you'd have to use directory locations such as /usr/local or maybe /opt (I prefer the latter one as commercial UNIX-es do that too ... they put "optional stuff" into /opt, so I'm kinda used to that).
Maybe you'd also be interested to read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem ... y_Standard
Guess what happened this morning when I logged in? I was notified of an update: Firefox 2.0.0.4 ==> 2.0.0.5Vic wrote:Brilliant, and thanks for the information. I do really appreciate it!
Chances are that on your system this might now lead to collisions. Besides that your local installation in your /home is kinda redundant as the packet manager will now suggest to install the new version anyway.
So safest thing would probably be to remove the installation and remove the symbolic links that you created, and then let the packet manager do its updates.