0

Ok so i have found that the Ubuntu software centre has excessively outdated builds posted for nearly every piece of software i attempt to install. The only solution i can think of is to download the most recent releases from the official page. I had this problem with blender, and managed to find a post that had me update the package manually (a pre made one liner). now im attempting to install an android development env. I downloaded the ADT bundle for linux 64 bit, inside was a zip folder. i attempt to run the executable file from the GUI and nothing happens. when i run it from the shell it gives me an error that i believe is related to missing dependencies. so heres the question:

How do i properly install a piece of software that does not come in a package intended for use with a software manager?

by properly i mean i want it installed as if it was installed by a package manager... i want the icons, i want the links in the dashboard, i want the dependencies...

EDIT

before someone says it, yes i have run 

sudo apt-get install eclipse
sudo apt-get update
sudo chmod +x path/to/bin
sudo path/to/bin

EDIT

"Impossible" = "Unacceptable" in my eyes. i want to properly install the latest releases on ubuntu. it is possible? it may be difficult but how do i do it? i have been trying to find answers to this question for a while now and it seems like an industry secret that no one will tell me....

Konner Rasmussen
  • 395
  • 2
  • 16
  • What do you mean saying "Ubuntu made running the program so difficult"? It's different from Windows but apparently not so difficult. In most cases, writing app's name in Terminal is enough to launch it. And if you want latest software, Ubuntu is not your choice. Try Arch or Fedora. – Danatela Apr 07 '14 at 08:27
  • @Danatela when i go online and download an application (eclipse for example) i expect that it should work. Not that i should need to go through an entire night trying to get it to work when i already have the file. all that aside, i am willing to learn how to do it... i am NOT willing to drop ubuntu just because its difficult to learn to use. while it may be difficult, i dont take no from a computer.... and typing in the terminal runs applications whose path has been configured (which is part of my question) – Konner Rasmussen Apr 07 '14 at 08:45
  • 1
    Well, eclipse is not good example. It needs a lot of commands to be executed before it runs. However, GUI way is close to the ideal: just unpack the downloaded file inside your home directory and launch eclipse. So to be accurate, you have to say, "eclipse made running the program so difficult". Just explore Ubuntu Software Center and you will find that Ubuntu and Linux way of running programs is much more powerful than Windows' way. – Danatela Apr 07 '14 at 08:56

2 Answers2

1

To the Eclipse thing:

To use the ADT (and to allow Eclipse to use the ADT) in Linux, you have one of two options:

  1. Run 32-bit Ubuntu (bleh)
  2. Run 64-bit Ubuntu and enable multiarch support (yay!)

If it is not already enabled you can enable multiarch support on Ubuntu by running the following command:

sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386

Once this is done, you will need to add the 32 bit libraries you need in order to use the ADT(depending on which Ubuntu you are using):

# Ubuntu 12.04
apt-get install ia32-libs

# Ubuntu 13.04
sudo apt-get install libc6-i386 lib32stdc++6 lib32gcc1 lib32ncurses5

# Ubuntu 13.10
sudo apt-get install libc6-i386 lib32stdc++6 lib32gcc1 lib32ncurses5 lib32z1

If you want access to the SDK and ADB from a terminal, you need to export the relevant paths in in your .bashrc file:

sudo nano .bashrc

# At the end of the file add

PATH=$PATH:$HOME/AndroidSDK:$HOME/AndroidSDK/tools
export PATH

PATH=$PATH:$HOME/AndroidSDK/platform-tools
export PATH

To create the launcher, you can have a look here.

To address one of your comments:

I am only going to say this about the debate going on here: each operating system has its strengths and weaknesses. That being said, let's get to the answer.

Windows requires backwards compatibility (due to the NT kernel and other things). This means that a Windows installation is larger, but there are very few things that 64 bit Windows can't run, including 32 bit application such as Eclipse and the Android SDK. This also means that most things work out of the box.

Linux requires additional setup because the base installation (even one with a GUI) does not require as many compatibility libraries (in Windows, .dll(s)) in order to function. This makes for smaller installations that can be targeted to specific hardware. This also means that you can run Linux on older/less powerful systems (the real goal of Linux, in my mind). The problem is that additional functionality (such as 32 bit applications in a 64 bit environment) require additional setup.

Only a few Linux distros (Arch and Fedora come to mind) have the latest and greatest of software versions in their repos. This is because most Linux distros are about stability. I cannot speak for Arch, as I have little experience with it. However, Fedora is essentially the test bed for RHEL (RedHat Linux Enterprise). For distros like that, it isn't about stability, it is about testing out what will work on the newest hardware. It can be a real pain as the user is the one who ends up testing the software (and drivers and libraries and kernels). This can be real hell. If you think wasting a few hours trying to get a program to work is terrible, imagine recovering and entire system (and your source code and your data and your sanity) when something untested breaks or melts down.

Distributions like Ubuntu (LTS in particular) are about stability. They usually do not include things in the stable repos that have not been thoroughly tested. This is why things are a little slow on the uptake when it comes to the latest and greatest. The trade off is you miss out on some of the new features, but you have a stable system.

You can install their unstable versions (I think 14.04 is the current testing for Ubuntu), but what was said about Fedora et al. applies. That handles that part of the question (I hope).

Community
  • 1
ChrisR.
  • 527
  • 4
  • 7
1

First of all, different Linux distro's are aimed differently. For example Gentoo is aimed to become highly customizable OS while LXLE linux is aimed at windows refugees.

Ubuntu aims to be a idiot friendly and elegant looking, simple distro. As such it should be used by following people.

  1. Total Linux noobs.
  2. Those who want elegant OS.
  3. Those who want an easy to use and large community OS.
  4. Ubuntu Fans.

Considering your needs Arch Linux or Gentoo would be best for you.

Ubuntu repositories are famous for being holding ice aged packages, some like Anki which are so old that they don't work anymore. In case you decide to use Ubuntu while having latest softwares, you have following options.

  1. Add ppa repos to your OS which contain latest software. Note that you may have to do this for every individual software.
  2. Build from source.Again you have to do this for every software and also resolve dependencies manually.

How do I properly install a piece of software?

If you have decided to build from source, all software devs would provide a list of necessary dependencies. Just install those software using apt-get install command.If they don't, either there is no dependency or the devs are so ignorant that their software must be ignored as well.

Too short; Do read
Use Arch Linux, there's no reason for messing up with Ubuntu to make it behave like Arch.There is no industry secret here, it's just not worth it. 

It's easier to buy an egg than forcing a chicken to lay one.
Registered User
  • 9,631
  • 14
  • 53
  • 85