How the fuck has no one made a graphical installation wizard for tarballs yet?

How the fuck has no one made a graphical installation wizard for tarballs yet?

Attached: download.jpg (225x225, 6K)

Attached: 1535728010120.png (509x404, 25K)

what do you mean

Attached: 1535728237914.jpg (597x553, 37K)

because linux devs want to keep their secret club secret and making it easy for the less inclined to get anything done on linux would let more noobs in

do you mean graphical in the shell or with a gui from the os

Attached: 1535751266446.png (800x600, 68K)

do you actually mean source code tarballs

Attached: lelnux_hammer.png (464x471, 3K)

what else could be packed in tarballs in order to be installed

Attached: 1537183449178.png (800x600, 44K)

Attached: 1525225604903-g.png (1190x906, 178K)

i don't know, maybe no one really bothers to write one because everybody that needs it knows how to do it without a graphical installer in the first place

Attached: 1535836159658.jpg (800x600, 29K)

install gentoo

Attached: 1535785111720.png (771x617, 5K)

You're talking about people who aren't qualified enough even to code simple filepicker thumbnails, user. You really think they can create something that sophisticated?
All the best coders are quickly snatched by big software companies that can pay them well. Only the very worst ones end up coding for free. That's why open sores is consistently inferior to proprietary software.

So if I put an image of dickbutt in a tarball what would its graphical installer be like?

You tell em user everyone knows working with Linux is for plebs. Windows is bullet proof that's why it's expensive. everyone uses it installed bare metal on critical systems. Linux is for little kids on their raspberry pis.

./configure
make
make install
gee that was hard. I can see why winbabbies need a GUI

Attached: x.png (367x218, 6K)

How has no one made a graphical installation wizard for zip files on Windows yet?

I mean that's basically any front end for a BSD-ports style system.

Attached: TUI.png (775x408, 69K)

slackware has sbopkg

I get paid well to work on open source software :^)

>OSS is somehow Linux specific
lmao

Lots of GNU/linux file browsers have thumbnails in the filepicker, just not Gnome shit. You'd know if you had actually ever tried it.
Why the hell are you trying to install programs from tarballs? And why are you too stupid to just unzip them and type make?

>just unzip a tar

ITT: retards

yeah, you are here

Even though you said it ironically, everything you said is true, and anyone who's ever set foot on an enterprise data center can tell you that. Linux is actually okay, it has its uses, like some on the network appliances and shit like that on an enterprise will be Linux (only because there are some massive corporations putting some muscle into it though, because if it were completely developed by volunteers it wouldn't be anything but a toy), but the machines doing the bulk of the work will be Windows Server 100% of the time. Pic related.
And before you complain that the graph I'm posting is biased, do note that I took it straight from Red Hat's website though.
>I get paid well to work on open source software
Cool story, bro.
>Lots of GNU/linux file browsers have thumbnails in the filepicker
Awesome, man, good luck installing their tarballs because there's no graphical tarball installer.
>You'd know if you had actually ever tried it
Why would I ever wanna try it?

Attached: Graph2.png (1060x660, 84K)

Why do you need a GUI?

Nice bait, retard.
>Most used operating systems
>Doesn't mention Android

Also
>"""Sysadmin"""
>Not comfortable with using the command line to unpack tarballs

Given your meme speak, I doubt your sincerity. The thread is now closed.

make *** no rule to make target 'install'. stop

I'm not, you're mistaking me for someone else

>Awesome, man, good luck installing their tarballs because there's no graphical tarball installer.
Nobody "Installs tarballs". Programs are installed by the package manager for you if that's what you're talking about.
>Why would I ever wanna try it?
A lot of people actually learn what about a subject before they go on the internet to talk about it so they don't seem fucking retarded.

If you ask "how the fuck has no one made a," as in "a," as in ONE, as in one, singular, ubiquitous, definitive solution to the question you're posing, you are misunderstanding how the Linux software ecosystem works. There are plenty of graphical installation wizards for tarballs, not a single one of them is well-supported or in common use, and you'll have to scour the darkest corners of the Internet to find them.

>Nobody "Installs tarballs". Programs are installed by the package manager for you if that's what you're talking about.
This is only accurate if you're using a distribution. LFS users do in fact "install tarballs."

Do they, really? Don't they compile the shit first?

How fucken hard is it to type -xvf?

I feel like at least 50% of the time the binary just fails to launch after you extract. At LEAST 50%

rent free

tar should just automatically deduce the correct arguments from file extensions, through a compile-time setting.

Arguments for obvious situations should be for fine-tuning, not for basic operation.

Prove me wrong.

The other part of that graph is they will be virtualized windows servers. Windows server does have 1) active directory which is like enterprise mandatory and 2) tons of applications. Client workstations will also largely if not always be windows, however, you will not see windows installed on bare metal. Installing windows on bare metal is retarded. My point that I made SARCASTICALLY (irony is when outcome is opposite intent, I was doing sarcasm) was that free software certainly does have its place. There's even enterprise software that's Foss designed to run on windows servers. To claim otherwise is to just reveal your ignorance.

> tar should just automatically deduce the correct arguments from file extensions
It does, but not through extensions, because it's programmed by non-retards. You don't need to specify a compression algorithm, -tf will work on gz, bz2, xz.

file extensions is a shit mechanic to determine what kind of file it is.

The command is just to easy my duude.

It's user-facing, which is good for people who actually have to type in the correct commands.
Different formats are good for the software itself, but you should never discount the value of user-visibility.

I'm talking about using the file itself as the only parameter, because it's apparent that the file is compressed and packed, so it's obvious that the user just wants the thing to be uncompressed and unpacked.

>good for people who actually have to type in the correct commands.
Which part of
>You don't need to specify a compression algorithm, -tf will work on gz, bz2, xz
did you miss?

-tf is still two fucking options.

Can't you see the command line is waay better? What if you run into a problem? With commands you can customize the act of the program till how far it can possibly go. In the gui you are stuck with a button

And? File-extensions won't help with that.

The only thing keeping Windows Server relevant in the systems administration world these days is Active Directory.
Most other functions are being done by some sort of GNU/Linux servers these days.

“Installation” is just copying some files in some directory, compiling if necessary, and creating a symlink to tell the system “hey this program exists here”. If a tarballs was precompiled you could literally extract is somewhere and run the program directly

wtf is going on itt?

Attached: BRUTAL HAMMER TO THE HEAD.gif (499x207, 388K)

>what is SQL Server?
>what is Exchange?
>what is QuickBooks?
>what is SAP?
>what is Crystal Reports?

It's not needed.

Attached: tughs.png (800x600, 62K)

because

Attached: 1540738367973.jpg (786x1000, 420K)

>At LEAST 50%
step away from the linux box.

why would there be a box running a bare kernel? it's not usable for any tasks you need an operating system for.

pure unrelated nonsense to op's question or who you're replying to. great work.