Debian/Ubuntu Package Repositories?

@stevel

cool :)

@stevel
awesome, hope to see it in hardy soon :D

@stevel
You could make your own 3rd party repositories for Debian and RPM Distro's. That way you can have the latest versions in your repo's, the official repo's are generally a version or two behind.

I'd like to see the gnutella network and torrents handled by Songbird. That would make it the ultimate media hub for me and I don't think I'd ever need another application.

sorry about my last comment that was a mistake but i would love to have songbird in the ubuntu repositories, that would make it so much easier

I guess you can make a .deb out of the tarball with Alien... Will give it a go later today.

The .deb made from Alien said it installed Songbird, but it won't launch. Says it doesn't exist. Is there any HOWTO for installing Songbird on Ubuntu?

Wow, I totally didn't check getdeb (I have it as a plugin in Firefox even) 'cause I didn't think it'd be up so soon. Cool. Thanks for the snappy reply!

The new version looks so awesome. I might even convert from Amarok2 to songbird soon (using kubuntu hardy with kde4).

The GetDeb file works great but, It really isn't that hard to install Songbird in Ubuntu. Just create a file in your /home directory called Songbird, unzip the Tarball into that file, go to System>Preferences>Main Menu click the Sound and Video button on the left side, then on the right side click New Item, In Name, type Songbird, for command, navigate to the file you created called Songbird, click on the file "songbird" in that file. Then click on the little launcher icon upper left, browse to /home/username/Songbird/chrome/icons/default. Click on Open. click on the little blue egg, click open and you have created the launcher. Close the menu editor, go to Applications>Sound and Video> Songbird and it will come up to be configured. Congratulations you have just installed Songbird!

@ Dread Knight.
Not quite sure why Songbird isn't working for you. I'm running Ubuntu Hardy x86_64 with both Gnome and KDE and it works fine under both environments out of the box for me.

I also have KDE installed with Ubuntu 8.04 64bit and right now I am listening to Shoutcast Radio on Songbird in KDE4. Try going into your file browser, and deleting the .songbird file. might have something old in there that is causing a problem. Now I really have to get back to Gnome, 5min. of KDE is enough for me :)

Sound problems in Ubuntu 8.04 can be remedied but removing pulseaudio completely and killing any running pulseaudio processes.

I honestly don't know why they put such a buggy, immature piece of software into a release but there you have it. Just get rid of pulseaudio is causes loads more problems than it could ever hope to solve.

I have Intrepid Ibex Alpha 4 on my computer, and I just installed the latest Alpha of Pulse Audio, which is just asking for something to be broken, I wasn't disappointed, it is broken. Songbird is the only audio app I can get working on it. Everything else either crashes or just sits there doing nothing. Songbird hawever fires up and plays Great!

I wrote something like this yesterday: http://getsatisfaction.com/song...

There is a dependency problem with Songbird looking for Firefox which is 'Iceweasel' in Debian/testing... shame

I recommend a PPA, that's the general standard for third party projects to be installed in Ubuntu.

You can also find DEB here : https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Son...

Downloaded the Upgrade, unpacked it, double-click on the songbird file inside the folder and the package upgrades itself. How hard is that? Works perfect for me.

A debian/ubuntu package is exactly what songbird needs.

Fabien Tassin has a repo with Songbird in it! I accidentally found it today while installing the .deb. It also has a ton of other projects, including Firefox builds.

deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/fta/ppa/ubuntu jaunty main
If you add this to your sources you can then apt-get install songbird!

follow the directions for Debian deb packages here, adding the java instructions if you want iPod compatibility

http://www.debiantutorials.org

Songbird 1.2 debs are here :

http://www.getdeb.net/app/Songbird

The deb will not work for those of us using Debian because we are missing the package firefox (instead we use iceweasel). I am on Sidux here and had to use the tar package.

Could we get a volunteer to setup a launchpad ppa?
I really have no idea how its done but I know people have done it

Songbird being in the Ubuntu repositories would be an excellent addition.

It's quite complicated, I talk a little with a man from Ubuntu-fr :
Songbird need to have separated package like firefox :
Firefox/XULRunner

Songbird has done some change to XULRunner so it's quite complicated to release this version to the public. And it may bug with Firefox.
Also each version of Ubuntu feature a branch version of the software with security fixes

Ubuntu 9.04 features Firefox 3.0 with security fixes
Ubuntu 9.10 will features Firefox 3.5 with security fixes
and so on...

The current songbird version is in the liquorix repo for debian. Not an official debian repo. But it works. deb http://liquorix.net/debian/ sid main

Actually, I have a semi-unique opinion (so hear me out).

I think Songbird (and other companies) should boycott packaging for Linux (and make it public) until Linux distributions companies agree to work on and develop/select a common packaging format. RPM is mentioned in the LSB, but is totally ignored.

All these various packaging systems inconvenience users, developers, and do nothing but stroke the egos of a few managers. And if someone doesn't do something, it will NEVER be fixed.

@Hellocatfood

People don't realise that packages are like exe's which are always run as root. You wouldn't run an exe file which has been repackaged by an unknown person because its risky. You shouldn't do the same for a deb either, unless its been packaged by the original developers (who, shouldn't have to waste their time to make 6 different packages).

If someone slips trojan's, dodgy patches or makes silly mistakes making an unofficial package ( such as making silly mistakes like linking to ./songbird-bin instead of ./songbird which has happened to a few), POTI gets time. I think you'd be surprised as to how much time gets wasted because of problems due to bad unofficial packages.

The current situation is bad for everyone, and until companies stand up and demand that distributions stop wasting developers time, nothing will be done.

Yeah, but that's only because of coincidence (because Ubuntu is based on Debian). Whereas redhat ones use RPM. Compatibility isn't getting better.

Each distro claims that their packaging system is better, so refuse to support another. That's why speaking to them isn't enough (surely they must be aware of the problem).

So, to succeed:
1) They all need to work together on a NEW standard that they will all agree to support, so that they can't claim that its "inferior" and refuse it.
2) The community needs to use leverage to force them to do so. Linux has been around for nearly 20 years now, and so if they were going to do it themselves, they would have done so already.

Because its a huge security problem, and wastes a HUGE amount of development/QA/support time.

get it also to debian's, arch's and gentoo's and other distros

the more, the better.

The easiest answer was already mentioned above for Ubuntu and it's derivatives, including Kubuntu, etc. and Linux Mint.

http://www.getdeb.net/release.php?id=...

Also, for Linux Mint users, Songbird is included in the Community Repositories - Installable from the web: http://packages.linuxmint.com/pool/co... and updated accordingly.

As for packages, people vote with their installs. As Debian, Ubuntu, and Mint get bigger, so will demand for more (and more up-to-date) packages in .deb format.

Likewise with the .rpm-based solutions. I have no problem with any Linux distro (I like several) but my vote on what runs on my desktop and notebooks rests with what flavor is easiest to run and has the most software options available to it without compiling form source. As well as a robust community and active developers. For me, that's Linux Mint.

Once Songbird will update to gecko 1.9.2 it will be possible :)

It would be cool if songbrid was in the ubuntu repositories.
There are programs with more bugs in there...

A deb file to download somewhere or someone's homemade custom repository is no solution that could solve this issue.

I had no problems however installing Songbird using the download from the site (I'm just running the executable from the folder I unpacked every time, but I don't really care about that).

But when a better music player comes along in the ubuntu repositories, I'll certainly switch. I really like the automatic updates (but I don't like it if each program has its custom automatic update solution).

I personnely hope this doesn't happen soon, as there are a number of significant features of songbird, that are on windows but have not been ported to Linux, proper notifications, tray control and MSC to name three.

Launchpad PPA Repo is quite nice.

https://launchpad.net/~songbird-daily...

Uncle Spellbinder's PPA does work well, but only if you're interested in the developer's edition. If you want a repository that offers a more stable release edition, try GetDeb:

http://www.getdeb.net/updates/Ubuntu/...
http://www.getdeb.net/software/Songbird

If you are using Ubuntu you can add the Getdeb PPA easily to your system following these steps:

1. Go to System-Administration-Software Sources, Third-Party Software tab, Add (replace karmic if you are using an older Ubuntu Version, e.g. jaunty):


deb http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu karmic-getdeb apps


2. Add the repository GPG key, open a terminal window and type:


wget -q -O- http://archive.getdeb.net/getdeb-archive.key | sudo apt-key add -


3. Install Songbird by typing into the terminal window:

sudo apt-get update

sudo apt-get install songbird

This version is NOT a developer release, it's updated for regular releases only. At the moment you get Songbird 1.4.3 (Build 1438) and it gets updated when a new songbird release is coming out.

Have fun!

test

I'd just like to point out that those using PPA's or other random packages, should be aware that there may be a significant security risk to using such packages.

You guys really should start stepping up and DEMAND your distro's start collaborating on a common package format. Its 2010, there isn't much excuse anymore for them to not do so.

That doesn't seem practical, Andrew. In fact, I don't even think it would be possible. Every distribution is made for different purposes, just like Windows and OS X are made for different purposes. There are literally thousands of Linux distros, not to mention all the other Unix-like operating systems like BSD and Minix, and they each cater to a different crowd. What are the odds they're going to all be able to agree on a single format that meets all of their specifications completely? That's what would need to happen, and I don't see it ever going down that way. It would be like asking Microsoft to stop supporting .exe files in Windows and start using only Solaris binaries.

I'm actually quite happy with the way Songbird packages their Linux versions. A simple tarball with an executable bash script is the best way to make a program cross-platform. It's a heck of a lot more lightweight than a java-based program anyway. Making a separate package for every Linux package manager in existence might theoretically be better, but when you can just make one Linux package that works with literally ever Linux system, that's seems like a much smarter use of manpower.

In the meantime, I can vouch for the safety of the GetDeb repository. I use it myself, and It's a fairly well-known repository.

@Foolishgrunt.. It actually should be possible, and I never said freebsd and such would agree. However, for starters, it would be nice if at the very least the top few distro's can (even if only fedora and Debian did, Ubuntu and many other distro's would step into line because they just simply repackage those two). Technically, you could probably enhance Packagekit to read the package, install it, and inject it into the same database as RPM/APT.

If a script can work in a lot of places, so can a custom package format.. RPM/DEB's suck anyway and need reworking because they don't support features such as local/user installations anyway.

And if you were running a multimillion dollar company, ask yourself, can you vouch for the security of the GetDeb repository enough to use it on your servers there? I wouldn't...

Anyway that's just my opinion. Because if Linux distro's don't begin to get their act together, companies are going to continue ignoring them, because even now, each separate distro for testing purposes needs to be treated as its own separate OS.

I would maintain that all the different Linux distros were never meant to be treated the as the same OS, so they shouldn't be today, even if it is 2010. OS X may have started from the same kernel as FreeBSD, but it was never meant to be the same OS. Even though all Linux distros use the same kernel, they are not the same OS and should not be expected to be interchangeable. That's my take, anyway.

Also, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure PackageKit is just a front end; I don't think it handles any package management tasks. If the Smart Package Manager takes off, that may be the sort of bridge developers would need to begin thinking about a universal package format. In the meantime, it's just not in the best interest of Linux developers to drop their own formats and work on something else. While .deb and .rpm are imperfect formats, they are very-well documented and integrated into their respective operating systems.

There is no need for a common packaging format for Linux, most of the Linux based OS have varying purposes and only Ubuntu and it's offshoot are really consumer orientated.

Red Hat and Novell have all but abandoned their consumer OS push and focus entirely on servers and corporate desktop. Their free offerings are for geeks only, if you are using them you are a geek (you don't need packaging) or probably should be using Ubuntu.

There are various other distributions such as Xandros and Linpus that are pushing their distributions at OEMs and businesses rather than consumers.

There are various Linux OS and as a consumer orientated software developesr you really ought to ignore everything but Ubuntu. If you try and take an overview or get the community to work together you are blowing hot air and wasting time. For the very here and now debs and Ubuntu repositories are all but ubiquitous for Linux desktop users. If you publish the source and produce good software, the open source community is quite capable of making your software work themselves.

Please Songbird put your own repository together the getdebs one is useful but it also tries to update the other software on my computer, when for the most part I'd like to stick to the Ubuntu baseline.

Why should everything be ignored except Ubuntu though? I bet the fedora people are saying exactly the same thing about their OS (in fact, from the perspective of usability, Fedora still seems easier to use for me, and in most areas, better designed).

If distributions want 3rd party developers to support their OS, they should bend over for developers (as Microsoft and Apple do). Because at the moment, distributions such as Ubuntu don't even guarantee the existence of the most basic standard libraries (an example is on Kubuntu GTK might not exist, and on Ubuntu by default, no QT). Furthermore, Linux has a TINY market-share (even Ubuntu), and needing to make packages for each one only makes things more difficult I guess.

But that's just my thoughts. I used to be a BIG Linux advocate, but honestly, I returned to windows because I got sick of:
1) The "if it works, it's good enough" mentality. That's why the messy filesystem layout is still being used, despite the fact that an increasing number of developers aren't a fan.
2) And the "meh we'll just repackage this, and post bugs upstream" attitude. Whilst companies such as Microsoft pour enormous resources into backwards compatibility testing, I don't like the way that distributions assume its done upstream (that's a poor way to operate).

Like I said, that's just the way I feel.

Do you actually understand packaging on Linux? QT and GTK are installed when a package requests the install, Kubuntu and Ubuntu actually use the same respositories and just use different packages by default. You can also configure any Linux distro to have KDE and Gnome installed and usable on the same system.

As a software developer you need to be pragmatic with your time and supporting Ubuntu while providing the source to everyone else to package or install is a perfectly reasonable. By creating a universal package that is supposed to work on all Linux distributions you could create more confusion than really necessary, no one distribution is the same and there are no gurantees that it will work, by restricting the package to a particular distribution you make support for both the software developer and the distribution a hell of a lot easier and it's a lot less confusing for a user of an unsupported distribution.

I do agree that Canonical as the stalwart provider of consumer OS need to get more involved in the nuts and bolts of the Linux kernal, audio, packaging and so on. Many of these elements are currently flush with developers from the most profitable distribution; Red Hat which has completely divergent aims from those of Canonical.

I think Canonical should add songbird to the repositories of Ubuntu or Songbird people must create a "How To Install" document for all the linux distributions.

smiggs, I think it's pretty arrogant to say that Ubuntu represents all desktop Linux users (even if I do use it myself). I also think it's shortsighted to ignore the fact that roughly equal numbers of distros use rpm as deb. I'd say that if you're going to package one format, you might as well do it for at least those two.

But even then it's not that easy. There's a reason Canonical suggests not using Debian repositories for Ubuntu, and why Mandriva suggests not using Fedora repos for Mandriva. Just because distros use the same package format doesn't mean they'll be able to use the same packages.

Think of all the distros that'll be left out in the cold if POTI supplies just one deb package. Sure, they can use the source to compile their own packages, but then why even bother with the preferential treatment? That's like saying since most computer users use Windows, we'll just ship one .exe and let everybody else use the source code. Nobody would be happy with that.